| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"LeMod Pol" |
| Date: |
15 Oct 2004 11:46:46 AM |
| Object: |
* DANIEL PIPES SPEAKS AT DUKE |
DANIEL PIPES SPEAKS AT DUKE
By Lee Kaplan
Durham, North Carolina- Daniel Pipes, the head of the
Middle East Forum and an advisor to President Bush in
the War On Terror, spoke tonight at Duke University
prior to the Palestine Solidarity divestment conference
that is taking place here this weekend.
The subject of his lecture was ÒThe Palestinian-Israeli
War: Where Did It Come From and How to End It.Ó As a
preface to the actual speech, Dr. Pipes expressed his
umbrage about the upcoming Hate Fest by stating, Ò I am
appalled that the administration at Duke University
allowed the Palestine Solidarity Movement to hold this event.Ó
He continued by thanking the Duke Conservative Union
for the great research they did in two open letters
sent to Duke President Richard Brodhead condemning the
event, and by illustrating how at past conferences the
speakers and organizers, as well as two current
speakers at this weekend¢s event, Charles Colson and
Fadi Kiblawi, have both openly encouraged suicide
bombings and terrorist attacks against Israelis. He
also pointed out that six people actively involved in
the organization of the event are members of both the
International Solidarity Movement that aids PLO
terrorists in the West Bank and Gaza. Campus Vice
President for Governmental Affairs at Duke, John
Burness, has consistently tried to maintain that the
ISM was not a part of this conference, even though some
of the organizers openly admit their membership and
affiliations.
Pipes briefly commented on the history of the conflict,
and pointed out that when Israel began in 1948 it was
based on a socialist past akin to political attitudes
so prevalent on campuses today. The Soviet Union had
actually supported the creation of Israel at that time
along with many leftist groups. He told how the
kibbutzim, farm movements and labor party actually
dominated Israeli politics for the first 30 years of
the Jewish state. He mentioned how numerous American
liberals supported the nascent country, such as Harry
Truman and others from the Democratic Party. He then
pointed out how conservatives like Dwight Eisenhower
were ambivalent about Israel.
He continued by explaining that from 1970 to about 1990
support for Israel by both political parties in the
U.S. was virtually indistinguishable, but that during
the 1990¢s there was a new distancing by liberals from
Israel. This coincided with a warming of relations with
conservatives that has been a counterweight to the
coldness and opposition Israel is now facing more often
in the U.S. and other countries. He discussed the
Durbin Conference where Israel was unfairly condemned
as a racist state and violator of human rights by many
of the most oppressive regimes in the world and how
since then the Left is condemning Israel more and more.
As an example, he cited the situation on U.S. campuses
where Israel is routinely attacked, clearly a reference
in part to the Palestine Solidarity Hate Fest scheduled
this weekend. He called for a reclamation of our
universities to bring them back to mainstream education
rather than to a biased emphasis on left wing views.
Dr. Pipes then launched his lecture by explaining the
war between the Palestinians and Israelis is Ònot a
cycle of violence, not random violence, not an age-old
feud like between the Hatfields and the McCoys.Ó
ÒIt¢s war. Violence is a symptom of the conflict that
has many meanings and goals,Ó he said. He emphasized
that such goals are very important and that most plans
currently used for arriving at peace will not work.
He called for a change in U.S. policy.
Describing the eleven years since the Oslo Accords in
1993 to when the Intifada began in 2000, Pipes made an
analogy between two handshakes. In September, 1993 on
the White House lawn, Yasser Arafat had shaken hands
with Yitzhak Rabin which led some national leaders to
declare that Òthe impossible is within reach.Ó He
explained that Oslo was perceived as a brilliant
solution and a way to bring dignity and economic
revival to the Palestinian people. Instead, he pointed
out, after seven years the Palestinians faced more
poverty, radicalism and corruption¯including suicide
bombings¯than ever before.
On the Israeli side he told of 1,500 dead and over
6,000 maimed. In addition, Israel has suffered
diplomatic and economic decline aside from all the terrorism.
ÒOslo was supposed to mean a new epoch but it simply
didn¢t work,Ó he explained.
Dr. Pipes then explained why: ÒThere was no real intent
on the Palestinian side to live up to or fulfill the
agreements.Ó First, he stated that in September 1993,
at the height of the Oslo agreement, the PLO recognized
Israel¢s right to exist on paper only. Whereas Israel
and the West took the agreement to mean an end of 45
years of war and a recognition of Israel¢s right to
exist, Arafat had no intention to doing so. If
acceptance of Israel¢s right to exist was actually
achieved, then the next step would have been the
settling of lesser issues such as borders, water,
natural resources among normal issues between states.
Reminding the audience that the 1990¢s were the period
of the dot.com boom, of economic expansion, he
explained that Israel had thought Oslo would mean an
end to a tribal conflict and said Israel was flexible,
restrained and generous in its offer to the
Palestinians. He explained how a curious idea
percolated about solving the ongoing war based on the
notion Òto enrich your enemy.Ó With the encouragement
and aid of the U.S., the EU and Japan, an effort was
launched to enrich the Palestinian economy and provide
jobs, schools, homes and many other services.
However, all of the above was received as
demoralization by the Palestinians who regarded these
things not as goodwill but instead encouraged the
ambition to destroy Israel. Money for peace was used to
prepare for war as the Palestine Authority purchased
weapons and set up a military and intelligence
infrastructure for war. This only served to make Israel
even more vulnerable.
He explained how a nascent Israel defeated five Arab
armies in 1948 only to have the Arabs prepare for
another round. In 1967, Israel overcame three Arab
armies to win a decisive victory yet again. Over the
following decades, the Arab world began to see they
could not destroy Israel. This was further reinforced
when Saddam Hussein was defeated in 1991.
During the seven years after Oslo, Israel continued to
make one concession after another, but by 2000 the
drive to destroy Israel only grew worse and worse as
evidenced by Arab rhetoric, political statements and
terror attacks. Arafat could barely deliver his own government.
ÒWhat was needed was not signaturesÉArafat¢s signature
was worthless.Ó He explained. Dr. Pipes then cited the
lynching of two IDF reservists seven years later in
Ramallah as the example of the contrast with the
handshake at Oslo in 1993: one of the killers held up
both of his hands drenched in his victim¢s blood and
shaking them for the world to see.
ÒWe need to learn from these mistakes,Ó Dr. Pipes
said. ÒFirst, the presumption a paper agreement would
create a real change. Second, that the Palestinians
were ready to give up their goal to destroy Israel.Ó
Going back to the notion of war, he told the audience
how Germany in the First World War, after a defeat,
came back a second time to try again.
He cited numerous wars in the past where enemies that
were not completely vanquished once and for all rose
again to continue protracted wars. He pointed out how
the U.S. had to go into Iraq again after the war in
1991 and how that had also worked against the Taliban.
ÒWhat is needed in the conflict between the Israelis
and Palestinians is not more negotiations, but rather
to get one side to give up.Ó He continued, ÒWe must
draw a conclusion: Do we want Israel to exist and be
accepted as a flourishing democratic state or
destroyed.Ó The Arab goal is to destroy Israel, but
Israel wants to be secure.
He urged no financial aid, diplomacy, no state and no
recognition for the Palestinians until they are fully
defeated as America¢s enemies were defeated in past
wars. He said that eliminating Arafat was not the
answer because another leader might make war even more
successful, and described the Security Fence as just a
wall that cannot stop a real war that is going on nor
lead to long term peace. Unilateral withdrawal from the
West Bank and Gaza would only be perceived as weakness
by the Palestinians. He cited the Israeli withdrawal
from Lebanon that was done as a goodwill gesture in the
early 1980¢s but was declared a victory by the other
side as an example. Transfer of populations,
international troops, even a Marshall Plan for the
Middle East were all ruled out as only temporary
solutions that would not end the war. Only the absolute
defeat of the Palestinians could bring an end to bloodshed.
ÒOnce they give up, only then can they build an
economy. As long as they are brainwashed, or give up
their children for suicide bombings, only when they
realize they are defeated can they make progress.Ó
Palestinians must accept their defeat and the outcome
would be good for all parties in the conflict, not just
for Israel.
Later he explained the hypocrisy of American policy
that condemns the Israelis for using targeted
assassinations of terrorist leaders or fighting
terrorists in ways that might lead to civilian casualties.
He explained the difference as being that the U.S. is
at war but the Israelis are in a diplomatic process.
Although, he left it up to individual attendees to
decide for themselves if they felt supporting a
democratic Israel was more viable than aiding the
Palestinians to destroy it, Dr. Pipes¢ speech
emphasized that the way to end the conflict is to
pressure our own government to consider the conflict a
war between a democratic ally, Israel, and the
Palestinians and to conduct our foreign policy to that
end in order to stop terrorism and bring peace to the
Middle East.
Lee Kaplan is a contributing editor to Frontpagemag.com.
Copyright©2004 FrontPageMagazine.com
--
LP
"We are fighting today for security, for progress,
and for peace, not only for ourselves but for all
men, not only for one generation but for all
generations. We are fighting to cleanse the world
of ancient evils, ancient ills."
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
State of the Union Address - 1942
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
