CKNW Editorial
for September 13, 2001

As the horrible images of last Tuesday recede a bit in our minds, it’s well to look at some of the problems to be faced.

The consensus seems to be that the mastermind was Osuma bin Laden. I’m not so sure that Saddam Hussein didn’t have a hand in it.

Assuming it was bin Laden, we must understand that if there were no State of Israel there would be no bin Laden and his well financed and highly structured terrorist organization. And it’s not a question of a peace treaty because for bin Laden the peace talks are irrelevant. He is dedicated to the destruction of Israel, period. There are no ifs, ands or buts about it.

And of course that can’t be allowed to happen. Israel is a state recognized by all major and most minor powers, by the United Nations and part of it. Moreover its existence is guaranteed by the United States. The issue of the legitimacy of the state of Israel has been decided.

If, then, bin Laden will settle for nothing less than the eradication of Israel, why is there any particular urgency to see the Israeli-Palestinian issue ended - apart, of course, from the genuine desire of all decent people to see peace in the region?

It’s because this ongoing struggle gives other Arabs and some Islam states reason not to be as angry at bin Laden as they should. It keeps alive in the hearts of those who know their wish can’t be granted, the slim hope that maybe, just maybe the terrorists will win and all what was Palestine will go back to the Palestinians. If nothing else it permits them to give terrorists moral support. It’s much like the IRA – as much as it had some support in Northern Ireland for a long time it had something just about as good – the indifference of the many of the Catholic community. Protestant terrorists relied for their existence on the indifference by other Protestants to the bad things they did. A settled Israel and Palestine will not make the terrorism go away, and any such peace is guaranteed to be tenuous at best for some time to come. But it erases injustice to Palestinians, real or imagined, as an issue uniting many Arabs in hatred, and paves the way for resignation to peace if not an actual embracing of it.

The parties seem incapable of settling matters themselves. The rhetoric is often white hot and there is so much history wrapped in so much fear, hatred and mistrust that peace cannot come by persuasive historical arguments but only by hard bargaining.

The issues are several – Jerusalem, return of or compensation for lost Palestinian land, and the Israeli settlements in disputed lands. I believe – and better people than I agree – that the first two and other associated problems could be settled if the land settlement issue could be disposed of.

There is no legitimacy in these settlements unless you accept the fundamentalist Jewish view that these lands belong to Israel because they were once part of the ancient, the Biblical Israel. That argument has never been part of the case made by the State of Israel itself nor is it given any dignity by the United Nations. It is a fundamentalist view and it would seem that the settlements that have taken place are a political sop to the extremists who, under Israel’s system, wield a power greatly in excess of their numbers.

It’s argued that the United States has no business in this dispute. It does. Historically it does as a sponsor of the State of Israel at the very beginning of its existence. Practically it does because it is Israel’s main source of arms, and its paymaster. If the United States were to withdraw its support, Israel would be in a hell of a pickle.

The only real question is how hard is the United States to be under the present circumstances?

I suggest very hard. If through its efforts there can be a peace which is recognized by Israel’s neighbours, bin Laden’s powder is considerably dampened. So, for that matter, is Saddam Hussein’s.

American presidents going back to Truman have tried, without permanent success, to grasp this nettle. Mr Bush must try again and while I am not by any means taking the Palestinians side of the dispute, he must strongly urge Israel to back down on the settlements issue. He can only do that by extracting appropriate concessions by the Palestinians but he must, if needs be, virtually bully the sides into an agreement which recognizes a Palestinian state and gives the two countries a chance to start living together.

As long as there is no peace in this area, bin Laden will always be able to point at this struggle, and what he can skillfully claim to be injustices to Palestinians, as justification for whatever he does.

The picture of the war we’re now in is a big one but the Israeli-Palestinian struggle is an important part of it.