Jan Willem van der Hoeven - Outpost, January 2001
For two thousand years, Jews have prayed and longed to return to Jerusalem. Each Passover night, during their long years in the Diaspora, they lifted the cup and pledged to celebrate if possible, “Next year in Jerusalem!”
Three times a day, century in, century out, Orthodox Jews have prayed that God would restore His house and dwell in the midst of His people again. And all this time, even as they were praying, Muslims invaded the land which is holy to God and His people, and erected their mosques especially on places holy to the Jews, not so much out of love for their Creator but out of spite, to prevent the Jews from ever rebuilding their shrines again.
From the minarets on the place most holy to the Jews, God's Temple Mount, Saddam Hussein was encouraged to complete what Hitler had left undone. Instead of prayer, these minarets bellowed Itbach el Jahud (slaughter the Jews), incitement to murder the Jews!
And the Jews allowed it all to happen: the takeover of their most holy place, even when it became desecrated as a place of violence and hatred and thousands of stones and bottles were thrown repeatedly on Jewish worshippers standing near their Western Wall.
History was rewritten: the Mountain of the Lord where the Jews' Temple twice stood has been denied any historicity. According to these same Islamic revisionists, the Western Wall's holiness is purely attributable to the legend that Mohammed fastened his horse, El-Buraq, to its stones before, according to the same legend, ascending for a heavenly visit.
No, nothing that the Jews treasure as holy is holy or significant to Israel's enemies. And unbelievably, the Jews today have to plead before Clinton that if they surrender this, the holiest asset of their faith, to these murderers, that it will at least be documented that once upon a time the Temple Mount had a connection to the Jewish people.
What utter degradation! There was even the cute notion that to get out of this tug of war, God would be given final sovereignty over the mount, as if He who claimed it to be “His holy hill” (Psalm 2) needed to bend towards men to receive “His right”!
How did this all come to pass? Would the Muslims, for peace sake, surrender Mecca and the Ka'aba stone to the Jews? Would Catholics, for peace sake, surrender the Vatican and St. Peter's Cathedral?
Would any nation in the world, after praying for 2000 years to return to its holiest place on earth, forfeit it for a peace which will not even be a real peace but a stage for further concessions till Israel, according to the deep-seated wish of many of her Muslim enemies, is dissolved and is no more?
And this prize is given to those who, through their leaders in the days of Haj Amin el-Husseini, encouraged Hitler to speed up his extermination of the Jews, and who have fought what was left of the Jews year after year as the survivors immigrated to a land partitioned for them by the United Nations?!
This of this! The prize of the Jews' most holy place is being offered to those who murdered Jews; terrorized them for years; brought the whole Muslim and Arab world against them; terrorized them in the air by exploding their planes; terrorized them in their synagogues from Paris to Istanbul; killed or wounded their peaceful diplomats and athletes in places all over the world; burned their carefully planted forests; torched or stole their cars by the tens of thousands; broke nearly every promise they made through treaties with Israel.
Why is Mein Kampf still required reading in many Arab universities?
Is this the prize Israel is willing to give to those who have as yet never kept their word, and who still in their heart of hearts dream of the day when all Palestine shall be theirs?
Is Israel willing to cut out her very heart, the heart of Jerusalem, holy to the Jews from time immemorial, and offer it to a people who have just murdered and lynched them and are not even willing to teach the lessons of peace in any of their school books nor on their Palestinian television and radio broadcasts? They should now receive Israel's heart before any true proof of the smallest commitment to peace and respect has been shown by them?
What utter folly! It is beyond comprehension. “Am Naval ve lo Chacham!” [O dull and witless people, Deuteronomy 32:6]
* * *
How is it possible that the usually clever Israelis are so void of understanding when it comes to relating to their enemy's death wish upon them? They resemble the Jews in Europe who, by continually trying to accommodate the ever increasing measures of enmity by the Nazis, thought that they would thus placate their enemies so that they would let them live their lives in peace, however humiliated and abused. Israelis behave like a battered woman running after the one that again and again beats her, hoping against hope that one day he will live in peace with her.
How is it possible, despite the manifold and clear proofs to the contrary, that there are still Israeli politicians and journalists who believe in the stupid assertion that it is only through negotiations such as Oslo, Camp David, etc., that peace can finally come to this region? It is clear for anyone who is willing to see that even if an Israeli government would offer more than Ehud Barak did at Camp David there would still not be peace because all the main sections of the Palestinian side pursue the destruction or dissolution of all of Israel as the only way to peace in this region.
How silly are these endlessly repeated mantras: “In the end there is no other way than to go back to the negotiating table.” “We cannot choose our partners for peace.” “We simply must find a way to live with them.” What nonsense! Did we say in Holland, Denmark and Norway, “We just have to learn to live with Adolf Hitler. We cannot choose our neighbours; we just have to live with them?”
There has been peace in Europe now for over fifty years because we did not accept Hitler and his Nazis. We allowed the Allied Armies to win a war over our enemy Hitler – we did not limit those armies to a battle here or there with endless cease-fires and even more endless negotiations. We won a war and therefore with God's help and mercy we won a peace that has now lasted for more than half a century. If only Israel's leaders could be as wise as those Western leaders who totally ignored the clever 'peace ploys' of the Nazis – men like Rudolf Hess sent to Britain to weaken the Allied forces resolve. It was not peace negotiations that defeated Hitler, but war.
You do not make peace with enemies, you make war with enemies, and when you win, then your enemies will make peace with you! You have to win a war in order to achieve a peace, Mr. Peres!
It was the unwillingness of most European Jewry, especially their own leaders, to take what Hitler said seriously that made them such easy victims. How after all we have seen and suffered, can there still be Israelis who do not understand that the great majority of Muslim Arabs and Palestinians aspire to the same aims as the Nazis? That their fervent hope is that Israel will be no more? Why will Israelis not listen to what the Arabs say among themselves? Why is it that most Arabs have no serious problems with what Hitler did? Why is “Mein Kampf” still required reading in many of their universities and the Holocaust denied?
I want to end with a recent expression of this Hitler-like aim toward the sovereign Jewish state, a debate entitled “Three Palestinian Viewpoints on the Intifada and the Future of the Palestinian State” hosted by Al-Jazeera, the Qatar-based Arabic news channel (it was reported by the Middle East Media and Research Institute on November 21, 2000).
Three prominent Palestinians participated in the program, representing the three major political viewpoints within the Palestinian public. PA Minister of Information Yasser Abd Rabbo represented the PA's official position, deputy head of the Hamas political bureau Musa Abu Marzuq represented the position of the militant Islamic movement, and Bilal Al-Hassan, an analyst with the London-based daily, Al-Hayat, represented the position of the Palestinian left.
Abu Marzuq explained that Hamas has no objection to a Palestinian state and even allowed that “A state within the borders of the West Bank and Gaza would be considered an achievement at the present stage.” However, he promptly added, “It is clear that if a state is established within the 1967 borders, these will not be its final borders. We must further aspire for borders that will include Palestine in its entirety.” PA Minister Abd Rabbo refused to elaborate on what will follow once a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders is established. "“There is almost a consensus among Palestinians that the direct goal is to reach the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the June 4, 1967 borders, with Jerusalem as its capital,” he said, “[but] regarding the future after that, it is best to leave the issue aside and not to discuss it.” Bilal Al-Hassan declared: “At this stage we talk about a state within the 1967 borders, but this is not the end of the story.” A unified Palestine, once the Palestinian state is established, he continued, can come about in one of two ways: through peace, or through war. It can be established through peace, if the Israelis accept the logic of a [unified] democratic Palestinian state. If they don't accept this logic, then the logic of history will lead to a confrontation.”
So after all that has happened, if there are still politicians who want to prove that they were right to believe in the so-called “peace process” and are determined to continue with it, then let us realize that even if they bring about a “peace agreement” by offering Arafat even more in the next Camp David-like meeting, including a Palestinian state on all the area occupied by Israel in the Six Day War with East Jerusalem as its sovereign capital, even then that will not be the end of the conflict. It will be, yes, an acceptable intermediate phase for most Muslims and Palestinians until they feel strong enough to take the rest of Israel. So why negotiate at all if what it means is that we make it easier for our enemies to finish off what will be left of us?(Jan Willem van der Hoeven, an evangelical Christian and among Israel's best friends, is one of the rare people living in Israel who describe the situation with the bitter clarity it warrants.)
©2001 - Jerusalem Post