Twenty-four years ago this month, then-defense minister Yitzhak Rabin appointed me military governor of the West Bank. In two years in that post, I learned that reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians is both feasible and necessary.
In 1988, after I had retired from military service, Rabin and then-foreign minister Shimon Peres asked me to lead the first secret negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Since then, I have dedicated most of my energies to promoting Israeli-Palestinian peace.
In this effort, I have enjoyed the cooperation of American Jewish groups that shared my commitment to achieving peace with the Palestinians. I considered the stances of these organizations to be in line with the positions of the Zionist peace camp in Israel.
Recently, however, I have come to feel that we no longer share the same convictions, that our paths have diverged. Some American Jewish organizations that are at the forefront of pushing for peace have begun adopting positions that contradict Israel’s most basic security needs and that ultimately are at odds with the goal of Israeli-Palestinian reconciliation.
We have seen dovish Jewish organizations advocate including Hamas in a Palestinian unity government (and support the idea of offering American aid to such a government), fight against the swift enactment of tough sanctions against Iran and vehemently oppose military action against the Islamic Republic — action that may eventually prove to be necessary to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
Certainly, I do not consider a military operation to be the preferred option. It is the very last resort. But we cannot afford to be complacent about the nature of the threat we face.
Iran is ruled by a despotic theocracy, with a horrendous record of human rights abuses. This regime is fueled by a fanatical ideology of hatred: Hatred of the West, of its culture, of democratic values. Hatred of Jews and their state. Hatred of Muslims who believe in peace and democracy.
The Iranian regime has one main ambition: to turn Iran into a superpower, leading more than a billion Muslims all over the world. Developing nuclear weapons and long-range missiles, controlling the corridors for oil and gas, undermining moderate governments in the Middle East — these are the Islamic Republic’s means of establishing hegemony.
A permanent-status agreement between Israel and the Palestinians would be a devastating blow to the Iranian regime’s hateful ideology. If Palestinians reach an accord with the “godless Zionists,” why should the average Iranian in Tehran or Isfahan hate Israel? This is why the Iranian regime does everything in its power to impede progress between Israelis and Palestinians.
Hamas is the main tool that the ayatollahs use to disrupt the peace process. Iran has sent large sums of money and huge amounts of explosives, arms and ammunition to Hamas. Thanks to this generous support, Hamas was able to conquer Gaza in June 2007.
Between Hamas — which represents a minority of Palestinian society, according to all available polls and studies — and the Palestinian majority, there is an unbridgeable divide. This divide is not primarily about Israel. Instead, it concerns the character of a future Palestinian state: Will it be a Taliban-like state or a modern, democratic one? Will there be a cinema in Nablus? Will folklore festivals be permitted in Qalqilya? Will the beach in Gaza be open simultaneously to men and women? There is no compromise between these two visions for Palestinian society. That is why reconciliation talks between Hamas and Fatah fail time and again.
Moreover, a Palestinian government that includes Hamas will never accept an agreement with Israel based on the Clinton parameters for peace. Hamas would force any unity government to adopt negotiating positions that would be unacceptable to even the most dovish Israelis.
But Gaza is not the only front in Iran’s offensive. The soft, naïve attitude of the Western democracies toward Iran has enabled the ayatollahs to reap more achievements. Just as Hamas took over Gaza, Hezbollah has tightened its hold over Lebanon. Iraq, meanwhile, is moving gradually into the Iranian orbit. Who will be Iran’s next target?
The Islamist-fascist regime in Tehran must be stopped, not hugged. Effective economic sanctions are the best way to make it impossible for the regime to govern, and to create a revolutionary situation in Iran.
Wasting time with futile talks, with gestures to the ayatollahs, will pull the rug out from under the feet of moderates in the Middle East. Policies that postpone confronting the danger that a nuclear Iran poses to Israel and other American allies in the region will bring about a nuclear arms race or make a military operation against Iran unavoidable.
I remain firm in my belief in the necessity of Israeli-Palestinian peace. But I also believe that achieving peace requires a willingness to stand up to the enemies of peace.
Ephraim Sneh has served as Israel’s minister of health, minister of transportation and deputy minister of defense. He is the author of “Navigating Perilous Waters: An Israeli Strategy for Peace and Security” (Routledge, 2005).
The Forward welcomes reader comments in order to promote thoughtful discussion on issues of importance to the Jewish community. In the interest of maintaining a civil forum, the Forward requires that all commenters be appropriately respectful toward our writers, other commenters and the subjects of the articles. Vigorous debate and reasoned critique are welcome; name-calling and personal invective are not. While we generally do not seek to edit or actively moderate comments, the Forward reserves the right to remove comments for any reason.
Copyright © 2013, Forward Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Why a Rabbi Should Not Marry Outside the Faith
Tapping Into Growing Lure of Hidden Jewish Heritage
Montreal's First Jewish Mayor Michael Applebaum Hit With Corruption Charges
Getting In Face of Ultra-Orthodox on Need for Real World Education
Barbra Streisand Is Butt of Anti-Semitic Joke
You've successfully signed up!
At least some of the objection to military action against Iran is based on practical considerations. Do we have reason to think that it can be effective? Do we know how many nuclear facilities Iran possesses and where they are? Are they vulnerable to air attack or would it be necessary to land troops in the vicinity? What happens if a military strike is unsuccessful or only partly successful? Will military action make things worse? I assume that both the IDF and the US military are looking for answers to these questions (and I understand that they are unlikely to share these answers with the public), but right now, it seems that the only reasonable alternative is some form of negotiation.
I think mr Sneh's assertion that Hamas is the nominal minority flies in the face of reality that Hamas like behaviors are allowed and encouraged by the rest of Palestinian society otherwise they would put an end to it. Even if he is right its practicality irrelevant as Hams has the majority of power. In practical terms a silent majority is a meaningless concept. Mr. Sneh's admirable desire for peace seems to me to have made it difficult for him to see reality for what it really is.
There is no question in my mind about Iran's intentions. The only question is how best to deal with them. American Jewish organizations have their place, certainly, but my sense is that those in the so-called peace camp see peace between Israel and the Palestinians more as an abstract ideology. One reason for that is that the vast majority of American Jews have never set foot in Israel, and most never will. As allies for peace, well, I have my doubts. So, Mr. Sneh, carry on and be of stout heart. Yours is the only commentary that I've read lately that makes any sense. And I've set my feet in Israel many times.
Did anyone understand Alex?
If you don't understand what Alex posted then you have a very serious Reading Comprehension problem with the english language.
Mr. Sneh's description of Iran is Biblical in its absolutism---but does it deal in any useful way with Iran as a complex historical formation? It does seem to be the distorted mirror image of caricatures of Israel, or of the US. No doubt, there are Jewish groups in the US whose members have, perhaps, less of a sense of other nations and peoples than of their own. A substantial number of American Jews, however, is likely to be offended by being thought so little of that they are addressed in these terms. As for our Gentile fellow citizens, those who find Cheney congenial might respond positively to this sort of argument---but it surely has not escaped Mr. Sneh's notice that there are new tenants at the White House and in the government.
If the yardstick by which we are measuring our elected leaders is to be based on 'congeniality', then Obama has loads of it. If we are basing it, as I and many others are, on a policy of proven deterrence which has effectively curtailed numerous known attempts at domestic terror since 9/11, then both Bush and Cheney did their elected job of protecting Americans. It remains to be seen whether Obama is up to the job. His recent directives in the anti-terrorism arena leave me and many, many others in doubt.
Peace, can not come to any group. First one by one each one of us must find peace with G-D. Then they will know who to help bring peace to the world. For the G-D of Peace, Ehlohay Ha Shalom will soon crush sin under your feat. How glad I am that I need not trust in my hands, my ability or my strength for defense. How I praise, the G-D of Peace. For it is written.....Psalm 140 O G-D, the LORD, the strength of my salvation, You have covered my head in the day of battle.