āNo causal relationship between economic hardship & mass violenceā
In his piece this week, Karsh recalls that: āAt the time of the September 1993 signing of the Israel-PLO Declaration of Principles, conditions in the territories were far better than in most Arab statesā¦But within six months of Arafatās arrival in Gaza (in July 1994), the standard of living in the Strip fell by 25%, and more than half of the areaās residents claimed to have been happier under Israel.ā
Significantly, he notes: āā¦. at the time Arafat launched his war of terrorism in September 2000, Palestinian income per capita was nearly double Syriaās, more than four times Yemenās, and 10% higher than Jordanās ā one of the better-off Arab states. Only the oil rich Gulf states and Lebanon were more affluent.ā
With regard to Gaza, Karsh underscores: āā¦countless nations and groups in todayās world endure far harsher socioeconomic or political conditions than the Palestinians, yet none have embraced violence and terrorism against their neighbors with such alacrity and on such a massive scale.ā
He aptly points out āā¦, there is no causal relationship between economic hardship and mass violence. On the contrary, in the modern world it is not the poor and the oppressed who have carried out the worst acts of terrorism and violence but, rather, the militant vanguards from among the better educated and more moneyed circles of society.ā
So, as Karsh reiterates: āā¦it is not socioeconomic despair but the total rejection of Israelās right to existā¦which underlies the relentless anti-Israel violence emanating from these territories and its attendant economic stagnation and decline.ā
Couldnāt put it better myself!
----------
Unlike Germany and Japanā¦
For unlike any prospective self-governing Palestinian entity, which sees itself unequivocally bound culturally, ethnically and religiously to the larger Islamic world, Germany was not surrounded by a swathe of kindred Teutonic nationsānor Japan by kindred Nipponic nationsāwhich, driven by a radical Teutonic/Nipponic ideology, strove continually to undermine the stability and legitimacy of any peaceable regime that foreign powers might install.
This, however, was the case in both Iraq and Afghanistanāand is certainly likely to be the case for any self-governing Palestinian entity ,whether in Judea- Samaria or in Gaza.
Unlike defeated Berlin (and Tokyo), Baghdad (and Kabul) along with their environs, were continually assailed by Islamic insurgents, financed, armed and equipped from surrounding Muslim countries, to undermine any arrangement or undercut any resolution the victorious powers wished to implement and imperiling any government, not to their liking.
Clearly, this is very likely to be the case in the Israeli/Palestinian situation, with regional Muslim-majority countries constituting a virtually unending source of post-victory instability and incitement. Accordingly, because any attempted remolding or āsociopolitical and educational transformationā is likely to be impededāeven up-endedāby external sources of incitement and agitation, the only way Israel can ensure that Gaza (or Judea-Samaria) will not be taken over by some inimical radical regime is to govern these areas by itself.
But the only way Israel can govern these territories itself, without the need to rule over a recalcitrant alien ethnic group, is to remove that ethnic group from those territories.
What could be simpler or more self-evident??
The real humanitarian solution to Gazaās humanitarian crisis
Clearly then, persisting with the current format of humanitarian effort will only exacerbate the humanitarian crisis. Accordingly, this effort must be restructured and redirected.
Indeed, the only durable humanitarian solution that can ensure Israeli security and relieve Israel from the burden of āruling over another peopleā, is
to generously finance the relocation/rehabilitation of the non-belligerent Gazan population to third party countries, and allow them to build more prosperous and more secure lives, outside the ācircle of violenceā, to which they will inevitably be subject, if they remain where they areāno matter what the level of humanitarian aid.
All we need now is leadership with sufficient political will, intellectual daring, and ideological commitment to undertake what must be undertaken.
Why would that be a problem??
(full article online)
INTO THE FRAY: GazaāThe āhumanitarianā hoax
