Will There Ever Be Peace Between Israel and the Palestinians?

If you really want to be depressed, contemplate the chance of success for peace between Israel and the Palestinians. The issues between them seem insurmountable.

As long as Israel holds the West Bank it is ruling a recalcitrant population. But if it withdraws to the 1967 borders, which are in reality the 1949 armistice lines, the narrow middle of the country could be cut in half by an Arab/Palestinian attack.

Israel is composed of leftists and secularists who are willing to withdraw
from some or all of the West Bank. It is also composed of the right and the ultra-religious, some of whom are willing to live in peace in the West Bank with the Palestinians, whether the area is called Judaea and Samaria or Palestine.

The Palestinians seem to want the West Bank Judenrein, something it was not before the Jordanians invaded in 1948. Given the current realities, it is not possible to get 500,000 religious and nationalistic Jews to withdraw without an Israeli civil war.

Based on history, if Israel does withdraw, the future of peace is less than assured.
When Israel withdrew from Lebanon, it got Hezbollah; when it withdrew from Gaza,
it got Hamas. If it withdraws from the West Bank, it could get a militarized Palestine
importing arms and rockets from Syria, Lebanon and Gaza. If Jordan falls to the
majority Palestinian inhabitants, the future is bleak for Israel.

When the Palestinians speak in English, they proclaim that Israel must withdraw
to the 1967 borders. When they speak in Arabic, they frequently say that the Jewish state of Israel must be destroyed and that not one inch of the area can ever be in Jewish hands.

The western press and many of their reporters who lean to the left always seem to favor the underdog. Israel is far stronger than the Palestinians, so there is little doubt of their allegiance. The UN, with a core of Arab and other third-world countries, is understandably anti-Israel, sometimes even shading into anti-Jewish. With more than twenty wars going on between Islamic extremists and what they consider to be infidels, it is surprising that the UN mostly criticizes Israel. Or maybe not.

With Israel’s hundreds of nuclear and other sophisticated weapons, you would have
to be insane to try to destroy it. The Arab terrorist groups must know what the
endgame would be. The question is: Are they fanatical enough to try it anyway?

Journalist Spotlight: Kapil Komireddi

Kapil Komireddi is an Indian journalist that writes on world affairs, foreign policy, India, Pakistan, and the Middle East.

He has written for Haaretz, New York Times, Foreign Policy, Guardian, New Statesman, Tablet, The National, and Forbes.

Kapil Komireddi has also appeared on Russia Today and Sun.

TV Interviews

  • Russia Today –  (October 2, 2012)
  • Sun –  (February 9, 2012)
  • Sun –  (January 6, 2012)

Newspaper Articles

Pakistan: Anatomy of a Failed State

  • Part 1:  (November 16, 2009)

    With a stockpile of over 80 nuclear warheads, a rapidly collapsing state, and an army and intelligence service severely contaminated with Islamists, Pakistan represents perhaps the single biggest security challenge of the 21st century.

  • Part 2: , November 18, 2009

    Today’s Pakistan is at war with itself, torn between competing ideas of what it means to be Pakistani. This failure to create a humane or liberal nationalism has its roots in Pakistan’s foundation.

  • Part 3: , November 18, 2009

    From its foundation, the primary challenge to Pakistan’s sense of itself came from India. India’s success at forging a nationality out of its diversity stood as a towering repudiation of the very idea of Pakistan.

  • Part 4: , December 6, 2009

    For decades, Washington has mistakenly believed that by funding Pakistan, it was propping up “Western-minded” leaders who would thoroughly oppose fanatical religious forces. Instead, since its creation, Pakistan has been a center for the Islamist movement.

  • Part 5: , December 7, 2009

    The Pakistani army, the nation’s most powerful institution, has never been the modernizing force the West believed it would be. Instead, after seizing power in a coup, the army implemented a national program of Islamic indoctrination.

  • Part 6: , December 11, 2009

    Pakistan’s relationship with America has always followed the same pattern: The army accepts American military aid while allying itself with the very enemies it had been paid and equipped by the U.S. to oppose.

  • Part 7: , December 13, 2009

    Pakistan’s 1971 civil war constitutes the single most terrible slaughter of Muslims since the founding of Islam – committed entirely by Muslims.

  • Part 8: , December 14, 2009

    No individual bears greater responsibility for the genocide in Pakistan in 1971 than Zulfi Bhutto, who refused all political compromises and maneuvered the government and army into civil war.

  • Part 9: , December 19, 2009

    In 1971, assisted by 13 battalions of mujahideen, Pakistan’s soldiers slaughtered three million people over 9 bloodcurdling months.

Social

  • Twitter:
  • Bitly: