Analyst's note: Absolutely must read. How many American administrations have involved themselves directly in trying to assure a place in history by trying to obtain a peace agreement in the Arab Israeli conflict by encouraging the counter-productive measures described below by Dr. Hamid? Let me count the ways ...
From Andrew C. McCarthy in his book "THE GRAND JIHAD How Islam and the Left Sabotage America" we learn that:
"In Islam, the umma is all -- it cannot be divided, depleted, or watered down; it wants a toe-hold, then an enclave, then the whole enchilada. [....] Islamism does not participate in politics; it uses politics. And when it does, we overlook at our peril that it is doctrinally and incorrigibly anti-democratic. For Islamist, democracy is a tool for acquiring power, not a culture of governance [....] willingness to engage in politics -- whether in democratic or authoritarian societies -- is not a concession. It is a jihad strategy, called siyash, and it is fully consistent with sabotage. [....] our "big thinkers" deduce that if the terrorists figure the [Muslim] Brothers are soft, they obviously must be moderates -- so we can work with them."
[....] We're tunnel-focused on terrorism, concerned only about forcible damage to life, limb, and property. As long as we're told there will be no harm, he [the Islamist] rightly figures we'll assume he means no terrorism. If terrorism is not in the equation, we go back to sleep -- amenable to all manner of accommodation, even to sowing the seeds of our own destruction at the behest of people who tell us, flat-out that their goal is conquest. In our suicidal disposition, "democracy" somehow requires that of us."
Why do we continue to listen to the same Salafist clerics who approve suicide terrorism and preach that it is a Muslim duty to kill our soldiers (our sons and daughters) and those who support them? This includes supporting civilian workers to American taxpayers and American voters. It is time we all stop listening to the seductive prompting of the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR now embedded in our federal and state governments (in some cased, even our local law enforcement) and for three generations in many of our academic institutions.
We must stand on our own without the "tsunami of oil-backed money" from the same Saudi regime that has long backed the operations of the Muslim Brotherhood here in America. If we (from citizens to the DoS, DoD, DoJ, HLS, and Intelligence Community, etc.) were to watch more closely we would find that the Muslim Brotherhood organizations says one thing in English and frequently something totally different to the al-Jezeera audience.
The Islamists do not really want "participatory democracy," but rather the ultimate purpose of their jihad (often implemented as a Trojan Horse) is to implement sharia law as a part of a global Islamic state. The Islamists are our enemy now and always.
After much study and experience, I have come to understand that Islam means "submission," not "peace." I personally have come to believe that ONLY the Muslims who (1) do not support sharia law, and (2) who fully and continually demonstrate their acceptance of American constitutional principles represent the Islam that is welcomed and encouraged here in America and the West.
All other Muslims, I refer to as "Islamist." The religion of the Islamist is wrapped around a political ideology that ultimately wants us either dead or in total submission; the Islamist are thus unwelcome here in our land. The ideology of the Islamist is totalitarianism and impliments an authoritarian political system under sharia law. The Islamist is focused at least as much on complete domination in this world as they are about salvation in the next.
Again I share the words of Andrew C. McCarthy as he writes in his book "THE GRAND JIHAD How Islam and the Left Sabotage America"the following:
"Defending ourselves will require flushing out the Islamists: identifying them and imposing on them the burden of defending their totalitarian ideology against the positive case for liberty and human reason. Doing so will undeniably burden true moderate Muslims as well: Given the prevalence of anti-Constitutional beliefs in Islam, foreign Muslims should not be permitted to reside in America unless they can demonstrate their acceptance of American constitutional principles. But those who satisfy this burden should be welcome, encouraged, and given the space necessary to seek reform."
From Dr. Tawfik Hamid we learn the following:
"The Arab Israeli conflict has repeatedly proved itself resistant to negotiated solutions. Despite peace treaties such as the Oslo accord, hatred toward Jews and Israel has risen to unprecedented levels in the Palestinian areas and continues to rise in much of the Muslim world. This consistent lack of progress should lead us to think anew about the underlying causes.
The view that solutions for the Arab-Israeli conflict have failed because of what some in the Muslim world call the 'expanding and colonizing ideology of Zionism' is unfair and devoid of truth. Israel proved its dedication to peace when they withdrew from Sinai, Lebanon, and Gaza in hope of peace with its neighbors.
What therefore are real factors causing the repeated failures of negotiated attempts to solve the Arab Israeli conflict? What perpetuates the stalemate?
One of these factors is that Palestinians do not accept the existence of Israel. Until Palestinian leaders, in both Arabic and English speeches, declare that Israel is their legitimate neighbor whom they no longer will strive to overrun, their participation in negotiations is fake, hypocritical, doomed to fail. It is impossible to negotiate with a partner about borders if this partner does not accept your existence to begin with.
The second factor blocking progress is the selfish mentality of the Palestinian leadership. Palestinian leaders seem to be interested in proving their "merit" by destroying Israel than in gaining a better life for their people. True leaders must be ready to do concessions to ensure better life for their people. Until Palestinian leaders are ready to make some concessions to the Israelis the problem will not be solved.
A third factor is the international community's naive belief that less radical Palestinians are "moderates." Fatah is not much different from Hamas in its refusal to accept that Israel is an established country with the same right to continue to exist as any other country in the world. Fatah is similarly virtually identical to Hamas with regard to its promotion of extreme anti-Semitic and anti-Israel propagandist incitement. Considering the Fatah leadership as 'moderate' because they are less radical in terms of their Islamic practices is like considering grade III cancer as a 'benign' tumor because it is less malignant than grade IV cancer.
The fourth reason that makes things worse is that the Palestinian leadership prefer to live -and make their population live -in delusions rather than in reality. Just recently, an official Palestinian report claimed that a key Jewish holy site - Jerusalem's Western Wall - has no religious significance to Jews. It is impossible to solve the Arab Israeli conflict if the Palestinian leaders persisted on living in such delusions instead of admitting the archeological reality that Jerusalem's Western Wall is Jewish. Problems are not solved by living in fabrications and lies but rather by facing and admitting realities.
The fifth factor that aggravates inability of Palestinians to participate as serious partners in peace discussions is that the Palestinians of Gaza who elected Hamas have not had to pay the price for their choice. Hamas was elected on the promise of the Muslim Brotherhood that "Islam is the solution." Allowing Palestinians to see that Hamas is unable to fulfill its promises would weaken radical Islam in the area. European and American economic support for Gaza under the banner of humanitarian aid masks the realities of the radical group's poor governance and enables them to survive.
With Hamas still strong, Gazan Palestinians have zero interest cooperating with peace arrangements negotiated by the West Bank PLO leadership. To the contrary, their version of Islamic doctrine forbids any accommodation with the Jewish state.
What about Israel's role in the stalemate? What mistake does Israel continue to make?
The fifth factor inhibiting progress has been insufficient use by Israel of negative consequences, perhaps in part because their American and European "allies" would balk at Israel's use of such tactics. Israel, for instance, could announce that it will build a certain number of new West Bank towns every year, or will annex West Bank land each year, unless and until Fatah and Hamas accept the minimal principles necessary for Israel to participate in any further negotiations. These principles would include: 1) Declaration of the right of the Jewish state of Israel to exist, 2) Cessation of both verbal incitement and physical violence against Israeli civilians and 3) Implementation of all previous agreements between Palestinians and Israelis.
Lastly, what of America's role? By contrast with encouraging Israel to establish negative consequences for continued Palestinian hostility, the current American strategy for obtaining a peace agreement in the region is counter-productive. President Obama's pressure on Netanyahu to make further concessions to recalcitrant Palestinian leaders adds yet another obstacle to peace. Concrete evidence shows that unilateral concessions from the Israeli side without significant concessions from the Palestinian side are counterproductive."
Unfortunately, given the mentality of the Palestinian leadership, a strategy by Israel and its allies of negative consequences is probably the only strategy with potential, at last, to give peace a chance."
