|
recently got a long, carefully composed e-mail from a reader, who
begged me to circulate it among "other opinion-formers."
It laid out a plan for peace in the Middle East. The writer, obviously
an intelligent and well-informed person, had composed the e-mail
with great care. With some passion, too he really wants to
find a solution to the Israel-Arab problem. Here was a public-spirited
person doing his citizenly best to promote an idea that, he fervently
believed, would put an end to the horrors.
And what was
that idea? In a nutshell: The U.S. should lean hard on Israel to
abandon the Jewish settlements in Arab land i.e. beyond Israel's
pre-1967 borders. These settlements (my reader argued) were the
root cause of all the strife. Closing them down would remove the
main casus belli; and the good faith shown by this act would
open the eyes of the Arabs to the fact that peace with Israel is
possible. The logjam would be broken.
I don't know
what to say to people like this. Obviously they are decent, good
citizens. Obviously they are trying their best trying to
be constructive, to give some hope to the world. How do I tell them
what I feel? Which is, that they are floating in orbit between Uranus
and Neptune inhabiting some place that does not touch the
real world at any point.
Look: Possibly
there would be some abstract justice in closing down the
settlements, I don't know. I don't see it myself, I must admit.
Why should Jews not live among Arabs? Lots of Arabs live in Israel,
and do very well there. There are rich Israeli Arabs; there are
Israeli-Arab pop stars and comedians; there are Israeli-Arab intellectuals,
teachers, writers, businessmen, athletes. Why, when the whole thing
gets sorted out, should there not be Jews living in Arab territory
as there were for centuries past? What, exactly, is wrong
with the settlements? I don't see it.
But, okay,
let's suppose there is some valid moral objection to the
existence of the settlements; and let's suppose my reader's plan
were to be carried out, and all the settlements were removed, their
populations transferred back to metropolitan Israel, their buildings
razed, their fields ploughed with salt. Does anybody think it
would make a damn bit of difference? There was no such thing
as settlements, no such thing as "occupied territories,"
before the 1967 war. There were no such things in 1960, for example,
when Adolf Eichmann was abducted from his hiding-hole in Buenos
Aires by Israeli secret agents, an event recorded by Saudi Arabia's
principal government-controlled newspaper as: "ARREST OF EICHMANN,
WHO HAD THE HONOR OF KILLING 6 MILLION JEWS".
The problem
of the Middle East is not the settlements. It is not this piece
of land or that piece. It is not the Golan Heights or East Jerusalem
or Temple Mount. It is not oil, or land, or water, or history, or
geography, or metaphysics. The problem is in plain sight. You know
what the problem is, and so do I. The problem is that the Middle
East hates the Jews.
I say "the
Middle East" because I don't know any more precise way to say
it. You can't say "the Arabs" (though of course the Arabs
hate the Jews more than anyone), because the Iranians and the Pakistanis
and the Berbers of North Africa hate the Jews too, and they are
not Arabs. You can't say "the Muslims". That is a lot
closer, I think, and there surely cannot be much doubt that institutional
Islam is riddled with Jew-hatred. Still, Malaysia is a Muslim country,
and they don't hate the Jews, except in a go-along, pro forma sort
of way, to keep on good terms with the Saudis and Gulf Emirs.
And I am sure,
before you write to tell me, that lots of people in the Middle East
don't hate the Jews. Lots of Arabs, millions probably, don't
hate the Jews. Probably lots of non-Arab Muslims don't hate the
Jews, either. Yet it's hard to avoid the impression, from reading
the MEMRI translations,
from looking at the kinds of things taught in schools all over the
Middle East (and in Islamic schools here in the U.S.A. see
below), from listening to the pronouncements of Middle East politicians
(remember the Syrian foreign minister explaining to the Pope
to the Pope! that: "When I see a Jew in front of me,
I kill him"?) and from random conversations with New York cab
drivers, that visceral, murderous Jew-hatred is awfully widespread
among Arabs, Pakistanis, Iranians, and North Africans. Awfully
widespread.
In between
getting that e-mail and answering it, I did two unrelated things,
by way of my daily work. One was to prepare an editorial snippet
for the print National Review about Islamic schools here
in the U.S., based on a long study in the Washington Post
of February 25th. There are estimated to be between 200 and 600
private Islamic day schools in the U.S., with up to 30,000 students
in attendance. They use textbooks imported from Pakistan and Saudi
Arabia. One in use at the Islamic Saudi Academy in suburban Virginia
instructs readers that a sure sign of the Day of Judgment will be
that Muslims will fight and kill Jews, who will hide behind trees
that say: "Oh Muslim, Oh servant of God, there is a Jew hiding
behind me. Come here and kill him." School authorities did
some fast damage control when the Post confronted them (as
the Saudis are doing over the now-famous Blood
Libel article). The textbooks are in process of being replaced
with special versions more suitable for American students, they
assured us, with the kill-a-Jew-for-Allah stuff left out. Presumably
that stuff remains untouched back home in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan,
Egypt, Syria, Iran, Libya,... Their kiddies will get the
right message, you can be sure: "What do you mean, you don't
hate Jews? Look, even the blessed trees hate them!"
The other thing
I did was read Jeffrey Goldberg's article about Saddam Hussein in
The New Yorker (titled "The Great Terror" in the
3/25/02 issue).
"Iraqi
dissidents agree that Iraq's programs to build weapons of mass destruction
are focused on Israel. 'Israel is the whole game,' Ahmad Chalabi,
the leader of the Iraqi National Congress, told me. .... "[Saddam]
thinks he can kill one hundred thousand Israelis in a day with biological
weapons....' Students of Iraq and its government generally agree
that Saddam would like to project himself as leader of all the Arabs,
and that the only sure way to do that is by confronting Israel."
Seems to me,
from what I read and hear, that those students are quite right:
That by "confronting Israel" via killing a hundred thousand
Israelis in a day, Saddam would win the hearts of the entire Arab
world, and of the Iranians, Pakistanis, Afghans and North Africans,
too. (Does Hamid Karzai, Washington's new darling, hate Jews? Has
anyone asked him?) I am sure Saddam himself believes this to be
the case, and he is, with all his endearing little character flaws,
a man who knows something about the Arab mentality.
It is not too
difficult to envisage a plan by which the spoken grievances of the
Arabs against Israel could be addressed, and some compromise struck.
The chancelleries of the world including Israel's
are in fact full of such plans, drawn up with loving care by legions
of diplomats, experts, politicians, ambassadors, scholars and private
do-gooders like my reader, across decades of time. In an atmosphere
of goodwill, and genuine desire for a solution, the Palestine circle
could be squared. You'd just have to pull one of those plans down
from the shelf, blow the dust off it, and say: "Let's take
this for a starting point, shall we?" The circle is not going
to be squared though not by George W. Bush, not by my e-mail
pal with his elaborate scheme to shut down the settlements, not
by another round of "shuttle diplomacy," not by any amount
of work on a "peace process". It isn't going to be, because
there is no goodwill, and no real desire on the part of Israel's
enemies for a solution. Or rather, there is a widespread desire
for only one solution the extinction of Israel and
the driving out, or mass killing, of the Jews. That's what they
want, the Middle East; that's all they want.
I don't think
we should be sending diplomats to the Middle East. I think we should
be sending teams of psychiatrists. This is a diseased culture, a
sick culture. Go back to that disgraceful recycling of the Blood
Libel in the Saudi press. Do you think anyone in that newspaper's
readership thought there was anything odd about it, anything deplorable
about it, anything untrue about it? I don't think so. To
the newspaper readers of Saudi Arabia, it was routine stuff, a statement
of the obvious. If MEMRI hadn't brought it to the attention of the
civilized world, do you think the Saudi authorities would have bothered
about it? Do you think, even now, they really have a clue what all
the fuss is about? Of course the Jews use gentile blood to make
their cookies. Doesn't everyone know that? We'd best pretend to
be shocked, though. Those Americans are so-o-o sensitive!
We are dealing
here with people who are, not to put too fine a point on it, nuts.
The Arabs, the Iranians, the Pakis, the Libyans: they are nuts,
the great majority of them. Nuts. Not playing with a full deck.
Not too tightly wrapped. One brick short of a load, one coupon short
of a toaster. The smoke not going all the way up the chimney. Not
quite 16 annas to the rupee. Nuts.
Is there anything
we can do about it? Only what Peggy Noonan told us to do in her
brilliant Wall Street Journal piece last week: Do what you
do when you find yourself in a roomful of glittering-eyed lunatics
down at the local funny farm. Keep smiling, talk softly, don't make
any sudden moves, keep nodding and smiling, and keep a tight hand
on the stun gun in your pocket. The Middle East contains three hundred
million people, and most of them are crazy as coots. Glad I don't
live there.
|