DAVIS: Netanyahu can be Israel’s Nixon-to-China peacemaker

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

A very wise Republican friend of mine, star pollster Frank Luntz, has made it a science to convince politicians of the supposedly self-evident proposition that words count.

New Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu is known in Israel and throughout the world as a man of the right. He is often referred to as a “hard-liner” when it comes to dealing with the Palestinians. The early impression in American and European media has been that Mr. Netanyahu, as one Jerusalem-based think tank fellow put it, “has refused to commit himself to a two-state solution.”

This is because whenever Mr. Netanyahu is asked whether he favors a two-state solution, his answer often sounds like, simply put, “No, but … .” But, he could articulate exactly the same substantive position by saying, “Yes, but … .” Words matter, as Mr. Luntz always reminds us. And which of these two words Mr. Netanyahu chooses matters. A lot.

Let’s look at substance first.

The “but” word, whether it comes after a “no” or “yes,” actually understandably involves the same four preconditions to a two-state solution: an extended period of peace and a civil society by the Palestinian entity; freedom of the skies; demilitarization; and a ban on hostile alliances. To understand the reasons for each of them, let’s substitute the name America for Israel, and Mexico for Palestine.

Would America agree to recognize Mexico as a sovereign state if Mexico were publicly committed to the destruction of the United States, with moonlighting military forces or terrorists free to use Mexico as a base for invading America or shooting rockets at American cities?

Would America agree if Mexico had control over its border crossings that were regularly used to permit al Qaeda or other international terrorists to enter and operate in its territory and attack the U.S. and invade Texas?

What if Mexico could shoot down planes flying from San Diego to Miami if they came too close to Mexican airspace?

And what if Mexico could make an alliance with al Qaeda or other anti-U.S. terrorists like Hezbollah and perhaps even cooperate in the planning of another Sept. 11-style attack on our economy and civilians?

Would Americans accept any of those scenarios? Of course not. So, too, for Israel.

Most Americans and even most Europeans, where criticism towards Israel has recently been greater after the Gaza incursion, understand that no nation could permit the establishment of a state next to it whose central policy is to bring about its destruction. That is why no two-state solution involving a Hamas-governed Gaza is possible. Here is a direct quote from Hamas’ charter:

“The Prophet, Allah’s prayer and peace be upon him, says: ‘The Hour of judgment shall not come until the Muslims fight the Jews and kill them, so that the Jews hide behind trees and stones, and each tree and stone will say: ‘Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’ … ”

So long as Hamas remains in power in Gaza, and committed to terrorism and the destruction of Israel, there can be no peace with Hamas.

But as to the West Bank and the Palestinian Authority, Mr. Netanyahu has a great historic opportunity to accomplish what his more “dovish” predecessors, the Kadima party government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and now leader Tzipi Livni, tried but were unable to achieve.

Story Continues →