A Hopeless State

by Ron Dermer
May 15, 2002
http://www.jpost.com

Watch out New York and San Juan. Hordes of hopeless Puerto 
Rican suicide bombers will soon strike in the heart of your 
cities. After all, that is the only logical conclusion one 
can reach when faced with three assumptions that are now 
as ubiquitous as they are specious.

The first assumption is that young men and women strap 
explosives to their bodies because they lack "hope." 
US President George Bush became the latest victim of this 
bogus proposition when he spoke last week of the Palestinian 
boys and girls without hope who blow themselves up. 
In making this statement, the president, whose first strides 
in the war against terrorism were clear and powerful, 
took a big step backwards.

The danger in believing that terrorism is rooted in hopelessness 
is that this thinking suggests that the way to end terror is 
to provide "hope" to those who practice it.

In fact, the recipe for making a suicide bomber is one part 
fanaticism and one part hope. The fanaticism is bred in a 
culture of death, where terrorist recruits are meticulously 
brainwashed to believe that their noble ends justify any means.

Still, a fanatical mindset only sets the fuse. Hope is the 
spark that lights it. Suicide bombers would not be so quick 
to die if they didn't believe that the cause they so fanatically 
pursue will be advanced by their sacrifice.

A few weeks ago, by replacing the term "suicide bomber" with 
"homicide bomber," Bush seemed to recognize this reality. 
Yet, despite his earlier clarity on this issue, Bush's statement 
last week buttressed the position of those who believe that 
only by restoring hope and addressing the supposed grievances 
of terrorists can terrorism be defeated.

Hopelessly misunderstanding the nature of terrorism, the 
guardians of conventional wisdom have also continued to 
cling to a second wrongheaded assumption - that the main 
grievance of the Palestinians is their lack of self-determination.

Of course, the fact that the Palestinian national movement 
has been devoted since its inception to destroying, not building, 
a state is quickly brushed aside. Dates like 1964, when the PLO 
was founded to destroy an Israel that did not then have 
control over the West Bank or Gaza, and events such as 
the repeated refusal of the Arabs to accept a two-state 
solution, are conveniently forgotten.

Today, in one final stroke of dimwittedness, the "hopeless" 
pursuit of self-determination has now been wedded to one final 
fallacy: that the thirst for self-determination can only be 
quenched by statehood. Only a Palestinian state, we are 
told, can satisfy the grievance the Palestinians so desperately 
hope to redress.

Admittedly, there is some truth to this argument. For the vehicle 
of a Palestinian state is the only means through which the 
real Palestinian grievance - the existence of the Jewish state - 
can be redressed.

By giving "Palestinians" control over their borders (remember 
the Karine A?) and their airspace, by placing 40% of Israel's 
water supply at their mercy, and by allowing "Palestine" to 
form treaties with hostile foreign states (axis of evil, 
anyone?), a state will give the Palestinians powers that 
will endanger the very existence of the Jewish state.

Those who believe that Palestinian self-determination cannot 
be achieved with anything short of statehood confidently 
pooh-pooh such apocalyptic forecasts with a promise to 
restrict the powers of any future Palestinian state.

Those peddling this nonsense might want to go to the next 
debate in the UN over infringements on "Iraqi sovereignty." 
If the United States has had difficulty keeping the sanctions 
against Iraq in place, one can imagine the difficulties 
Israel will face in restricting the powers of a future 
Palestinian state.

Last month, when Israel exercised its basic right under 
international law to self-defense and destroyed terrorist 
infrastructure in Area A under rights that Israel retained 
under the Oslo Accords, the world attempted to handcuff 
this country and prevent it from defending itself. Imagine 
the shackles that would be in store is we were forced to 
confront a sovereign Palestinian state.

Once synthesized, the three phony assumptions that have now 
completely cluttered the world's thinking about Israel and 
the Palestinians can be boiled down to the following proposition: 
The Palestinians are desperate because their demand for a 
self-determination that can only be achieved through statehood 
has not yet been satisfied.

Those who really believe this drivel may want to warn their 
friends in New York and San Juan about the imminent dangers 
they face. After 50 years as an American colony, 50 more 
as a Commonwealth, and with national referendums showing 
no prospects for Puerto Rican independence, the day when 
"hopeless" Puerto Rican freedom fighters grab explosive 
belts is surely not far away.
----------
The writer is a political analyst living in Jerusalem.