The Whiff Of Munich
Tony Blankely posts, in a slightly different context, a very useful reminder of the bloody terminus to where appeasement policies always lead:
I thought about that while reading this AP story:
Doesn't sound like Israel's Muslim enemies are satisfied, does it? No, indeed, Gaza is just the first step; if the Jews don't also exile themselves from Judea and Samaria, there can be "no prospects for peace."
That talking point echoed throughout the Middle East:
That's where this burgeoning tragedy is headed, as Isreal National News reinforcingly laments:
I dunno. Ariel Sharon was specifically and overwhelmingly re-elected in 2002 on an unequivocally anti-withdrawal platform. He's spent his military and political career as the ultimate hardliner, and now he is doing the Pals' ethnic cleansing for them.
Maybe he thinks it's possible to retreat in one area but not the others. But that, as Mr. Blankley notes above, runs counter to the lessons of history. Once you pull back under enormous pressure from all sides, that retreat usually acquires a momentum of its own, and oftentimes becomes a rout.
In one way what's happening in Gaza is immeasurably worse than the travesty of Munich 67 years ago. Back then Czechoslovakia was carved up by the great powers of Europe with little or no voice in that "peace process." In the here & now, the Sharon regime is wielding the knife to its own countrymen. He has become the "Chamberlain within." And nothing is going to come from his "disengagement" bait & switch except more terrorism, more bloodshed, and more war.
The IDF will be back in Gaza, and sooner rather than later. Or the Israelis will "disengage" from the West Bank (and Golan Heights) as well in the same time frame, leaving themselves topographically defenseless and in need of some sort of outside security guaranty.
I can't help wondering how many people (and not just in the Middle East) will have to die for this latest "progress along the road to sanity."
The Munich Agreement called for the "cession to Germany of the Sudetan German [sic] Territory [of Czechoslovakia]." Paragraphs 3 and 5 of the Agreement established an "international commission" composed of Germany, Britain, France, Italy and Czechoslovakia to work out the final details, oversee the various plebiscites and guarantee the resultant borders.A plight that ended up snuffing out the lives of sixty million people worldwide over the next six years.
But on that same day, September 29, Germany's insincerity was already manifest. On that day the four signatories issued an "Annex to the Agreement" in which Germany and Italy withdrew their support for the international commission's work (which they had agreed to earlier in the day when they signed the main agreement) - pending resolution of "the question of the Polish and Hungarian minorities in Czechoslovakia."
Needless to say the "international commission" did nothing the following March 15, 1939, when Germany swallowed the rest of Czechoslovakia. Only then, when it was too late, did Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain - who had been proud of his efforts to appease Hitler - finally realize the plight Britain and the world were in.
I thought about that while reading this AP story:
Arabs watched Israel's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip on Tuesday with a mix of joy at what they see as a Palestinian victory and regret that it doesn't include all Jewish settlements in the West Bank....[M]any Arabs remained skeptical about Israel's true intentions, fearing Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will balk at offering more territory in the West Bank to the Palestinians, jeopardizing their dream for statehood.
Sharon repeatedly has said the withdrawal is designed to allow Israel to hold on to all of Jerusalem and major parts of the West Bank _ a position that raises questions about the prospects for peace since the Palestinians claim those areas for a state. [emphases added]
Doesn't sound like Israel's Muslim enemies are satisfied, does it? No, indeed, Gaza is just the first step; if the Jews don't also exile themselves from Judea and Samaria, there can be "no prospects for peace."
That talking point echoed throughout the Middle East:
*Jordan's King Abdullah II, who maintains close ties with Israel under a peace treaty signed in 1994, welcomed the withdrawal as a "positive step," but stressed it "must be a starting point for pulling out of the West Bank."Leave it to the jihadis to be candid about the full scope of where they expect this latest "peace process" to go:
*In Al-Hayat, Maher Osman wrote that the Israeli withdrawal "deserves a celebration as big as the amount of Palestinian land they leave. So the Palestinians are tailoring their joy and their parties to the size of the Gaza Strip and the areas of the West Bank."
*Kuwait's Cabinet said in a statement that it hoped the pullout was a "first step toward ending Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories" and that it would "revive peace efforts in the area."
*In Dubai, the independent Gulf News daily said the international community must "pressure Israel to leave other occupied lands, particularly the West Bank, including East Jerusalem..."
Nine hardline Palestinian factions, including the radical Hamas and Islamic Jihad [which will dominate any freely elected "Palestinian" government], said in a joint statement that the Gaza pullout was the "fruit of the steadfastness and resistance of the Palestinian people."First Gaza, then the West Bank; and then the rest of "Palestine." And the Jews? Well, surely the Germans have some spare ovens they need taken off their hands.
"The retreat of the occupation from Gaza is the beginning of liberation and not the end of the struggle with the Zionist enemy," it added.
That's where this burgeoning tragedy is headed, as Isreal National News reinforcingly laments:
Nearby, in Palestinian Authority-controlled areas of the Gaza Strip, many Arabs are celebrating. The local terrorists are exulting in what they see as proof positive that their breed of terrorism works — marches, speeches, candies, and floats in the shape of Kassam rockets that have rained down on Israeli cities. Naturally, therefore, Hamas and Islamic Jihad are planning more of the same terror. PA officials, such as Saeb Erakat and Abu Alaa, are also openly acknowledging that terrorism has worked, holding it as an implied threat for possible future negotiations....
As Michael Freund has written, "You can tell a lot about a political or historical event by looking at who's celebrating it." [emphasis added]
I dunno. Ariel Sharon was specifically and overwhelmingly re-elected in 2002 on an unequivocally anti-withdrawal platform. He's spent his military and political career as the ultimate hardliner, and now he is doing the Pals' ethnic cleansing for them.
Maybe he thinks it's possible to retreat in one area but not the others. But that, as Mr. Blankley notes above, runs counter to the lessons of history. Once you pull back under enormous pressure from all sides, that retreat usually acquires a momentum of its own, and oftentimes becomes a rout.
In one way what's happening in Gaza is immeasurably worse than the travesty of Munich 67 years ago. Back then Czechoslovakia was carved up by the great powers of Europe with little or no voice in that "peace process." In the here & now, the Sharon regime is wielding the knife to its own countrymen. He has become the "Chamberlain within." And nothing is going to come from his "disengagement" bait & switch except more terrorism, more bloodshed, and more war.
The IDF will be back in Gaza, and sooner rather than later. Or the Israelis will "disengage" from the West Bank (and Golan Heights) as well in the same time frame, leaving themselves topographically defenseless and in need of some sort of outside security guaranty.
I can't help wondering how many people (and not just in the Middle East) will have to die for this latest "progress along the road to sanity."
posted by JASmius at 11:41 AM
<<< Home