President Ahmadinejad of Iran has been pretty forthright about his views of Israel: "Iran believes that whoever is for humanity should also be for eradicating the Zionist regime (Israel) as symbol of suppression and discrimination," Ahmadinejad said in an interview with a Lebanese television network, carried by ISNA.
Ahmadinejad also recently said that Iranians and Muslim nations worldwide should hold Qods rallies and show their willingness to dispose of this "infectious tumor and this regime full of rascality." (Ha’aretz 25-08-11; http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/ahmadinejad-iran-is-determined-to-eradicate-israel-1.380629)
So too has Hamas, in its Charter:
“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.”
“The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Muslim generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up.”
“There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors.” (http://www.mideastweb.org/hamas.htm)
These statements have brought a degree of—if not energetic and consistent—condemnation from various nations of the world. Both Ahmadinejad and Hamas are regarded as extremists and, in some states, Hamas is officially designated as a terrorist organization.
Recent statements from the Arab world echo the sentiments of Ahmadinejad and Hamas. Just one example, as reported by Martin Kramer: “Jihad el-Khazen is a leading columnist at Al-Hayat, the premier Arabic daily newspaper. In his latest, he labels Netanyahu ‘a mongrel like every Israeli Prime Minister before him,’ in comparison to Lebanon's rep at the UN, ‘an Arab who hails from a well-known family, and is not a Khazari immigrant who changed his family name like Netanyahu.’”
Kramer is appalled: “It's racist claptrap, and Al-Hayat should be ashamed of publishing it.” (https://www.facebook.com/#!/martinkramer.page?sk=wall) But wait, Kramer has more of el-Khazen for us: “And how about this from Jihad el-Khazen (from an article in which he celebrates his own bit performance at the UN show): ‘The prophets of Israel is a lie, since they were never once on our land. Their history is a collection of legends from the Torah, and any university student today will hear that there has never been any archaeological evidence that supports this view. This is what I heard at Georgetown University.’” http://goo.gl/UtLmv
Such views are widespread in the Arab world, and why wouldn’t they be, as they are purveyed in school books, newspapers, radio, television, the internet, and sermons universally and on a daily basis.
But now we are hearing these things directly from high officials of the Palestinians: Abbas Zaki, Member of the Fatah Central Committee, in an interview aired on Al-Jazeera September 23, 2011, confirmed that the Palestinians’ goal is to “wipe Israel out,” but because it is “not [acceptable] policy to say so, keep it to yourself.…” (MEMRI, September 23.)
“The settlement should be based upon the borders of June 4, 1967. When we say that the settlement should be based upon these borders, President [Abbas] understands, we understand, and everybody knows that the greater goal cannot be accomplished in one go.If Israel withdraws from Jerusalem, evacuates the 650,000 settlers, and dismantles the wall–what will become of Israel? It will come to an end.…”—Member of the Fatah Central Committee, Abbas Zaki, in an interview aired on Al-Jazeera September 23, 2011.(MEMRI, September 23, emphasis added; reprinted in Isranet Daily Briefing, from the Canadian Institute for Jewish Research, www.isranet.org)
In other words, the Fatah policy is not “two states” for two peoples, but “two stages” for the disappearance of Israel and the triumph of a Palestine from the Jordan to the sea.
A few days ago The Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) ambassador to the US, Maen Areikat, told reporters in Washington that the Palestinian state his regime is trying to gain recognition for at the UN next week should be free of Jews. "I think it would be in the best interest of the two people to be separated," said Areikat. (http://www.israeltoday.co.il/News/tabid/178 nid/22948/language/en-US/Default.aspx)
Israel Todaymagazine continues, “Of course, any talk by Israeli politicians of removing Arabs from the Jewish state is immediately branded as racism and aggressively dismissed by the international community.” And, “Israeli and Jewish leaders were incensed by the Palestinian official's remarks.”
Finally, there were the remarks of (term-expired) P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas at the U.N. Here is what one commentator understood:
“Comments from Abbas’ recent United Nations speechreinforced this underlying concern that the PA is not currently willing to accept a peaceful solution for a Palestinian State alongside the State of Israel. First, he spoke at the UN of Palestine being occupied for 63 years, i.e., since 1948. This marks the UN partition plan that split the former British mandate of Palestine into two states, one with a majority Jewish population and one with a majority Arab population based on the people who were already living there. This contrasts markedly from the proposal being submitted for statehood at the UN, which calls for borders on or negotiated from before the war in 1967. If the Palestinians are plan for gaining statehood is still to hold a claim on Israeli land, it means there will be no permanent solution coming from any negotiations or creation of a Palestinian state, so Israel will be rightly wary about its security. If there was any way to doubt this conclusion, it was undone by his mentioning of Palestine being he land of the Prophet Muhammed and Jesus Christ, but conspicuously absent was any reference to Jews or even religious figures who have shared heritage between Judaism and Islam, such as Abraham.” (http://www.democracystandard.com/israel/is-palestinian-recognition-of-a-jewish-state-a-legitimate-demand/)
P.M. Netanyahu in his U.N. speech remarked on Abbas’ identification of 1948 as the start of the occupation. The implication that occupation does not end until Israel is gone was obviously not lost on Netanyahu. Those favouring the policy of two state for two peoples were disappointed by Abbas’ comment. Supporters of Israel were irritated, to say the least, about Abbas’ formulation.
The anti-Israel statements catalogued here drew much disappointment, anger, and disillusion among supporters of Israel. In contrast, I am frankly delighted that the Palestinians are finally telling us what they really think: A Jew-free Palestine! The end of “occupation” means the end of Israel! This is pure gold. Why? Because the constant theme of Europeans and others that Israel’s recalcitrance is the cause of the conflict and the reason that peace has not been established, and that Israel must make more concessions to meet the Palestinians, has been thrown in doubt by Palestinians telling what they really think.
The self-righteous pleas of Scandinavians and others to ‘give the Palestinians a state, and there will be peace,’ no longer sound so credible. It is increasingly difficult to blame Israel when the Palestinians are now making it clear that they have no intention of compromising, even for peace. So my advice to the Israelis is, just hand the microphone to the Palestinians, who have finally come around to saying what they really think.
(Philip Carl Salzman, a Professor of Anthropology, McGill University and CIJR Academic Fellow, is the author, inter alia, of Black Tents of Baluchistan [2000], Culture and Conflict in the Middle East [2008] and, forthcoming, Classic Comparative Anthropology. Studies from the Tradition [2012])
