Daniel J. Elazar writes, "There is little or nothing in the past behavior of the Palestinians to suggest that, other than a handful of moderates, they are likely to respond in a measured way to a measured Israeli offer of statehood."
You can't get blood out of a stone. The Western world does not really expect anything more than violence and discord from the Palestinians. Their unrestrained and belligerent existence seems to be as far as this invented people can travel. Jordan, where the only possible "homeland" awaits them, does not want them, and Israel, as compromising as she may be, will not be tolerated by even the vaguest form of Palestinian leadership--until her Jews are cast into the sea and drowned.
And this narrative of "making peace with the Palestinians" is just becoming so redundant. That writers such as Caroline Glick have made "a mission in life" out of this tedious and squandering impasse, from which a denouement, in my opinion, will never find purchase, speaks volumes about the futility of Jews trying to make peace with a people who are not interested in making peace with Jews.
And not to deny Caroline Glick her genius, but my point is that such genius--Jewish genius in particular--is becoming redundant in the face of such cynical obduracy as demonstrated by the Muslim fundamentalists who virtually "own" the so-called Palestinian people. For example, a meeting scheduled for July 1 between Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Vice-Premier Shaul Mofaz was postponed because, as Wasl Abu Yosef, a member of Abbas' Palestine Liberation Organization put it, "We know that Mofaz will bring nothing new." These are not the words of someone interested in making peace with a Jewish Israel. These are not the words of someone willing to "respond in a measured way." These are the words of a terrorist intent on Islamic preponderance by any means possible, preferably violence.
It was reported that Palestinian youth were offended that Abbas was meeting with Mofaz because Shaul Mofez was formerly an Israeli defense chief. Apparently these same Palestinian youth are not offended by the fact that Abbas, their noble leader, provided funds for the terrorist attack that killed eleven Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics; similarly, these same Palestinian youth were not discomfited by the fact that Mahmoud Abbas is an avid Holocaust denier.
In his book The Other Side: The Relationship between Nazism and the Leadership of the Zionist Movement, published in Arabic in 1983, he writes, "a partnership was established between Hitler's Nazis and the leadership of the Zionist movement... [the Zionists gave] permission to every racist in the world, led by Hitler and the Nazis, to treat Jews as they wish, so long as it guarantees immigration to Palestine." Small wonder then that the same "lawyer and historian," as the ever-noble New York Times described him, in 2009 proclaimed that, "A Jewish state, what is that supposed to mean? You can call yourselves as you like, but I don't accept it and I say so publicly."
This is the "little or nothing" behavior Daniel J. Elazar was referring to in his reference to the futility of trying to establish any sort of peace agreement with the Palestinian people and their leaders, whether Mahmoud Abbas or Ismail Haniyeh. You can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Or as the wise King Solomon wrote, "Do not answer a fool according to his foolishness, lest you also be considered like him."
I'm sure that by now, after so many diplomatic impasses and failed "peace initiatives" (including the Oslo Accord), after so many great Jewish minds have adroitly articulated into print the dark mental process of those Muslim terrorists with whom the State of Israel continues to respond to, most of the non-Jewish world must be of the critical opinion that great thinkers like Caroline Glick (and whoever else chooses to climb onto the back of this tiger) are become intellectually and psychologically constricted to the small and malefic world the Muslim terrorist inhabits. After all, Jewish thinkers like Caroline Glick devote so much of themselves and their time toward the idea of a peaceful resolution with their Muslim-Arab neighbors but receive threats of genocide as a response.
What is that Yiddish proverb? "Having no choice is also a choice." I think it is long past the time when Israel's leadership (and their intellectuals) gives up on the idea of ever achieving a peaceful outcome to a complex situation created by a Muslim world unwilling to tolerate a Jewish presence in the Middle East. Israel's Jews should stop apologizing to the world for a failure that begins and ends with the centuries old Arab-Muslim culture of anti-Semitism. Moreover, the government of the State of Israel should cease believing in the protracted assumption that the Arab-Muslim world will ever welcome even the smallest measure of a Jewish presence in the Middle East, no matter how evidential and ancient the Jewish history there.
Little or nothing means just that: little or nothing.