Jeruslaem Post
16 Nisan 5762, March 29, 2002
(March 29) - The blood that flowed from the dozens
of dead and wounded attending a Pessah Seder in Netanya
is the logical conclusion of the blood libel that
is still alive and well in Saudi Arabia. The words
of peace that were offered in Beirut mean less than
nothing, when the nations that offer them continue
to finance and foment the shedding of more Jewish
blood.
Earlier this month, a Saudi government-controlled
newspaper published a two-part series on how "the
Jewish people must obtain human blood so that their
clerics can prepare the holiday pastries." The
author goes on, "Before I go into the details,
I would like to clarify that the Jews' spilling human
blood to prepare pastry for their holidays is a well-established
fact, historically and legally, all throughout history.
This was one of the main reasons for the persecution
and exile that were their lot in Europe and Asia at
various times." After the wide circulation of translations
of the articles by the Middle East Media Research InstituteMiddle
East Media Research Institute, the embarrassed editor
of the newspaper claimed that it was a mistake to have
published them, but it is obvious that for such a "mistake"
to occur that virulent anti-Semitism must already be
commonplace.
The dehumanization of Jews and Israel
was hardly absent from the Beirut summit. At the same
time as Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah unveiled his much-anticipated
peace plan, Syrian President Bashar Assad made clear
that all Israelis - soldiers and civilians, wherever
they live - are equal targets of the current terror
war. Leaders of Hamas - which claimed responsibility
for the Netanya massacre - Hizbullah, and other terrorist
groups were honored guests at the Arab summit and arguably
dictated its agenda as much as the Saudi prince.
Indeed, the best guess as to why Egyptian
President Hosni Mubarak did not attend the Beirut summit
is that it had been physically and diplomatically hijacked
by the Arab world's more radical forces: physically
in that Mubarak could not guarantee his own security
given Hizbullah's strength within Lebanon; diplomatically
because the Saudi proposal had been watered down to
something roughly 35 years too late.
The Saudi proposal was essentially not
the first, but the most forthright acceptance of the
Arab world of UN Security Council Resolution 242, but
only according to its own distorted interpretation.
After the 1967 Six Day War, that resolution clearly
recognized that Israel had a right not to return to
the previous indefensible borders, but to "secure
and recognized boundaries." The Arab states responded
in August 1967 with their famous "three noes"
resolution: no peace, no negotiations, and no recognition.
The Saudi proposal calls for a complete Israeli withdrawal
to the pre-1967 lines and therefore contradicts and
is a step backward from Resolution 242.
Optimists had hoped for three countervailing
steps forward: a commitment that peace meant full normalization
with Israel, a silence on the "right of returnâ"
and some distancing from the use of terrorism against
Israel. The summit disappointed on all three counts.
Normalization was watered down to "normal relations,"
which gives Israel no reason to expect more than a perfunctory
exchange of ambassadors while, Egypt-style, vilification
continues unabated. The "right of return,"
though less explicit than Lebanon and Syria wanted,
was there in full force. And the silence regarding the
Palestinians' current terrorist rampage can only be,
and will be taken by the perpetrators, as an endorsement.
Despite all this, many will ask, is late
and flawed not better than never? Is it not significant
that the Arab states are talking about peace with Israel,
even if on unacceptable terms? What about Prince Abdullah
saying directly to Israelis that, "if their government
abandons the policy of force and oppression and embraces
true peace, we will not hesitate to accept the right
of the Israeli people to live in security with the people
of the region"?
The answer is that actions must follow
words. By the Saudi's own admission, the royal family
has spent "astronomical" sums to spread its
own intolerant, militant form of Islam "to every
corner of the earth." (See www.memri.org/sd/SP36002.html).
Saudi riches continue to fund Hamas, the group that
specializes in suicide-massacres of Israelis. While
Prince Abdullah managed to muster a claim that he "could
not condone" the gruesome attack in Netanya, the
fact is that his government's actions more than condone
such atrocities.
If the Saudis are serious about peace,
they can begin by unabashedly condemning terrorism against
Israel and ending their material support for it. They
could also agree to revive the multilateral talks with
Israel that began after the Madrid Conference in 1991
and quickly dropped by the Arab side.
In the meantime, the big intra-Arab news
of the summit was the kisses exchanged between the Saudi
crown prince and Saddam Hussein's vice-president. The
kisses were worth a thousand words. In the end the Arab
summit was not about peace with Israel, but a desperate
attempt to divert the war against terrorism from its
collision course with Saddam Hussein, and with Arab
despotism and radicalism generally. Unfortunately, the
Arab attempt to change the subject does not serve peace,
but the forces of terrorism.
|
