Israel Reduced to the Size of a Jail Cell

"I said, ‘Natan, what is the deal [about not supporting the peace deal. He said, ‘I can't vote for this, I'm Russian... I come from one of the biggest countries in the world to one of the smallest. You want me to cut it in half. No, thank you.'"

I responded, "Don't give me this, you came here from a jail cell. It's a lot bigger than your jail cell."

                                                                                                              President Bill Clinton

It is truly astounding that Bill Clinton, who in the 1970's was visiting Moscow and conducting Anti-American rallies on behalf of the Kremlin, had the gall to tell, Sharansky, who had risked his life as a political dissident during the 1970's fighting the Kremlin, that he should be satisfied that his new country is bigger than the old jail cell where the Soviet authorities had stuck him.

Just be happy that we're allowing you to keep half of the 8,500 square miles, instead of a few meters in a prison cell. That was the message from the red-faced leader of the free world. And under it, the subtext that if you don't like it, a prison cell might still be waiting for you. Perhaps somewhere under the Hague by the diktat of the ICC.

This isn't the first time that Sharansky had heard that particular message. In 1978, while Bill Clinton was starting his political career, Sharansky was being sentenced by a Soviet court to 13 years of forced labor in the Siberian Gulag. In his response to the court, Sharansky declared; "For more that two thousand years the Jewish people, my people, have been dispersed. But wherever they are, wherever Jews are found, every year they have repeated,'Next year in Jerusalem.' Now, when I am further than ever from my people... facing many arduous years of imprisonment, I say, turning to my people... 'Next year in Jerusalem.'"

According to Clinton, Russian Jews are the biggest obstacles to peace, followed by Mizrahi Jews who escaped Muslim rule. Naturally these are the groups in Israel who are the least naive about what happens when you surrender to tyrants. While many of the Israeli lefties, the grand-children and great-grandchildren of native Israelis whom Clinton interacts with, the cultural elite who live in Tel Aviv and rarely set foot outside it unless they're paying a visit to Paris or Brussels, have forgotten the reality that lurks in the hills of the Shomron.

And what of the country that Clinton and his successors have tried to reduce until it is hardly more than a jail cell.

Israel is already tiny. At 8500 square miles, it is smaller than all but 3 US states, Connecticut, Delaware and Rhode Island. Compared to its Muslim neighbors, it's even smaller than that. It's barely 2 percent of Egypt, which it nevertheless defeated in several wars. It's 1/4th the size of Jordan and 1/8th the size of Syria. Compared to Turkey or Iran, it hardly even appears on the map.

Under the Palestine Mandate, Israel's territory would have been six times as large as it is now. Since 1967, Israel has ceded territory 3 times its own size. This would be astonishing even if Israel were a larger country. Instead it's one of the world's smaller countries, with one of the world's highest population densities. And still the Muslim world and its Western backers continue demanding that Israel continue giving up land even though over 7 million Israelis live on a piece of land smaller than New Hampshire with a population density that is the 37th largest in the world, barely behind Japan at 32nd, Rwanda at 37th and denser than Haiti at 42nd. When eliminating islands, city states and principalities from the list, Israel actually has the 10th highest population density in the world behind India, Japan and Rwanda.

And it gets even worse from there. Because Israel's width at its narrowest point is less than 10 miles (15 kilometers). Considering that Israel is surrounded by Muslim countries whose populations still consider Israel the enemy, despite whatever territory was already conceded in order to sign peace agreements with them, it means that hostile armies from both sides could cut Israel in half in only a matter of miles. Just to make matters worse still, that narrow point intersects Israel's capital, the seat of its government and its largest city-- Jerusalem. And finally to put it all into perspective, that is exactly the territory that every "peacemaker" from Clinton to Blair to Obama want to slice into. And not just "slice into", but turn into a geographically contiguous state for Hamas and Fatah terrorists that would cut Israel in two at its must vulnerable point.

We are not talking about the Negev where there is some land to spare. The Jerusalem region is already painfully overpopulated with housing hard to come by. Reporters who make snide remarks about "settlements" around Jerusalem, need to visit the city itself and try to find a place to live for a working class family on a limited budget. This is no revelation to the men in charge. In response to the Jerusalem housing crisis, former US Ambassador Richard H. Jones snidely remarked, "Sometimes people do have to move to a different location. They cannot always stay close to their families". But when they do try to move to someplace like Ariel, they're also denounced for it by the usual Saudi stooges like Jones as well as NGO's funded by the EU.

The territory being targeted for concessions is in the heartland of Israel, the core of its history and its population. And we are also dealing with an area that served as the last stand for a Jewish state under siege for thousands of years. Besieged by everyone from Nebuchadnezzar to Titus to Heraclius to the Arab Legion, this was where so many last stands were made and broken throughout Jewish history. Except now the besieging army comes in the form of political pressure to surrender the area to the terrorists before the battle has even been fought and won.

Bill Clinton warns us about terrorists using GPS guided missiles if there is no peace, but the peace proposals would only move those same missiles closer and closer to Israel's population centers. The "Peace Pushers" have always argued that cutting a deal is the only way to stop terrorism. But Israel has been cutting deals for 18 years now, and not only is there no peace, but the violence has hit a whole new threat level. Israeli towns and villages are now being shelled on a regular basis, the way that Egypt and Jordan used to, but now the shelling is being carried out by terrorist groups whom Israel allowed into the country, and whom Clinton and his successors financed and trained.  

Nor does Clinton even seriously address the Hamas presence, except to claim that this time around Gazans would vote for Mahmoud Abbas and Salaam Fayyad, the good and moderate terrorists. But considering that Fayyad has never come close to winning anything remotely resembling an election in his life, (unless you count pulling in 2 percent a victory) and Abbas refuses to hold elections, this is almost as believable as a proposal to bring peace by finding a Djinn's bottle and making a wish.

Yet even if Abbas could actually win an election, and if Hamas would actually surrender power based on election results without a war (about as likely pigs flying over Mecca, especially when you consider how their backers in Iran dealt with a problematic election) all this would mean is that the final phase of the peace process would lead to a state perpetually on the verge of attacking Israel, the moment the US backed moderates lose an election. Imagine living in a Germany where the Nazi party was always a year or two away from coming to power. You couldn't live for very long near such a country. Would there ever have been anything resembling a normal way of life for a France or a Poland, living near a Germany where the Nazi Party was always waiting around to take power. Their foreign policy would be forever oscillating being preparing for war, or trying to appease the moderates in the hopes that the Nazis don't come to power.

And that is the best case scenario that Clinton has to offer us. And even that is based on a series of lies and illusions. That is the "dream" for which the "Peace Pushers" would like Israel to carve itself up and ethnically cleanse its own population. Not the reality of peace, but the dream of it. A dream based on lies and manipulation by terrorists and their enablers.

The truth is that the "moderate" terrorists we are supposed to negotiate with, were and still are terrorists. They're just terrorists that the State Department and the EU likes and finances. They have absolutely no democratic legitimacy because they refuse to hold elections. They refuse to even acknowledge Israel as a "Jewish State", rather than an entity they can invade and take over. The majority of Palestinian Arabs don't even support the state that Abbas is negotiating to create. The majority of Israeli Jews don't support any concessions on Jerusalem to create such a state. Jews, Muslims and even Americans in poll after poll, expect the talks to fail. No one outside of Washington D.C. and Brussels even sees any point to having them. The only way this process could have any less legitimacy, was if the negotiating panels were replaced  by kangaroos.

But the "Peace Pushers" keep on singing the siren song of "Somewhere over the rainbow, when we've invested enough billions into institutions, militias and training, then it'll all work out for the best." How and why, are questions that are best not asked, because there are no answers to them. To any of them.

The talks don't serve the cause of peace. They never did. Both sides are being marched to the table, because Obama desperately needs a photo op, and Europe thinks it can appease Muslim anger by bullying Israel into handing over parts of Jerusalem. The Arab Socialists whom Clinton and the EU backed have lost badly, they're nothing more than puppets now, and they know it. That is why Abbas is doing everything he can to throw the talks. The era of Arafat and his ilk is over. It's the Islamists' turn now and no amount of hot air out of Washington D.C. or Brussels will change that.

And in Jerusalem, a new siege of the city continues. The focus on the city continues to touch off new acts of Muslim violence and terror. As what began as a political siege may well end in actual war.