The Hot Potato: A Sequel

I have a confession to share. The original draft of this column is in the waste basket — where it belongs.

In utter discomfiture at the ongoing violence in Gaza and the West Bank I suggested a solution, thus ignoring my own counsel in my previous column ("The Hot Potato in Context," Record, March 1988).

Fortunately, I had a good and wise friend review the piece and he handily proceeded to expose its speciosity. Frankly, I felt relieved to discard it.

It is natural for us to seek facile solutions out of frustration with the extremely vexatious situation in Israel — especially with no end in sight.

There are differences, as there should be, among Jews both in Israel and the Diaspora on how to proceed. I have a son and a daughter who are both long time residents of Israel (even as this is being written my son is on patrol with the Israeli forces in the West Bank) and they differ radically on what track to follow.

This schism is not surprising given their humanitarian belief in freedom of choice and their democratic tradition. Yet it is of the utmost importance that the situation does not cause a serious or permanent rift among Jewry. We are much too few in number to also fight amongst ourselves on an issue affecting the very existence of Israel.

In this instance there simply are no easy answers, and those who offer them are deluding themselves and doing Israel a disservice.

Having gained international attention and sympathy for the Palestinians, it is likely that the disturbances will continue — and on an intensified level.

Undoubtedly, the hard core Palestinian rioters in Gaza and the West Bank are orchestrated by the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) of Yasser Arafat, funded by Saudi Arabia and incited by Syria. In truth, no Arab state has a genuine interest in a peaceful settlement of the situation on the West Bank and in Gaza.

The blatant challenge to Israel's authority over the territories simply cannot be ignored, nor should any negotiations be undertaken in the midst of violent insurrection.

It is incumbent upon Israel to be equally adamant in maintaining order or else risk the safety and security of all of Israel. Any sign of weakness in the face of Palestinian riots or any hasty solution to alleviate the immediate pressure will only invite disastrous consequences for Israel in the long run.

Israel is a democracy and its duly elected officers are the only ones to make the ultimate decisions. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, agree with him or not, has paid his dues over a lifetime in Israel's service both in war and peace and knows the Arabs well and from first-hand knowledge.

Appearances and reputation notwithstanding, he is neither a dogmatic ideologue and, like most politicians, acts in consonance with the constituents who elected him. Fortunately for Israel, he is a pragmatic centrist who would undoubtedly win any election held now.

If Shamir has seemingly been slow to take affirmative steps, such as embracing U.S. Secretary of State George Shultz's international conference proposal, it's for valid reasons. Israel's security is not negotiable in caucus. Until the PLO renounces terrorism and destroy her, the stakes for Israel are incredibly high.

Incredibly high stakes, awesome responsibility extend to unborn future generations, too

Momentary relief of pressure now by hasty territorial concessions will at most buy an ephemeral "peace." Israel's awesome responsibility for secure borders extends to unborn future generations and that, too, must be measured against protecting the sensibilities of some of the current population.

Some valuable lessons of history are before us in the headlines describing the violence in Northern Ireland. An "agreement" was made 68 years ago creating an independent Irish Republic but leaving six Protestant-majority northern counties under British rule. Ever since, the Irish Republican Army has been waging bloody guerrilla warfare to annex those six counties to Ireland.

Israel cannot afford to make an expedient "settlement" on such kind of terms. It sorely needs responsive Arab partners with whom to negotiate. None have been forthcoming.

Admittedly, the Israel army was neither equipped nor trained for the riot control required in the occupied territories. Some young soldiers have felt brutalized by the actions they needed to take to maintain order, contributing to a loss of morale. And, a substantial segment of the Israeli public is troubled and frustrated by the army's actions.

But when all that is acknowledged, there is nevertheless no feasible alternative to the Shamir course of proceeding slowly. It's a process you can't hurry.

Jewish humanitarianism does not require national suicide in its behalf. Unilateral compassion will not guarantee Israel's survival any more than prayers alone will.

Maybe the present disturbances were inevitable and foreseeable given the incendiary circumstances. Perhaps the status quo is no longer tenable in the territories. But until the PLO and the Arab nations surrounding Israel truly acquiesce in Israel's right to exist in peace within secure borders, Shamir's course of inaction is the best bet.

It may be less dramatic than bold risk-taking action, but it's more prudent too.