The huge number of victims in the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023 tempts people to react with similar wrong decisions as after the September 11, 2001 attack in New York. Terrorism as an expression of bitter rebellion should not be confused with regular war which can be ended by using military means. It is not the military effectiveness of the October 7th attack that threatens Israel's existence, but the unsolved problem of terrorism. Things were different in the four previous Arab-Jewish wars of 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. In each of them, Israel was only able to prevent genocide thanks to its outstanding military fighting ability, after the Arabs had proclaimed the motto to “throw the Jews into the sea.” In these four wars, the Jewish state asserted itself completely alone and within short time against a large superiority. – Militarily, the fight for Palestine is decided. Therefore, the military aid now spontaneously offered by Western governments is absolutely misplaced and distracts from the actual causes of the problem. History has shown that the liberation or defense of a country by U.S. military regularly involved escalation, excessive delay, maximum collateral damage, and civilian casualties, while euphemistic reporting hid these true circumstances. The present military aid to Israel is in striking contradiction to the dwindling moral support provided by the media, which instead uncritically publishes absurd comparisons to apartheid and “overlooks” the Western financing of anti-Semitic forces. The fake aid confirms the finding that Israel is being led by the MIC militarists on the same doubly suicidal course on which the other Western nations are currently heading towards World War III in Ukraine. On May 15, 2023, Nakba Day of the Palestinians for the first time was celebrated in the UN. The 700,000 Arab victims of displacement who had lost their homes 75 years earlier were commemorated. May 15, 1948, the day after the proclamation of the State of Israel, was a day of attack – however not by Israel on Arab citizens, but by six Arab states on the approximately 600,000 Jewish settlers at the time. Israel won this very hard war, but had to fight for its existence again in each of the following decades, namely in 1956, 1967 and 1973. According to the old rules of war, the dispute over Palestine would have been over and the clear winner could have finally created a more stable post-war order. But with the entire Arab League, the UN and various Western organizations behind them, the Palestinian side continues to refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist. The EU and other Western donors support this destabilizing attitude by, among other things, continually filling the coffers of the Palestinian Authority. From there, regular payments are made to terrorists imprisoned in Israel. The veneration of violent perpetrators as martyrs illustrates the Western-supported “moral” psychological environment in which terrorism thrives. School lessons in the refugee camps cared by UNRWA, also contribute to this, as anti-Israel and anti-Semitic inflammatory propaganda is an integral part of the curricula there. – “Of course” UNRWA, like the entire UN, is mainly financed by the West. The devastating Western interference in the Middle East conflict is still based - apart from a lack of psychological understanding - on insufficient knowledge of the historical context. Reference https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/en/book/chapter/staged-middle-east-conflict Israel's legal position is clear, based, firstly, on the League of Nations' Mandate Treaty of 1922, which is valid under international law, and secondly, on the right of self-defense (enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter) of a community threatened with genocide by its neighbors. Nevertheless, Palestinians make territorial claims, citing the UN's 1947 partition plan for Palestine. However, this was rejected by the Arab population in a referendum and therefore, and due to the military use of force that followed in 1948, could not achieve legal effect. Therefore, the legal basis for Israel and Palestine as a whole is formed by the Mandate Treaty of June 1922 between the League of Nations and Great Britain, a result of World War I. It obliges the mandatory power to establish a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Exclusively within this Jewish community, the civil an religious rights of the Arabs are guaranteed. Also as a result of World War I, with some delay, all Arab countries received their state independence. Overall, the pact with Great Britain brought freedom for the Arabs from Turkish rule with the downside of the Jewish homeland project in Palestine. This affected less than 0.2% of the Arab territories and was known to everyone involved since the Balfour Declaration of 1917. Yet polarizing Western forces have prevented the intended Jewish Palestine that could coexist in harmony with Arabs within and beyond its borders. First of all, it was the British government that neglected or counteracted its obligations under the 1922 treaty. Instead of encouraging Jewish immigration as requested, ever new restrictions were placed on land purchases and immigration, so that the demographic transition to a Jewish majority was bound to fail. The lack of physical assistance and moral support for the legitimate project of a Jewish homeland understandably encouraged the Arab residents to resist (including in uprisings of 1936-1939). Since Israel's independence, a polarizing atmosphere of doubt about Israel's legal status has been cultivated in Western politics, the media and charities. The tenor of media commentary shifted from previously cautiously pro-Israel to neutral to now often flagrantly anti-Israel. According to psychological rules, uncritical support for Palestinian claims does not lead to moderation and understanding, but to radicalization. The growing terrorism therefore has its actual origin in the historically and psychologically blind media environment of the West, which serves the self-image of abused victims among Palestinians and thus provides “moral” support for revanchist rebellion, perpetual hatred, resistance and violence. Israeli politics is by no means innocent of the tensions - but here too, Western influence is proving to be a decisive destructive factor. After the clear military decision in the Six-Day War in 1967 against the superior strength of four Arab countries, Israel had the opportunity, despite the extremely unfair UN intervention (Resolution 242, see https://www.frieden-freiheit-fairness.com/en/book/chapter/staged-middle-east-conflict), to establish a clear and final territorial order in Palestine - either with the conciliatory solution of a Palestinian state in the West Bank or with the hard solution of expelling all Palestinians who were not willing to recognize Israel. The latter theoretical consideration shocks, must shock. However, from a neutral perspective that is not influenced by the Western media environment, this spontaneous rejection is put into perspective: Citizens who are “informed” in the Western environment are usually not aware that after the war of 1948 and the Six-Day War of 1967, almost all Jews living in Arab countries were expelled from there - a total of over 800,000. Israel took in most of them and integrated them immediately. Israel's renunciation of the rough solution of a mirror-image expulsion of Palestinians has been kept out of the political consciousness of Western citizens. – This meant that for decades the great opportunity to calm emotions by pointing to Israel's conciliatory gesture remained unused. Instead, time was able to work against a peaceful, permanent solution by keeping another fundamental fact outside media attention - the ongoing violation of the principle of responsibility, especially self-responsibility. When 700,000 Arabs fled or were expelled from Palestine in 1948, the Arab countries took in some of the refugees, but refused to allow them to integrate into their societies. On the contrary, later mass expulsions occurred in several countries - Reference https://www.meforum.org/ 3391/kuwait-expels-palestinians - A comparison helps to correctly assess this strikingly concerted refusal: After WW II, West Germany (whose area is less than 2% of that of the Arab countries combined) took in around 15 times as many refugees from the lost East and fully integrated them within a few years. With their refusal, Israel's Arab neighbors shirked responsibility for the consequences of a war that they themselves had triggered. However, this irresponsible behavior was only made possible by supposedly good Western interference. Instead of (if at all) supporting the Arab host countries of the refugees in integrating them into their societies and labor markets, the UN subsidiary organization UNRWA set up around 50 refugee camps, which continue to expand to this day. A good 700,000 refugees in 1948 have now become around 6 million recognized refugees. This increase partly has its origin in the UNRWA prctice to allow the refugee status to be inherited, i.e. it considers the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those who fled at the time as refugees. The second reason lies in the lack of personal responsibility that comes with supervised camp life. This environment provides no incentive for birth control. On the contrary, rapid demographic growth is seen as a means of generating political pressure, i.e. using demographics as a weapon. In 1948, UNRWA took on a responsibility that was not its due and, since the wave of refugees in 1948, it has failed to place this responsibility back into the hands of the people it cares for. There was also failure on the part of Israeli politics. The problematic demographic trend was known, but its connection to the factor of self-responsibility remained fatally ignored.Therefore, in 1967, a Palestinian state was not immediately established, which would have given the Arab population, along with sovereignty, responsibility for their group territory and for themselves.
Thus, two anti-strategies can be detected. One of them is the suicidal appeasement policy towards the Arab world, which is mainly propagated by supposedly left-wing forces. The second anti-strategy represents a supposedly conservative pursuit of national interests, which, however, is led on a suicidal militaristic course under the influence of the MIC, which polarizes and destroys reputations. This generally concerns the supposed defense of national interests through tough actions that do not help Israel in the matter but convey an unforgiving message. A simple example is the practice of destroying homes of terrorist families, which can only cause further hatred. It was equally counterproductive to refuse - with strong American support - to recognize Hamas's democratic election victory in the Gaza Strip in 2006 because it is classified as a terrorist group - but as a result of such measures it must remain so. The establishment of Jewish settlements in the West Bankundermines Israel's reputation and violates Niccolo Machiavelli´s rule that harsh measures against rivals must be applied within shortest time, otherwise resistance will be triggered and not respect. Instead, a final border shortening territorial order is required, considering:
1. the claim of the Jewish state to the entire territory of Palestine as part of the post-war order of the First World War
2. the right to a unilaterally declared post-war order as the winner of 1967, after the UN failed in this function with its rights-bending Resolution 242
3. 56 years or two generations after the 6-Day War and now again under Arab attack, Israel should sum up that its renunciation of the expulsion of the Palestinians as a reaction to the expulsion of almost all Jews from Arab countries was not valued by the Arab side – “thanks” to the mainstream media.
4. The Jewish state should spread this historical truth and proven conciliatory spirit throughout the world.
5. A warning message must be sent to UNRWA pointing out its massive violations of the principle of self-responsibility. This organization bears responsibility for the original 700,000 refugees, who have become around 6 million due to the birth surplus, until having returned it to the refugees or to the Arab states responsible for four wars against Israel.
6. Self-responsibility includes the responsibility for a demographic balance within the available territory as well as in coexistence with other population groups living there.
7. According to UN Resolution 446 of 1979, the “substantial change in the demographic composition” in a territory constitutes an impairment of the rights of other groups that should be warned against. This view was also expressed in Resolution 677 of 1990.
8. A democratic Palestinian state to be established must be obliged to accept those Persons who are not willing to integrate into Israeli society.
9. After the end of WW I in 1918, the British government was responsible for a stable post-war order. Considering the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the task primarily consisted in a clear demarcation between Jewish and Arab rights and interests. The conditions were perfect, as Great Britain's sphere of influence also included the neighboring countries to the east and southwest of Palestine, in particular Egypt.
10. At the psychological-diplomatic level, carrying out this task had required making it clear to the Arabs that the price for their liberation from Ottoman rule included to sustain the Jewish homeland. It was therefore a serious violation of the Balfour Declaration to grant Egypt independence in February 1922 without obliging it to accept the emerging Jewish national homeland. The same applies to the independence of Iraq in 1932 and Transjordan in 1946, which also violated the Mandate Treaty of 1922.
11. This appeasement policy led to the attack by six Arab countries on the newly founded state of Israel in 1948 - and to the Nakba.