Western Resistance

Ms. Livni's plan, over which Mrs. Oz-Sulzberger fawns, is the pinnacle of political stupidity, one of the finest achievements of human self-delusion. She wants to trade land for peace, but pays no attention to whether the plan can succeed at all. To achieve peace, you must first check whether peace is possible.

All "land-for-peace" deals are dangerous by their very nature. After they are consummated, there are no guarantees the party getting the land will honor its political commitments. Words are cheap, while land is expensive. The trustworthiness of your political opponent is crucial if peace--or even "peace"--is to be achieved. You don't give diamonds to a thief.

And you don't give diamonds to Islam, period--Islam commands Muslims to be political caravan robbers. Islam is not merely a religion, but a way of life and ideology of conquest. Trusting an Islamic country is pointless, since Islamic Law demands perpetual warfare against the unbeliever.

This is no mere rhetoric; Islamic Law does not allow for perpetual peace treaties, only for truces up to a maximum of ten years. A good Muslim ruler, after the treaty has lapsed, must then renew Jihad warfare in order to "bring the gift of Islam" to the unbelievers.

Notice it doesn't help to sign the treaty with a "bad" Muslim ruler: he might "get Allah" later and fulfill his religious duty, or he may be replaced by a different leader who takes the religion seriously and you'll have warfare in your hands anyway. Ironically, the only thing that can bring peace in the short term is the internal strength of the infidel--Islamic Law does allow the renewal of truces when the infidel is militarily strong. Giving up land for a false peace, to the extent that it makes Israel weaker, not stronger, makes war more likely, not less.

Ms. Livni, of course, wouldn't listen to any of this. She does not want to listen to reality at all. Listen to her on the nature of the "Arab-Israeli" conflict:

"… [Ms. Livni] lashes out against what she calls "attempts to theologize the conflict. I cannot solve a religious strife," she says, "but I can solve a conflict between nations."

This assumes, of course, that perceptions can always and everywhere trump reality. To be blunt, there is no need to "theologize" the conflict; the conflict is already as theological as it can be. Islamic Law demands that all of Israel be returned to the bosom of Islam, and there is nothing Ms. Livni can do about this theological reality. She does not want to deal with the political and practical consequences of accepting it. Her so-called moral vision is more important to her than the future of her people.

So, I must ask our Israeli readers--don't listen to this woman, don't listen to those who want "peace, peace!" when there is no peace to be had. Severe, grievous consequences usually follow the pursuit of the impossible. The future of your nation is at stake.