WELCOME  TO  MIDDLE EAST SOLUTIONS
(This website is under construction)
Click Here for Printer-Friendly Page

The essence of the PAIR Initiative for peace is the orderly resettlement of Palestinian Arabs into a large new state of their own, inside Arabia. However, current thinking is so entrenched in favor of confiscating Israeli land for that Palestinian Arab state, that many strong objections will likely arise to this alternative approach. It is therefore necessary to present this concept from various sides, and in some detail, in order to answer likely objections and demonstrate both its feasibility and desirability.

II-A  A better way to achieve President Bush’s proclaimed goals
II-B  The peace that almost happened
II -C  A Palestinian Arab State
II-D  A Jewish State of Israel
II-E  New attitudes for Arabs and Jews
II-F  An orderly resettlement plan
II-G  Defending the general principle of relocation
II-H  But won’t the Palestinian Arabs reject this idea?
II-I  Many Arab states are moving toward their own internal crises.
II-J  Another vision of the future
II-K  The future choices can be visualized by presenting three maps.
II-L  The opposition
II-M  Islamic voices of moderation
II-N  On the world scene
II-O  Dealing with the Jewish “fifth column”.

The PAIR Initiative seeks to achieve the five points listed below, which the Bush administration has also proclaimed to be their goals in resolving the Arab-Israeli conflict.

1. Achieve a ‘two-state’ solution.
2. Exchange ‘land for peace’.
3. Solve the Palestinian Arab refugee problem.
4. End the ‘occupation’.
5. Have both Israel and a Palestinian Arab state secure and at peace.

These four can be achieved, but only with the inclusion of point 6 below.

6. Establish a genuine peace, based on historic truth, enabling both sides to safeguard their vital interests and with ample land in which to grow and to thrive.

The PAIR Initiative will achieve a two-state solution with a Jewish Israel and a separate Palestinian Arab state, with both states of viable size to accommodate future growth for at least the next century. It will bring about an exchange of land for peace - with land-rich Saudi Arabia providing the land for peace. It will solve the Palestinian Arab refugee problem through resettlement of refugees, and other Palestinian Arabs, into decent homes of their own, on land of the their own and in their own sovereign state. This process will also end the ‘occupation’, however such may be defined.

This proposal may appear bold and audacious but judgment should be reserved until after thoughtful consideration of the entire plan. Achieving a just and lasting peace with honor requires the courage to be bold and audacious and not bound by the limitations of the past. The constituent elements of the PAIR Initiative, as defined throughout the following sections, comprise an integrated whole.

For a brief period following WWI it appeared that both Arabs and Jews were poised to embark on a future of peace and prosperity. The logical question is what went wrong?

The ‘roots’ of the current Arab-Israeli conflict are neither Arab nor Israeli but British. Following WWI The League of Nations drew new boundaries for the Middle East. Arabs would gain sovereignty in multiple countries covering five million square miles. Jews would finally have a homeland in under one percent of that area. England, the dominant regional power, was assigned, and accepted, a League of Nations Mandate to facilitate the establishment of the Jewish homeland in the region called Palestine. The British sabotaged that Mandate thereby ruining any prospects for a future peace between Arabs and Jews.

In 1919 the Arabs and the Jews were poised to embark on a peaceful and bright future as friends and neighbors in the Middle East. But it was the British government itself which sabotaged that Mandate and instigated the Arabs to oppose the Jewish presence which led to anti-Jewish riots. This direct British incitement against the Jews continued until 1948 when they finally withdrew their troops from Palestine. After that withdrawal they continued their war against the Jews, but in more covert ways.

At the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 His Royal Highness Emir Feisal Ibn Hussein, head of the Arab delegation and acting on behalf of the Arab Kingdom of Hejaz and all Arab peoples, warmly supported the Jewish return from exile in his letters to Jewish leaders Dr. Chaim Weizmann and Felix Frankfurter. After WWI there was an amicable agreement between Jews and Arabs, based on the Balfour Declaration of 1917. This declaration called for a Jewish National Home in Palestine comprising 45,000 square miles. [show map of the 45,000 mile territory] It is noteworthy that this 45,000 square miles extended both east and west of the Jordan river in what are now Jordan and Israel! That agreement was formalized and ratified by the League of Nations and should be viewed as part of international law.

The noble spirit exemplified by Feisal and Weizmann deserves to be publicized and rekindled as the basis for a just and lasting peace. British duplicity needs to be exposed to its principle victims among both Jews and Arabs, and to the entire world, including the American and British peoples. Let responsibility be placed where it properly belongs in order to press for a full accounting and for policy reform. Too many peoples have already suffered from the legacy of British imperialism in various parts of the world.

Size requirements: As shown in Part I - B, the 2,300 square miles of Judea and Samaria (a.k.a. the “West Bank”) plus the Gaza Strip is hopelessly short of what is needed for a long-term solution. A more adequate space would be about 35,000 square miles for a long-term permanent solution. This area would be sufficient to absorb all Palestinian Arabs in the Middle East, now estimated at about 6 million, should they all chose to migrate to one place. It would also allow ample space for natural population growth over the next century for a people that is presently doubling in size about every 25 years.

Possible site: Although most of Jordan’s current population is Palestinian Arab, its ability to absorb millions more Palestinian Arabs is highly limited due to economic, political and security factors. A far better choice would be Saudi Arabia with its vast area populated by only 25 million people plus its immense oil wealth. This would also place sufficient distance between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs to reduce that proximity which leads to confrontation. Saudi Arabia is the largest Arab country with about 850,000 square miles and a Palestinian Arab state of 35,000 square miles would require only 4% of Saudi territory.

Saudi Arabia, in particular, has a huge moral obligation to extend itself for peace. They have benefited lavishly from their western-developed oil wealth and from continued western support and protection. At the same time they have been among the leading instigators of hatred toward Israel and the West and have funded terror and the teaching of radical Islamic beliefs in many countries, including the U.S. They must now be pressed to make genuine efforts to undo some of the worldwide tension they helped to create. A good start would be an improvement of their original “Saudi Plan” which called for a total Israeli withdrawal to pre-1967 boundaries. That plan would include painful uprooting of entire communities - home to hundreds of thousands of Jews in return for mere promises of peace and with no guarantee provided by anyone. The best way to improve the Saudi Plan would be their donating a tiny corner of their enormous territory for a fair and just solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict which they, in no small measure, helped perpetrate. Appendix II - C contains additional information.

Size requirement: The size of Israel should reflect both future needs and historic justice by including the following considerations:

In 100 years the Jewish population of Israel could exceed 30 million.

To keep the ultimate population density of about 30 million within a reasonable 1,000 persons per square mile (the U.S. has 80 persons per square mile) would require at least 35,000 square miles.

The League of Nations Mandate assigned 45,000 square miles to the Jewish state and that agreement is still legally binding, despite being ignored.

The millions of Jews slaughtered in WWII and during the past twenty centuries constitute a huge moral claim against the community of nations. This must be reflected in Israel’s final size which should serve to encourage accelerated growth to replace some of those lost in the past.

Offsetting the unfair thousand-to-one inequality favoring Muslim territory over Jewish territory must become a serious consideration.

New boundaries: Arbitrary boundaries, drawn by outside imperialist nations for self-serving purposes, without historical, legal or moral justification cannot be considered sacred, legitimate, or permanent. Fresh thinking is required to correct historical injustices and to provide for future peace and prosperity. The following considerations should apply.

The Jewish People was assigned modest national boundaries by the Creator, as defined in the bible, and were twice sovereign in the Land of Israel. [link to map of ancient Israel] This is in contrast to the ‘might makes right’ attitude over boundaries prevailing elsewhere in the world. Christians and Muslims both claim to respect the Hebrew bible and many among them already recognize the religious and historic right of Jews to their ancestral homeland. [Link to Christian and Muslim sources]

Both Christians and Muslims already possess huge parts of the planet and cannot morally invoke a ‘might makes right’ attitude to begrudge the Jews having the small territory that is rightfully theirs.

The present State of Israel must therefore expand both eastward and southward to become at least 35,000 square miles although they have a right to acquire the full 45,000 as promised in the League of Nations Mandate.

New boundaries will naturally require relocation of most of those Arabs presently occupying land that rightfully belongs to the Jews. This would be historically among the least difficult of relocations and would represent a tiny price to achieve the great benefits of permanent peace and justice in the region.

Appendix II - D (under “boundaries”) contains additional information.

Destructive attitudes among both Arabs and Jews continue to fuel the conflict and must be addressed by both sides. Each side has their individual problem and must deal with it if there is ever to be a genuine reconciliation.

Many Arabs have been taught implacable hatred towards Israel and Jews. Arab children are indoctrinated with a narrative that demonizes Jews and portrays Arabs, and especially Palestinian Arabs, as victims of horrific crimes perpetrated against them by the Jews. Teachings include falsifying history, demonizing Jews and a religious duty to view Jews as an enemy to be conquered or even killed. Among some Arab governments and the terrorist organizations such as Hamas, Hezbolla, etc. there is no acceptance of a Jewish sovereignty of any size except as a temporary expedient awaiting the opportune time to finally eliminate that sovereignty. Even a signed peace treaty and diplomatic relations with two Arab neighbors has failed to end the ongoing attitude of hostility. The more reasonable Arab governments offer only grudging acceptance of Israel and that under very limited and demeaning conditions.

As long as Muslim clerics continue to teach and to preach hatred against Israel and Jews there cannot be a genuine peace. No amount of ‘peace treaties’, concessions by Israel or outside intervention can ever substitute for genuine reform in attitude among the Muslim masses and those who instruct them.

Amidst all the hostility there is hope because there exist independent Arab/Muslim voices of moderation and reconciliation. Expressing such views often entail considerable personal risk and such people deserve encouragement, especially from Western leaders who often pander to Arab/Muslim demonizing of Israel and Jews. They also deserve greater encouragement from Jewish leaders in Israel and the U.S. to help break the image of a solid wall of opposition to Israel. There are moderate Muslim clerics and theologians who have challenged the theology of Islamic extremists which is at the core of anti-Israel and anti-Jewish hatred. Religious Jews and moderate Muslim clerics must also provide a stronger public image of respectful dialogue. In 1919 Emir Feisal also addressed the Jews as “cousins” of the Arabs, noting both having suffered at the hands of great powers. He welcomed the Jews to come home and to live in peace and beneficial cooperation with their Arab neighbors. That wise and generous spirit must be encouraged and promoted.

Jews too need a new attitude. Too many, including their leaders, suffer from a lack of ethnic/religious self-respect. They are overly eager to appease and accommodate in a futile attempt to placate Arab hostility. What some Jews view as being conciliatory, their enemies view as an admission of guilt and an invitation to increase their demands and to always demand more than the Jews can safely concede. Arabs are a proud people who respect strength and who distain weakness. Demonstrating weakness serves to reinforce Arab perceptions of Jewish unworthiness and increase contempt which leads toward war. By offering ill-advised concessions to avoid war the Jews of Israel ultimately end up fighting more wars just to survive. The path to reconciliation requires both Arab/Muslim moderation and Jewish self-respect. Western officials must also be held accountable to reform their attitudes in ceasing their double standard which overlooks Arab intransigence and places excessive demands upon Israel.

Resettlement has worked elsewhere to resolve other conflicts and it can work here as well. There is great social and political value in making a clean break and offering a fresh start to the Palestinian Arabs. Those who migrate are usually obliged to think in fresh terms about their future. It has been true for immigrants to America and it can certainly be true for Arabs as well. They would be beneficially occupied for many decades building their own country and structuring their own society. There would be less time to sulk and nurture old hatreds. They could design their physical environment and finally reform their present political regime, still operating under the PA, which all know to be highly corrupt. Reform is in the air and a clean break could further empower the reformers.

There are no material problems that cannot be resolved. Only 4% of the vast territory of Saudi Arabia would provide 35,000 square miles for a new Palestinian Arab state 15 times larger than Gaza and the West Bank combined. Resettlement would be phased in over a 5-10 year interval as fast as new homes and infrastructure can be ready. Far larger and more difficult relocations of various populations have occurred during the last century. It is reported that well over 100 million people in the world are currently crossing borders in search of a better life.

Building their new country would generate jobs and excitement as people become caught up in anticipating a better life that was actually taking form. Funding would come from a combination of sources including huge reductions in bloated arms budgets of the Arab countries, from international grants and loans and sale of their present homes. Fifty billion a year over ten years would provide $80,000 per head for all six million Palestinian Arabs with the knowledge that this is a one-time expenditure for peace that will pay generous dividends in the future.

This would offer a superb opportunity to attempt a new initiative for peace and create a bright new beginning. Located well away from Israel, it would eliminate direct contact between the two sides and the associated suffering it has engendered. It would not depend on anti-Israel hostility subsiding first. It would only require that they opt for a better future for themselves - a far easier option. The Palestinian Arabs would be gainfully employed for a century in building their own country. Vast oil resources in this area would provide additional support for the Palestinian economy. Both sides would also experience a huge reduction in the severe economic costs associated with their conflict. Many years of hateful indoctrination against Jews could finally begin to dissipate, given enough time and proper conditions. There would be no more ‘occupation’ and Palestinian Arabs would have ample room for future population growth. They could exist peacefully within the Arabian Peninsula. They would even be near the holy sites of Mecca and Medina, the foci of their ancestral/religious roots.

It is relevant that some 900,000 Jews fled Arab countries between the 1930’s and 1960’s and forced to abandon property worth about $100 billion which is rightfully owed to them. Just as the PAIR Initiative advocates fair compensation to Palestinian Arabs who are resettled to better conditions elsewhere, there remains a just claim by Jews from Arab lands to finally receive compensation for property that they were forced to leave behind. Let there be equal justice and reconciliation for both sides.

This resettlement program should also appeal to the 1.2 million Israeli Arabs who could see a better future in resettlement than in remaining. Their birth rate, being considerably higher than Israeli Jews, will make them an increasing minority. Their strong separate identities will lead to increasing tension and conflict as these two distinct peoples increasingly compete for political power on limited land containing limited resources. Confining two distinct ethnic groups inside one political boundary has produced bloody failures in other instances and it will fail here as well. Tragic examples such as Rawanda, Kosovo/Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Sudan, Lebanon, India/Pakistan, etc. come to mind. (The United States is cited as an exceptional example of a successful melting pot of different peoples and cultures adapting and living in harmony. But if one asks the Native Americans about their tragic experience this example looks much less congenial.) With so much available land in the Middle East there is NO compelling reason to confine these two peoples inside this one tiny space.

The Israeli Arabs would provide a very valuable leadership element in the new Palestinian Arab state because they have been exposed to a modern democratic society plus a good level of education. They could be motivated to become the generation of new leaders and managers replacing the highly corrupt regime of the PLO/PA. They would also be needed to assist in the absorption of low skilled Palestinian Arabs arriving from refugee camps and poor towns in the West Bank.

In contrast to the total ethnic cleansing against Jews practiced by Saudi Arabia and Jordan, the PAIR Initiative allows some non-Jews, and their families, who have demonstrated their loyalty to the State of Israel would continue to live inside Israel. Among the Arabs, Christians, Muslims, Druze, Beduins, Bahai, and others inside Israel, there are those who volunteered in the Israel Defense Forces or served in other capacities, sometimes at the cost of their lives, who deserve to remain. On the other hand, those Arabs who presently hold Israeli citizenship but who identify themselves as Palestinians and Arabs, not as Israelis, and who view the Jewish State as an enemy or a foreign entity, now could join their Palestinian brethren in building the new Palestinian State, on its own territory.

On a practical level some critics might argue that Arabia is mostly uninhabited desert with only about 1% of the area being cultivatable land and therefore cannot accommodate resettlement there of Palestinian Arabs. At the time of the Balfour Declaration following WWI, there also were ‘experts’ and critics who argued that the land mandated to become the Jewish National Home was too barren to support a mass influx of Jewish refugees. The Jewish pioneers proved them wrong by making the desert bloom again as it did in ancient times by using methods of modern agriculture to heal the land. The same can and ‘must’ be done in the vast areas of Arabia with Palestinian Arabs leading the transformation. It is a ‘must’ situation because the world is losing arable land to desertification at a time of rising populations. The world needs the Middle East to again be a verdant garden and a regional ‘breadbasket’ as it was in ancient times. More details on creating this transformation and the benefits to the local population are provided in Part III and in Appendix II - G.

Any discussion of an Israeli-Palestinian Arab settlement often encounters the automatic assumption that, of all the peoples in the world, only Palestinian Arabs living inside Israel and the territories cannot be relocated elsewhere. We are told that ‘relocation’ can only mean more Palestinian Arabs moving from refugee camps in neighboring countries into Israel and of Jews being forcibly evicted out of Judea, Samaria (the “West Bank”) and Gaza . This concept is, inherently racist, a double standard, and cannot be justified under any circumstances.

History is replete with example after example of mass population relocations. The creation of India and Pakistan involved bi-lateral relocations even in the midst of extreme violence which led to over one million deaths. Many Germans were forcibly relocated in the immediate aftermath of World War II. Fifteen million ethnic Germans were forcibly relocated from areas that had previously been part of Germany and Austria, but were awarded to Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary and other countries by the victorious Allies after World War II. None of those Germans received financial compensation for their confiscated properties. And, over the last two thousand years, no other people has faced one expulsion after another --- or one mass slaughter after another, than have the Jews. The Jews of Arab countries were virtually expelled en masse between the 1930's and 1960's. Their property was seized without any compensation. In most cases, the Arab Jews were just lucky to make it out alive. Now it is time to complete the population exchange. The Arab countries can take back their Arabs just as Israel took in its Jews.

Relocation of Palestinian Arabs under the P.A.I.R initiative would be radically different from the numerous instances of forced, violent and unplanned expulsions and displacements of peoples that have occurred in the past. Resettlement would be conducted in an orderly and carefully planned way, with full compensation for any property left behind, and with provision for new land, housing, employment, and general infrastructure to enable the resettled communities to acquire a decent standard of living.

We are constantly told that virtually everyone opposes resettling the Palestinian Arabs. Unfortunately outside nations are opposed as are all Arab governments along with the PLO/PA and even the Israeli government seems afraid to oppose Arab-inspired international pressure. The PLO/PA not only rejects any talk of resettlement but also demands the ‘right of return’ of millions of Arabs to places inside Israel itself.

It would seem that everyone has been heard from - everyone except the Palestinian Arabs themselves. We are told by their corrupt leaders and various non-Palestinian Arab voices that they are unanimous in strongly rejecting any possibility of resettlement. These voices seem overly anxious to bury this idea in advance even before the Palestinian Arabs have had a fair chance to hear of this plan, to debate it freely and to give it full consideration.

If some Palestinian Arabs began to look favorably upon a viable and generous resettlement plan it would then become progressively more difficult for others to reject resettlement on their behalf. Is the zeal to reject resettlement in reality a purposeful attempt to lock the Palestinian Arabs (and Israel too) into a bad solution before they have had a chance to choose freely?

Self-appointed Palestinian Arab spokespeople will naturally attempt to reject any idea of resettlement while claiming to represent all Palestinian Arabs. However, a poll conducted among the Palestinian Arabs by the Maagar Mohot Interdisciplinary Research and Consulting Institute Ltd., in collaboration with the Palestinian Arab Center for Public Opinion in 2004, found that over 70% of Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza could be induced to relocate. To the question: "What would induce you to emigrate permanently?”, only 15% stated that nothing would induce them, while 71% specified one or more material factors that would induce them to emigrate permanently (such as substantial financial compensation, a guarantee of a good job abroad, or good housing).
.
These encouraging numbers are prior to their receiving a credible offer which might be even more tempting. This shows the great potential of the PAIR Initiative with its many attractive incentives. Even an initial response of 10%-20% would be sufficient to start the process moving. The successful adjustment of those who resettled first would build confidence for others to follow.

The Palestinian Arabs deserve the opportunity to consider the PAIR Initiative, to fully explore it, to extensively debate it, and to respond freely and without intimidation. The unseemly haste by the U.S. administration to ram their ‘Roadmap’ down the throats of both Israelis and Palestinian Arabs is a violation of the right of these people to freely and democratically chart their own future. We have already had far too many imposed solutions by outside interests at the expense of peoples in the region. It is time for outside meddlers to cease interfering and give real peace a chance.

The PAIR Initiative has the potential to play a constructive role in responding to a regional dilemma. The principle factors moving some Arab states towards their own internal crisis are: government corruption; oppression of their people; stagnant economies; burgeoning youth populations (in Syria, Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia over half the population is under 25); high unemployment; no clear program for reform; increasing popular unrest. These regimes are facing a severe dilemma. They are too corrupt and inept to effect genuine reform on their own initiative. If they cannot reform voluntarily and soon, the radical Islamic extremists will attempt to topple these regimes and Taliban-type regimes may replace them.

The unresolved Palestinian Arab refugee problem also poses dangers to the stability of some Arab states in the region. Many Arab states fear that an unresolved Arab-Israeli conflict could provoke a regional war that will draw them in, radicalize their populations and threaten their own stability.

The dilemma confronting the Saudis, other Arab regimes and American policy makers is exemplified by two equally bad choices. On the one hand, oppressive regimes are sitting atop social pressure cookers fueled by intense anti-American sentiment heightened by the U.S. war on terrorism. Maintaining an oppressive lid on the unrest, without improving conditions, assures an eventual explosion. On the other hand, a number of Arab regimes have responded to internal tensions with limited reforms designed to calm domestic unrest. But these reforms may be far too little to assure stability, while they also open the door to possible takeover by the extremists. They appear both unable to manage peaceful reform and to significantly reduce the risk of violent takeovers by the militant fundamentalists. Meanwhile time is running out.

What is needed now is another vision of the future for the oppressed Arab masses, namely a transition toward moderate, representative societies. The U.S. and Europe had not pushed for such a transition prior to 9/11. The Bush administration has now finally begun to press for increased democracy in the region in the hope that this will halt the trend towards Islamic extremism and lead, instead, towards moderate self-government. Unfortunately, certain Arab regimes, the mullahs and the Islamic extremists are all opposing Bush’s vision.

Pressures for reform are emerging with increasing strength from within the Arab public and independently of governments and of Islamic extremism. Besides Iraq and Afghanistan, there are active movements seeking greater freedom in other Arab states including Lebanon, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the Gulf states. In the recent Palestinian Arab election younger leaders are taking power. They reject the extreme corruption of Arafat’s old guard and they favor political reform, even while many remain hostile towards Israel.

Stagnant old beliefs are new being challenged by progressive new thinking. This is the time for a bold initiative to resettle the Palestinian Arabs and finally resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. Many experts have long insisted that democracy could not be transplanted into Arab society and also that resettling Palestinian Arabs elsewhere was unthinkable. Just as these voices of the past are being proven wrong about democracy for Arabs they are just as wrong in opposing a beneficial resettlement plan. When old attitudes begin to change, new opportunities open up. What previously was considered impossible may now become eminently possible.

The PAIR Initiative could well fit within the Bush Administration’s announced effort to democratize the Arab nations and defuse the Arab-Israeli conflict. The image of Palestinian Arabs building their own independent future inside Arabia might fire up some imaginations. It would represent Arabs successfully helping themselves in a peaceful and honorable manner and without the presence of foreign troops and constant killing as in Iraq. This would represent a breath of fresh air in the Arab world where their restless youth could see a successful model of hope for a better future, free of the corrupt Arab dictatorships, free of the Islamic terror organizations and also free of direct Western influence and meddling. It would also be in step with the yearning for positive changes now starting to manifest among the Arab masses. The West would also have a big stake in seeing a truly progressive Arab society emerge as an antidote to a militant and hostile Islam. For this reason the West might well assure that this bold experiment is quietly nurtured and well supported.

Saudi rulers could also benefit. Their corrupt and inefficient regime has produced the likes of Osama bin Laden who threatens their monarchy as well by stirring justified resentment among the Saudi population. A successful Palestinian Arab state, supported by the Saudis, could begin to defuse the negative feelings among their own population who might become inspired by a better alternative than Osama bin Laden and, in the process, give new life to a constitutional monarchy that can implement peaceful reform with stability.

The oppressed, resentful public throughout the Arab and Muslim world could be inspired with pride in this bold, peaceful Palestinian Arab initiative taking place and with the Saudis acting as midwives to a new Palestinian Arab state. It could defuse much of the arguments and appeal of Arab dictators against Israel and the West. The Saudis could feel pride in supporting a unique social and political accomplishment on the world scene with their energies channeled towards peaceful development instead of war. The potential implications of peaceful change could extend far beyond just solving the Arab Israeli conflict.

II K  The future choices can be visualized by presenting three maps. [Link]

Map one, the IMPOSSIBLE map, which is currently on the table means returning approximately to the pre 1967 lines, i.e. the Road Map. That option is totally unacceptable and impossible for reasons given earlier in Part I.

Map two, the WAR map, is the PLO/PA map in which Israel no longer exists. The world pretends not to notice it but the PLO/PA continues to use that map to define Palestine both past and future. Trying to implement that map leads directly to the nightmare scenario of all out war.

Map three, the PEACE map of the PAIR Initiative, means a new Palestinian Arab state inside the Arabian peninsula thus removing the main pretext for hostility against Israel by other Arab states. It shows suggested borders for the new state and proposed secure, defensible borders for Israel, consonant with the original League of Nations mandate for a Jewish National Home.

II L  The opposition.

It is anticipated that any proposal to relocate Palestinian Arabs will likely trigger immediate and extreme opposition from many sources including the charge of racism. However the Roadmap is inherently racist in its demand for total ethnic cleansing of all Jews living in areas ceded to the Palestinian Arabs while Arabs in Israel remain exempt from the same rule. This is yet another example of an anti-Jewish double standard that must be rejected.

Note that the PAIR Initiative benefits both Arabs and Jews, unlike the Roadmap which cheats both Arabs and Jews. Further, the PAIR Initiative makes allowance for some non-Jews to remain in Israel for justifiable cause and on a case by case basis. The anti-Jewish racism of western governments was demonstrated by their acceptance of the earlier expulsion (ethnic cleansing) of some 900,000 Jews from Arab countries along with their acceptance of the ‘judenrein’ policies of Saudi Arabia and Jordan. As mentioned earlier, peace requires strict adherence to four immutable principles, mentioned earlier, including telling the whole truth and rejecting double standards.

The PAIR Initiative is actually very pro-Palestinian Arab and that point is readily demonstrated by comparing its results with the perpetuation of suffering and conflict for both sides if the current Roadmap plan is implemented. Proponents of the PAIR Initiative would welcome open debate because all opposing arguments can be answered. Some critics may prefer to attack this plan while avoiding open debate.

Palestinian Arab moderates willing to consider this plan could face intimidation. The opponents will ignore the fact that, during the last century, countless millions of people have resettled, often under far less favorable conditions than proposed here. They will have to argue that, of all the people in the world, the Palestinian Arabs alone cannot be resettled, even if it is to an infinitely better life. They will ignore the Arab regimes that have deliberately kept Palestinian Arabs rotting in refugee camps for decades as an open wound to be used as a political weapon to undermine any settlement with Israel. They will have to argue in favor of continuing a zero sum game where both Arabs and Jews remain locked into a lose-lose situation. And they will have to ignore the millions of Jewish refugees, many expelled from Arab countries, that migrated to Israel to build a strong vibrant Jewish nation and better lives for themselves.

There are important voices of Islamic moderation who deserve to be heard. Some support Israel and its historic right to the land. Others focus on their support for democracy and pluralism and strongly oppose the extremists. These voices of moderation include religious Muslim scholars who can cite the Qur’an with authority in support of their views. Unfortunately, these voices of moderation are not being given adequate recognition and the support that they deserve. The response to the PAIR Initiative must also include opinions from moderate Muslims which can help open the door to the win-win approach being offered for both Arabs and Israelis.

Moderate Muslims encounter various obstacles that serve to mute their voices. Within their own communities moderate Muslims face opposition, ostracism and sometimes even personal risk if they express their opinions. The major media is reluctant to accord them sufficient exposure. C.A.I.R., the Committee on American Islamic Relations, attempts to silence all those, including moderate Muslims, who point out the dangers of Islamic extremism. C.A.I.R. has had considerable success in gaining credibility to speak on behalf of American Muslims while establishing influence with U.S. government agencies.

The American Jewish leadership should be doing much more to actively reach out to moderate Muslims and help them gain needed public exposure. Meanwhile American Jewish leftists organize national speaking tours for Israeli leftists who come paired with anti-Israel Arabs to propagate their nihilistic message. This presents a false ‘balance’ designed to denigrate Israel and convey the image of a solid anti-Israeli attitude among all Israeli Arabs.

Visitors to the web sites of moderate Muslims will be impressed with their extensive knowledge and positive attitude that is reaching out to Jews and Christians in the spirit of peace and friendship. These are people of great personal courage because their activities require intense dedication and fearless determination. they are in the best position to challenge the influence of radical Islam which is being taught in America with Saudi funding. Appendix II N contains a list of web sites representing views from a variety of moderate Muslim sources.

II N  On the world scene.

This is not just a local dispute between Arabs and Jews. Yasser Arafat had succeeded in internationalizing the conflict to an extreme degree. He drew support from the Islamic countries, from the intractable terrorist organizations, from the rogue Arab regimes, from the ‘moderate’ Arab regimes, from the European Union, from China, Russia, North Korea, the totalitarian left and the anti-Semitic right wing extremists. In short, all of the reactionary and nihilistic forces on the planet had lined up to support Arafat and the Palestinian Arab cause as he defined it.

Normally the European Union would be threatened by the aggressive posture of radical Arab regimes. Many European governments, however, still harbor latent anti-Semitism, are jealous of American power and success and would not mind meddling in the Middle East at Israel’s and America’s expense. Many also have vocal and growing Arab minorities that threaten social harmony by their aggressive actions. And all wish to protect their sources of Arab oil and their Arab markets. Betrayal of Israel and irritating America seems a trivial price to pay. Sadly, these are the same kind of politicians that underestimated Hitler; thought that he only threatened the Jews and decided to appease Hitler by betraying Czechoslovakia.

Today, as then, the Europeans calculate that they can purchase their security at Israel’s expense and assume a moral posture in the process. Today, as then, they are in denial as to the true danger to themselves. Militant Islam is infecting more and more of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world. Militant Islam is quite open about its plans for Christians and is already persecuting Christians in various Muslim countries. Militant Islam is very conscious that two thirds of the world’s oil reserves are located inside Islamic countries and this translates into a potent political, economic and military weapon. China, North Korea and Russia have all been earning money by massively arming the Arabs with weapons of increasingly destructive force. Even America and the West are fueling this insane arms race.

The prime rationalization for this fanatic arming is to help the Palestinian Arabs gain their own country. But the Arab people and many Muslims as well are themselves captives of a brutal Islamic fanaticism. Many have had their minds poisoned by years of systematic indoctrination in hatred. Others, who may know better, remain oppressed and intimidated by regimes that tolerate no dissent. The totalitarian Arab regimes and their foreign supporters display a uniform hate towards Israel. The forces of intolerance and reaction reveal their inherent brittleness by their obsessive need to present a unanimous front without any dissent. And that is their vulnerability. If our side can demonstrate that in all of these countries, including Arab countries and among the Palestinian Arabs, there are dissenting voices, we can start to tip the balance in favor of moderation and conciliation.

If we can spark open debate on all the issues addressed in this plan, then many people will begin to see that this is not just about Arabs and Israelis but about totalitarian forces that threaten all of humanity. In this global battle for humanity’s future it is Israel that is on the front line for all of us. Any setback for Israel will embolden all the reactionary forces to redouble their efforts to stamp out democracy and freedom all over the world.

The converse of this process can also hold true. If we can visualize even small numbers of people in various countries coalescing around this PAIR Initiative, it will give encouragement to the forces of democracy and decency everywhere. When the first few courageous Palestinian Arabs speak out and are heard, it will be the first crack in the ideological and rhetorical ‘Berlin Wall’ of hatred. It will remove the false excuse used by Arab dictators to arm massively and to suppress their own people. A democratic Palestinian Arab country emerging within the Arab world can be politically infectious. It could start to defuse Middle East tensions and undermine the iron grip of Arab dictators. The PAIR Initiative could spark a genuine movement towards peace that could benefit the entire region and beyond.

II O  Dealing with the Jewish "fifth column".

The PAIR Initiative cannot be limited only to encouraging Palestinian Arabs to resettle elsewhere in order to promote peace and justice for both sides. The four basic principles, which guide the PAIR Initiative, must also be applied consistently to Israeli Jews. The security of Israel is also endangered by the presence of what can only be called a Jewish “fifth column”. These are renegade individuals, who exploit their Jewish ancestry, who work obsessively and maliciously to undermine the security of the Jewish people in general, and the State of Israel in particular.

Although a small minority, they have infiltrated the centers of power. They hold positions of influence in: labor unions, academia, the courts, the media, political office, and even the military. They also include self-styled ‘activists’ who elbow their way to prominence and claim to speak for the masses. They consistently denigrate and subvert legitimate Jewish rights in favor of advancing antagonistic Arab interests, often by way of deception, malicious falsehoods and double standards. They readily misinterpret Judaism for ideological purposes and even demonize those Jews who are religiously observant. They often hold ideological allegiance to the militant international left, which raises the question of their having dual loyalties.

Claiming to be promoting peace they push lopsided and unworkable schemes such as the Oslo Accords, the Geneva Accords and now the Roadmap, all of which undermine Jewish rights, endanger the Jewish character of the country and endanger Israel’s physical security.

It is this radical Jewish left whose activities increased Israel’s vulnerability to Arab terrorism resulting in many additional Israeli and Arab casualties. It is the radical Jewish left that contributed to the immense moral and political corruption that pervades the Israeli government and many institutions. The destructive influence of this Jewish “fifth column” has caused hundreds of thousands of patriotic Israelis, who had their fill of this corruption, to emigrate to other countries.

These individuals have long forfeited their claim to be considered legitimately Jewish and to live freely in the Jewish State of Israel. Unlike the Arab terrorists who are brainwashed from early childhood, these Jewish “fifth columnists” are consciously malevolent and know full well what they are doing. They should each stand trial before a Nuremberg-style tribunal on the charge of perpetrating war crimes against the Jewish people and for crimes against humanity. Those found guilty should be given a near-term date to emigrate voluntarily, forfeiting only their real property, or face physical expulsion minus all their assets. This would be extremely lenient considering that many victims of their treasonous actions have been killed and wounded. Just as they vigorously supported the expulsion of Jews from Gaza, even under brutal conditions, in the name of peace and security, they cannot now object to their own removal, also, in the name of peace and security.