Sure, but the main difficulty is getting the Plaestinians to go along with it. You’ll have noticed that Arafat rejected the deal giving the the Palestinians Gaza, the West Bank and Arab Jerusalem. He preferred a terrror war.

Unilateral withdrawal from Gaza was a bust, too. Hence, the unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank never went ahead.

Abbas might possibly sign a peace deal with Israel, but he only governs the West Bank with the IDF’s assistance. Once Israel actaully withdraws, any peace agreement signed now will prove worthless.

I am not utterly without hope. Perhaps Abbas will gain effective control of the West Bank. Perhaps then he’ll be able to hold up his end of a peace deal. But I don’t think it’s likely, not anytime soon.

Wiser words were never spoken. The question is how.

This statement reminds me of a story I once read about a nineteenth century British rag that used to publish sensational novels in weekly serialized instalments. The story was written from one week to the next and only the author knew how he was going to resolve the knotty problems that he had set up himself in the week before.

On one such case, the author, ended his weekly chapter with a breath-stopping situation, his protagonist hanging with both hands in a pit, snakes snipping at feet, on one side a roaring lion, on the other two crooks with their guns aimed at him.

Then he failed to submit the next week’s chapter. As he was a known lush, everyone suspected that he had gone on one of his drinking sprees. The editor asked other writers to provide the necessary instalment but they were all stymied. They had no idea how to get the hero out of the pit, and away from the menacing snakes, lion and killers. The paper was issued with an apology to the readers for missing that week’s episode.

Finally the author shows up. Everyone flies at him, yelling and angry and predictably, at a complete loss as to how he was going to resolve the situation.

No problem, says the author. He inserts a sheet of paper into the typewriter and starts the next chapter:

“Once out of the pit, our hero…”

It would be better for whom, anonymous “resistor?”

Why would it better to create another country with an Arab majority leading to the destruction of the only Jewish State I the world?

In any case, minorities don’t do very well in Arab and Muslim majority countries. Ask the Christian in Lebanon or Iraq? Ask the Copts in Egypt?

Besides, U.N. resolution does not specify that Israel has to take in all the Arab refugees who had made war on the Jews in 1947 and 1948.

Wouldn’t it be better to stop the oppression and dispossession of the Palestinians and obey UN resolutions by allowing them to return to their homes?

I could not disagree more. Israel diplomats need to pick their issues. They do not have infinite resources, far from it. “Building an international diplomatic coalition against anti-Zionism” is just not feasible in the UN arena when so many countries are ranged against Israel.

You can argue that it would have made more of a news story to pull out during Durban2 rather than 5 months ahead. But there is just no point in expending time and resources in a ‘no hope’ debate. You’ve got to be realistic.

“It is a topsy-turvy world: At the United Nations–an organization born out of the struggle against Nazi Germany and intended to embody the lessons of the Holocaust–a head of state openly spouts anti-Semitic propaganda in an address before the General Assembly. Granted, he takes the trouble to denounce “Zionists” and avoid the word “Jew,” but this dodge is transparent to any student of the Nazis. His speech is greeted with acclaim, and neither the U.N. secretary general nor any Western head of government bothers to object. The media are mostly silent.”

Iow - and this is not much of an exaggeration either, to help grasp the systemic and deeply embedded corruption at the U.N. - imagine Adolf himself in the same forum, the U.N., “an organization born out of the struggle against Nazi Germany and intended to embody the lessons of the Holocaust,” and being applauded.

l. No isolation of Israel - Jerusalem will not accept Israel being singled out as the only country specifically mentioned in the resolution.

2. No partial condemnation - Israel will also not agree to a “a partial condemnation,” such as eliminating the reference to Israeli “apartheid” while leaving a Zionism equals racism clause. “We will not accept a compromise built on our backs”.

3. No to hate language - Israel will not accept a resolution that uses forms of Holocaust denial or other terminology that are euphemisms for anti-Semitism.

“Europeans seek new formula in Durban”, Haaretz, by Yair Sheleg (5/9/2001)
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=71143

Given what occurred at Durban I, given the uses the UNRWA and UNHRC are put to and given systemic and deeply embedded corruptions at the U.N. in general (Bayefsky’s and others’ reports) that analogy is, arguably, no exaggeration at all.

Israel stepping aside may seem problematic to some, but with limited resources, and a hijacked system that continues to target Israel, it must focus its resources elsewhere … especially to confronting the growing problem of Iran.