Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Barry Rubin sul licenziamento di Drefner

Alcuni punti potrebbero essere interessanti anche a proposito
dell'invito a Moni Ovadia alla Giornata della Cultura Ebraica
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2011/08/larry-derfner-should-be-debated-not.html
Larry Derfner Should be Debated, Not Fired
By Barry Rubin
The Jerusalem Post columnist Larry Derfner was fired today because he
wrote on his blog a statement many readers saw as justifying
Palestinian terrorism against Israelis. As so often happens when
people focus on a single sentence of an article, they're missing the
point, or at least the most important point. It also throws away what
President Barack Obama calls a teachable moment.
The issue here is not “left” versus “right” but rather what is true
and what is not.
In addition, columnists should not be continued in their jobs if their
writing is not interesting or is factually inaccurate, not because
they write something that people don’t like.
All too often nowadays the response to disagreement is to try to
destroy people on the other side of the argument, to delegitimize them
with name-calling and to silence them. That's not the way democratic
debate is supposed to work.  If you think someone is wrong then answer
the substance of the statements being made.
I don't think Derfner should have been fired. Rather the point is that
people should have answered what he said. Like Gideon Levy of Haaretz
he is still arguing the line that terrorism is basically Israel’s
fault. They hate us and want to kill us because we haven't made enough
concessions and because we are oppressing them. That's the issue, not
"justifying" terrorism.
Of course,  Derfner's position implies that if Israel ended the
“occupation” and accepted a Palestinian state, terrorism, incitement,
and hatred would stop. Many people throughout the world think the same
thing.
That is a point worth debating. Since 1993, Israel has been trying out
that theory and it has proven to be false. Unfortunately, and I wish
things were different, we learned that the Palestinian leadership
doesn't want compromise and is unable to deliver it.
There are two problems here. First, the Palestinian leaders seek to
wipe Israel off the map and are not in favor of a lasting, stable, and
peaceful two-state solution. We know this by reading their words in
Arabic, watching the institutions they direct, and observing their
actions.
Secon, the Palestinian leaders--including those like Prime Minister
Salam Fayyad--who do want negotiated compromise solution are too weak
to bring it about. They fear their own people who they've been
inciting toward extremism for years; the hardline mainstream within
Fatah; and, of course, their Hamas rivals.
So, no, giving more territory; accepting a Palestinian state
unconditionally; letting terrorist attacks on Israel go unanswered by
retaliation; and so on will not solve the problem. I genuinely wish it
were otherwise. It would be far better if Israel's left-wing was
correct and there was an easy and quick way to achieve full peace
through a two-state solution this week.
Unfortunately, this wishful thinking is wrong and we have seen massive
evidence to that effect. That's why the vast majority of Israelis--
including those who in the past voted for people like Shimon Peres,
Yitzhak Rabin, and Ehud Barak to be prime minister (for example, me),
also know this is true.
Let's examine the issue. Derfner says that the "denial of
independence" to the Palestinians is so bad that it’s helping drive
them to try to kill us.
1. But wait! Didn't they used to say that it was the occupation that
is helping drive them to try to kill us?
But now there's no "occupation" (except in 20 percent of Hebron and
east Jerusalem) and they are still trying to kill us!
And guess what? If they get independence they will still try to kill
us because it will be Israel's existence and the status of the
"pre-1948" Palestinians that is "so bad that it's helping drive them
to try to kill us."
2. There's another way to look at this, too. If denying them
independence is, “so bad that it’s helping drive them to try to kill
us.”
Thus, if they obtained independence would they be so grateful, so
happy, or so busy building up their country that they would stop
trying to kill us?
No. We know--even many of the most dovish and leftist of us--that they
will continue to try to kill us from a better strategic position that
would make it more likely they would succeed. So what good would that
step do? And that is precisely why Israelis are not eager to support
independence without any preconditions.
Indeed, a few minutes after writing this piece, I noticed that
Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas has stated that even if the
UN recognizes the independence of Palestine, he and his government
will still demand that all Palestinians who lived within Israel's
borders before 1948 or any descendants of such people can demand to go
live in Israel and Israel must let them in. Or there cannot be peace.
source: 
http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=235789
You see, there's no end to this.
What happens when two weeks after independence there are more cross-
border attacks? What happens if incitement continues? What happens if
Hamas or radical Fatah forces seize power? What happens if the state
of Palestine invites in foreign Arab forces or imports missiles or
forms an alliance with Egypt or other sttes? I said "if" but I mean
"when."
And the lack of an agreed and defined border, as well as the presence
of Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip (which the Fatah-led leadership of
Palestine would support against Israel) would guarantee tension and a
likely crisis before long and periodically thereafter.
At that point, if Israel were to retaliate for an attack or act
against a build-up of military forces against itself, that would
constitute international aggression in the eyes of many, including a
majority in the UN General Assembly. Nobody would help Israel deal
with this threat, including the current government of the United
States,
To leap into such a situation in the hope--without evidence--that they
would then "stop trying to kill us" is insane. No Israeli government
would do it and that's the correct decision.
3. And who is "them" when we discuss the Palestinians? Because
obviously "them" doesn't apply to Hamas (the group that happens to run
almost half of the Palestinian territories) or to many other
Palestinian groups and leaders that aren’t Islamist. It doesn't even
apply to most of Fatah.
In short, Derfner's formulation is nonsense. And to understand why it
is nonsense is the essential point to understanding the conflict, the
failure of the "Peace Process," and the Middle East.
But that doesn’t mean he should be fired.

 But that doesn’t mean he should be fired.
ah, ecco. Perchè quello che avevi postato l'altra volta aveva l'aria
di volere qualcosa di peggio del licenziamento

 ah, ecco. Perchè quello che avevi postato l'altra volta aveva l'aria
no, direi proprio che non te ne intendi.