🔴 Website 👉 https://u-s-news.com/
Telegram 👉 https://t.me/usnewscom_channel
Just months after Adolf Hitler started World War II, Winston Churchill smartly summarized why Europe’s hopes for peace had been shattered.
“An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last,” the new prime minister said in a speech.
His stark imagery mocked the foolish efforts to head off war, infamously led by Churchill’s predecessor, Neville Chamberlain, who insisted Hitler really wanted peace.
Chamberlain was delusional and the global conflict that followed turned his name into a permanent warning about the wages of weakness.
Yet here we go again, with the current leaders of Britain, France and Canada falling into the trap.
Their delusion is that Palestinians, including Hamas and other terror groups, really want peace and will live in harmony with Israel once they have a nation of their own.
The clamor for a Palestinian state is the appeasement of our times.
It travels under the disguise of a “two-state solution.”
Who can be against a solution?
‘River to the sea’
Except a Palestinian state wouldn’t solve anything.
Quite the opposite, it would set the stage for another round of bloodletting.
As such, think of it as the two-state delusion.
That’s what it is because too many Islamists, from Iran to Arab lands and around the world, remain committed to destroying the Jewish state.
They don’t want to live in peace with Israel.
They want to eliminate it.
That’s the essence of the antisemitic chant heard on American college campuses: “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.”
Translation: Palestine will be free of Jews, and Israel will be no more.
That isn’t a problem at the Jew-hating United Nations, which held a two-day conference on the topic last week.
It was little noted that Palestinians already have a state of their own.
Instead of living in peace with their Jewish neighbors, they turned Gaza into a terror state.
Nearly two years after their barbaric invasion of Israel, and while they continue to hold some of the 250 hostages they took on Oct. 7 of 2023, the push to give them a nation isn’t just foolish — it’s obscene.
As President Trump correctly said last week, “You’re rewarding Hamas if you do that. I don’t think they should be rewarded.”
Thankfully, he added that the US is “not in that camp,” referring to support for a Palestinian state by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, French President Emmanuel Macron and Canada’s Prime Minister Mark Carney.
Each is beset by radical Islamist immigrants, and so their pandering illustrates Churchill’s observation about feeding the crocodile in hopes of being spared.
They are aided and abetted by the Western media outlets that have fallen for the two-state ruse.
‘A Hamas state’
Typical is the nakedly anti-Israel coverage of The Associated Press, which described the UN conference as a serious bid “to end one of the world’s longest conflicts.”
It claimed “the plan would culminate with an independent, demilitarized Palestine living side by side peacefully with Israel.”
That’s a fairy tale, and at least deserves the caveat that it would be necessary to enforce a peaceful Palestinian state to guarantee Israel’s security.
Good luck persuading the Israelis that their security can be outsourced to the United Nations.
Jews there and around the world have said for decades: “If Palestinians lay down their guns, there will be peace. But if the Israelis lay down our guns, there will be no Israel.”
The Jewish nation’s Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar said last week that Israel would not cave in to the “international pressure.”
“Establishing a Palestinian state today is establishing a Hamas state. A jihadist state,” said Sa’ar.
“It ain’t gonna happen.”
The only positive development to come out of the conference was that the Arab League, including Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Egypt, Jordan and Turkey, condemned for the first time Hamas’ 2023 invasion and called on the terrorists to release all hostages, disarm and end their rule of Gaza.
But even that progress was undercut by a tone of both-sideism that included outrageous attacks on Israel because of how it responded to the invasion.
The final declaration also urges Israel to cooperate with UN agencies, including UNRWA, whose employees openly fanned the flames of Hamas terror.
It also defends the Gazan Health Ministry, which acts as a Hamas mouthpiece in distorting Palestinian casualties.
‘Right of return’ farce
Worse, the conference supported the Palestinians’ so-called “right of return” to places in Israel they left or were expelled from during the 1948 creation of Israel.
That would undermine Israel’s security and its existence as a Jewish state.
My view about the push for a Palestinian state is informed by 25 years of covering the topic.
In the summer of 2000, I was on my first trip to Israel just before its Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, and Palestinian chairman Yasser Arafat were scheduled to meet with President Bill Clinton at Camp David to iron out the terms and boundaries of such a state.
The American Embassy had helped arrange an interview for me with a top aide to Arafat in Ramallah, the de facto capital of the West Bank.
The night before the interview, the late Martin Indyk, then the US ambassador to Israel, suggested a question I might ask.
It ran something like this: If Arafat can’t accept the 92% of the West bank Barak’s government is offering, how would Arafat feel when a more conservative government offers as little as 72% of the West Bank?
When I asked the question, the Arafat aide responded with a phrase he’d used in response to other questions about Arab violence.
“Well, you know,” he said, “there are these groups we can’t control.”
He didn’t name names, but his meaning was clear: There will be violence against Israelis, but don’t blame Arafat because he can’t stop it.
No partner in peace
It was a convenient lie, but the terror leader obviously feared for his own life if he signed a deal.
Much to the shock of Clinton and Barak, Arafat walked away from Camp David without accepting a Palestinian state.
Since then, several Israeli governments have made similar offers of a Palestinian state.
All have been rejected in part because of the Sadat example.
Recall that Egypt’s bold leader, Anwar-el Sadat, was assassinated in 1981 by Islamist extremists two years after signing a peace treaty with Israel’s Prime Minister Menachem Begin in a process facilitated by President Jimmy Carter at Camp David.
Sadat and Begin shared the 1978 Nobel Peace Prize.
Yet 47 years later, there is still no Palestinian state because no Palestinian leader has felt safe enough to recognize Israel’s right to exist in its own secure borders.
Hamas has made it clear it will never accept Israel. Its leaders have promised that given the chance, the horrors of Oct. 7 will be repeated again and again.
The threats prove that a point Israelis have made about Palestinians still prevails: We have no partner for peace.