by Dr. Miklos K. Radvanyi

From time immemorial, it had been a favorite pastime of historians, philosophers, theologians, politicians as well as adventurers of all persuasions to provide answers and even harebrained solutions to the seemingly insoluble puzzle of enduring anti-Judaism across the globe.  The list of hate inspired atrocities against the believers in Judaism is almost as long as the history of mankind.  Starting with the ancient Egyptians, continuing with the numerous conquerors of the so-called Canaan cum Holy Land and culminating in the Holocaust, many millions of Jews were objects of bloody geostrategic ambitions, murderous avarice and self-serving theological as well as ideological hatred.  Thus, the most recent acts of inhuman barbarism by the Gaza-based terrorist offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood against innocent civilians in southern Israel, once again raises the consistently ignored problem that, in cases of overwhelming crises, the quality of leadership is of critical importance. 

 Plainly, the chain of upcoming events and actions will decisively be determined by a very small group of decision makers who might not necessarily be proven intellectually superior individuals.  For this reason, the fate of the Middle East will also be decided by men who are too weak or too adventurous to adhere to the fundamental principles of global peace and stability, such as Presidents Putin, Xi and the Ayatollah Khamenei among others.  Could these men be persuaded by President Biden, the Presidents and Prime Ministers of the European Union and beyond to finally grow up to the task of laying the foundations for a stable as well as peaceful Middle East? Would they collectively be sufficiently courageous and intelligent to strive to establish a campaign toward the humanization of governments in the region, or will they embrace small-minded parochial interests as tools to the perpetuation of catastrophic future wars?

In order to achieve these superhuman objectives, all the states involved must agree on a restricted number of fundamental principles that could endure for decades and, if possible, for the coming century.  Most importantly, the question of legitimacy must be agreed upon.  In the Middle East Israel is the sole democracy.  The Arab countries are either monarchies or military despotisms.  In this juncture, both popular sovereignty and enduring monarchies with their aristocratic principles must be considered legitimate, provided that they are stable and enjoy the support of the majority of the people.  Military despotism must be transformed through exploiting the anti-oppression sentiments of the people and their longing for a society without fanatic violence.  Such a seemingly impossible task can be accomplished, if the non-democratic countries realize that even they have nothing in common with small-minded autocrats that are neither very intelligent nor serious individuals.  In reality, they are dangerous for the stability and peace of the whole world.

Second, the psychological curse of the Angst of inferiority and the related  fear of defeat as well as the fear of victory in the Middle East must be dealt with.  The volatile Abraham Accord, unlike the doomed Oslo Accords, have been an encouraging new beginning.  However, the crucial weakness of this loose agreement too has been that it does not entail firm principles about the most important issue of sovereignty over the land that the Jews call Eretz Israel and the Arabs refer to as Palestine.  Until this issue is not settled, no lasting peace can be achieved in the Middle East.  In this respect, the harmonization of the realities on the ground and the application of the principles which govern them, must lead both sides to avoid becoming victims of domestic as well as foreign pressures and fortuitous circumstances.  To begin calling for justice by repeated aggressors is not particularly convincing.  To claim to be the victims of aggression is even more macabre when the objective is the annihilation of all inhabitants of an internationally recognized state by a ragtag collection of barbaric mobs who are lacking even the bare minimum of morally and legally aspiring sense of wisdom, justice and humanity.  Finally, exploiting peace to cause the greatest harm to innocent civilians is the clearest proof of incorrigible inhuman abomination.    

Third, peace treaties have always been the most complex and complicated bilateral or multilateral agreements to accomplish because they must rise above the biased as well as emotional frenzies of the past and the present, while anticipating the political as well as ideological transformations of the future.  The chief principle of any peace treaty in the Middle East must be that all ambitions of partition or mutilation shall be renounced.  Hence, no new state entity shall be created in the region.  Accordingly, advocating the establishment of a so-called “Palestinian” state must be abandoned for good.  On the other hand, the Arab population in the formerly Egyptian and Jordanian territories shall be reintegrated into these two states.  The use of force in relations among states, which has done more damage to the states having applied the instruments of wars against Israel, shall be forbidden.  As a corollary, occupation by force for the future shall be outlawed too.

The Middle East is passing through its most catastrophic crisis.  The region as well as the rest of the world are challenged by the destructive terrorism of Iran and its irrational pawns.  Their politically motivated religious ideology is full of evil contradictions that could sink the World of Islam into a real cemetery of  self-annihilation.  The solution is the effective and lasting cooperation of all the legitimate governments, be they democracies or monarchies.