Putting lipstick on a pig

I was having a political discussion with my parents this past weekend (hey, they're Israelis now, so what else would we be talking about?!), when I suddenly realized we were talking at cross-purposes.  Specifically, we were using different terminology to describe the same thing... but only I seemed to realize it.

My parents were using terms and phrases they'd read and heard in the media... and I was using more historically accurate terminology to describe the exact same thing they were. 

Yet we were arguing.  Strange.

They kept talking about the various plans being bandied about in the news for Israel to "return to the '67 borders" (with small modifications, of course), and I kept correcting them saying, "you mean the 1949 Armistice lines".

This went back and forth a few times before I had to call a time out and clear things up.

I patiently explained that using the phrase "the 67 borders", while not necessarily wrong, was misleading due to the fact that Israel had two different sets of borders during that year.  Our present borders (with the exception of Gaza, which we recently relinquished) are the "67 borders".  Specifically our current borders (except for Gaza) are those that existed on June 12h, 1967 after the Six Day War.

But when most people today say "the '67 borders" in relation to territorial compromise, they are talking about the borders that existed on June 5th, 1967... which were, in fact, the 1949 Armistice lines.... Israel's de facto borders at the end of the War of Independence.   

But since a return to the 1949 borders - even a modified version - would be tantamount to admitting that every war fought since (and every Israeli killed in 60 years of Arab aggression) was for naught, you will almost never hear that phrase used in the news.

It's really no surprise that the left-leaning media and the Olmert government are very careful to only talk about returning to "the '67 borders".  How else can one consider giving a do-over on not one, but three major wars (and six decades of Arab intransigence)... in return for nothing more than vague promises to recognize our right to exist.  Sort of.

"But what about the Palestinians?" I hear you asking.  "The Palestinians didn't attack Israel in the War of Independence, so why should they be punished?"  An excellent point, which calls into question the entire legitimacy of the oft-heard claim that Israel is occupying 'Palestinian Land'.  You see, the Palestinians had never been heard of in 1948, and were not a party to that conflict (except perhaps as stateless refugees).  Therefore, when you look at a map of the 1949 Armistice lines, you will see no mention of such a people/entity.

Here, let's have a look, shall we?  The Blue areas below are what Israel agreed to accept under the UN's Partition Plan in 1947.  The Arabs unanimously rejected the Partition Plan and instead went to war. And lost.  The result was that when the 1949 Armistice lines were drawn, Israel had added the peach colored areas and some of the gray area as well... and Egypt and Jordan had occupied the green, gray and purple areas. The 1949 Armistice lines remained Israel's borders until the end of the Six Day War in 1967 when we acquired the green and purple areas, as well as some areas in the Golan that aren't pictured here:

Here

 

[Map Source Here]

Now, my parents happen to be two of the smartest, most well-informed people I know.  Yet they'd both assumed that I was arguing semantics (i.e. being difficult) when in fact I was trying to make a very important historical/geographic distinction.  As soon as my father understood what I was saying, all he could say was, "a return to Israel's 1949 borders would be madness!"

Funny how just changing the terms with which a topic is discussed can change one's entire perception.  Basically, when the product you are selling stinks, the best strategy is to make sure it is packaged nicely.  And let's face it... calling for a return to relatively modern borders sounds a heck of a lot nicer than a retreat to indefensible borders that existed at the end of our War of Independence!  Yet, without saying as much, it is the latter that everyone seems to be talking about today. 

Look, if you want to talk about the poor, suffering Palestinians.  Let's talk about them.  Really!  I'm not saying that there isn't something to talk about.  But let's also talk about who they are, and what legitimate, legal claims they may have.  Let's talk about what obligations they have to themselves and their neighbors (us)... and most importantly let's talk about what this sudden yearning for Palestinian self-determination has to do with the sovereign State of Israel. 

Then, if you want to talk about giving them some land to call their own, we can talk about that too... again, in the framework of what is best for everyone in the region (including us).  Maybe some of the land needs to come from other sovereign states in the region... states that were legally part of the League of Nation's Palestine Mandate and which were supposed to be carved up amicably between Jewish and Arab entities (instead of unilaterally at the whim of the British caretakers of the land). 

Heck you'll notice that during the 19 years that Jordan and Egypt were in possession of the land the Palestinians call 'occupied territory' (from '48 thru '67) nobody - not even the 'Palestinians - asked them to create a Palestinian state.  So I figure if somehow the pie didn't get properly divided to everyone's satisfaction back then, let's see if maybe we can rectify that.

But to make the creation of a Palestinian State entirely Israel's problem (and at Israel's territorial expense) is untenable.  And to promote this flawed agenda by arbitrarily tossing around terminology that is not only intentionally misleading, but which is actually describing borders and wars that were established/fought before anyone on the planet had ever heard of 'the Palestinians'... well, it sounds a lot like someone is selling a pig and thinks applying a little lipstick will make the swine a bit more marketable.

[this post was built around a comment I left yesterday over at Yourish.com]