We will find out today, with great anticipation, whether President Trump will make good on his promise to move the US Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. We will also likely find out whether the PLO will act on their threats to terrorize and kill innocent Jews in response to the move.
I have more concern about the latter than the former. The idea that the world should recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish state is, on its face, immaterial. Jerusalem has been under Israeli control for decades now, and has been the seat of the government ever since; and shall remain so independently of what any other country has to say about it. The value is purely aesthetic. Whether the nations want to recognize it or not, out of principle, does nothing to change the situation on the ground. In essence, it’s a one way street; Jerusalem doesn’t need anything from the nations, but the nations need to recognize Jerusalem, for their benefit.
This line of thought is really tempting. If it’s meaningless from a practical standpoint, then why care? For years, we’ve heard about bombings and stabbings in Israel, and not one case was the legal status of Jerusalem the cause of a single death. Usually, it’s the bullets that do the trick.
But, I do care for many reasons. To see the reactionary calls from Arab leaders, these diplomatic scenes remind us who the real aggressor is, and it is not Israel. Whatever Trump decides, I can guarantee, that not a single Palestinian will be harmed as a result of what the US considers a capital city. The idea is inconsequential from the outset yet, the Arabs have such a regard for this particular issue, that they are willing to wage war and kill Jews over it. I ask then, who is the one being aggressive here?
This stands in direct contrast to the approval of new settlements earlier in the year, in which the Palestinian response was non-existent. Let it sink in that the Palestinians, who constantly grumble about not controlling the land, are willing to prioritize the diplomatic victories of Israel over the land itself. This only confirms what I have known for a long time, they care nothing of maintaining a state, but only of destroying the Jewish people. On an issue like this, they have had better fortunes fighting us in diplomatic retreats, than in battle. They are willing to start a war, because moving the embassy would represent a major defeat in the only arena they have ever had success in, against us at the peace table.
This is why I must update the quote of the day, that brings some clarity into this specific situation. “What country starts 3 wars, loses 3 wars, and then demands the land?” Apparently, that country would be the Arabs; and it would be morally unacceptable to surrender a single inch, either in war or in peace. If they rise up in a violent intifada, as they are threatening to do, then they must learn to fear the price of harming a single Jew. Peace is preferable, until then, a strong deterrent will keep Israel safe.