·
REVERSE HISTORY, OR FOUR RULES OF THE MIDDLE EASTERN "BAZARA"
Professor of the Department of Oriental Studies at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Moshe Sharon is one of the leading Arabists and experts in Islam, not only in Israel, but also in the world. In the past, Advisor Menachem Begin and participant in the Camp David talks, he is an expert on Arabic, Muslim methods of negotiating and psychology of Middle Eastern rulers.
Is peace possible in the Middle East? It is possible, says Professor Sharon. And adds: if the Jews disappear from the face of the earth or unquestioningly obey the will of the Arabs. However, unlike the West and Israeli politicians, the Arabs are in no hurry. They know how to wait ...
Alexander MAYSTROVOY
- The peace process in its present form is a parody . But is a hypothetical peace with the Palestinians possible?
- I have always been convinced and never hid my opinion that we have no one with whom and nothing to talk about. I fully agree with what Avigdor Lieberman said when speaking at the UN. I can only add that peace with the Arabs is impossible neither tomorrow nor the day after tomorrow, nor in 50 years. It is impossible in principle. The Arabs will not reconcile themselves to the existence of an independent Jewish state. This is not a tactical, but a principled solution. Their goal is to destroy this country. The world, according to the Islamic canons, will come only with the triumph of Islam . And they go to their goal in Europe, Russia , and now in the US.Before starting negotiations, we need to see the world from the point of view of Islam. For Muslims, the very existence of Israel is the reverse of history , a forced retreat from the already conquered positions . They will not put up with it under any circumstances. Worse, they do not perceive Jews even as a people, they deny the history of Jews, their existence as an ethnos.
"But does Islam recognize the forefathers of the Jews and their prophets?"
- It does not matter. From the standpoint of the traditional canons of Islam, it is this religion that is the only correct one, and Judaism is its false, distorted version. The main problem is in the difference in the worldviews of the people of the West and the Arabs. Western culture, which is a synthesis of cultures of Greek, Roman, Christian, is cultivated on the notion of the relative value of certain worldview approaches. Here they believe that each of the concepts has its own right . Muslims have no concept of "relative". In their view, they are carriers of not relative, but absolute knowledge, and this gives them the supreme right in relation to "infidels". According to this concept, everything that the Arabs captured in the 7th century belongs to Islam, including Spain, Sicily, not to mention the Land of Israel . And this is not the approach of those who are considered radicals, but of "moderate" Muslim figures, with whom the West is so willing to negotiate. Take, for example, the founder of the Cordoba Initiative, Abdul Rauf , whose project is at Ground Zero (a 65,000-m² site in Lower Manhattan, which until 11 September 2001 housed the original World Trade Center complex-GL). It is planned to erect an Islamic center with a mosque . Has anyone in the West thought about why this initiative is called Cordova ? Hardly. And it is named so, because it symbolizes the right of Muslims to Andalusia, lost by the Arabs during the reconquest.
- Do you propose to refuse negotiations with the Arabs at all ?
- Negotiations can and should be conducted, but not in the same way as Israeli politicians do. We do not negotiate - we simply concede, without even trying to set a price and bargain. Thus we only kindle their appetites.We must understand: the Arabs are an ancient culture, and they are very strong and inventive in political games. They realized that Israel could be undermined with the help of diplomacy and delegitimation, and here all the funds go into action, from inflating anti-Semitic sentiments to the use of "useful idiots" in the West and in Israel itself. Arabs use the natural gravity of the left to all repressive totalitarian regimes, however disgusting they may be. They also supported Hitler, nominating him as a candidate for the Nobel Prize. By the time it coincided with Kristallnacht at night.Arabs skillfully use the West's desire for immediate, swift decisions . At us it is called "shalom ahshav". But in the Arab political culture, in principle, there is no word "now ". That is, it exists, but in an exceptionally negative context. "Haste is from Satan," says an Arab proverb. Here they are not in a hurry, and haste in solving political problems is unthinkable. In the West and Israel , they do not want to understand this . Moreover, here they project their feelings and desires on the other side. At one time, I wrote an article about how the negotiations in the Middle East are conducted.They are not being conducted to solve the problem here and now.Negotiations are conducted for the sake of the negotiations. This is a kind of game, in which the main thing - patience and sophistication. The parties try to force their opponent to admit an oversight and impose their conditions on him. We do not just allow oversights - we ourselves are substituted for the enemy's blows, and our naivete, haste and stupidity are simply staggering. When I, as an adviser to Menachem Begin in 1977, negotiated with the Egyptians, Sadat told me: "Tell Begin: this is a bazaar, and the price here is high." Begin did not hear me ... - What are the laws of the Arabian "bazaar"? - They are essentially the same as in a regular bazaar.
Rule number one: negotiations are conducted one on one . This is exactly how Sadat wanted to lead them. But Begin wanted the participation of Americans and the British . Then Sadat agreed and used it for his own purposes . The mediator is never objective. Each intermediary has its own interests and vulnerable points, and they can always be pressed on them
. Rule number two: there is always time, you can bargain unlimitedly . But if you want to take the goods faster, right now, pay a high price. And the more you hurry, the higher the price . And it happened. Sadat came to the talks, being ready (sounds fantastic!) To surrender half of Sinai for the peace treaty, which he needed. After Sadat lost the war, despite the victorious Egyptian reports: the Israelis were a hundred kilometers from Cairo. He did not remember about the Palestinians at all . But when he saw that the Jews gave him the whole of Sinai without even bargaining, he put forward a new condition: a Palestinian state . He realized that he was getting everything without resistance, and began to dictate his terms.And we, instead of discussing the Sinai section, discussed the Palestinian problem. And, pay attention, all concessions were made by Likud. "Labor" has always insisted on the preservation of part of Sinai.
Rule number three: check what kind of goods you are offered . If you are told that you will be allowed to eat humus in Damascus for the Golan, it is a rotten commodity, because you can eat hummus in Abu Ghosh. If you are told that in exchange for territory you will get peace, check first what kind of world is meant and whether there is any such goods in stock at your partner or it's just empty words. The merit of Lieberman is that he radically changed this approach. He says: we will not pay for peace. The world needs you no less than us, and maybe even more, and if you want it, you pay, but we can wait. The Syrians attacked us three times, and now they want us to pay them Golan heights for peace. If they want peace, let them pay. First, let them officially recognize that Israel is a Jewish state. It is Jewish, not Jewish, democratic. Democracy is inherently inherent in the Jewish state, and one should not stress this every time.
Rule number four: you need to know when to get up from the table and turn the chairs. There are things that are not discussed. The right of Jews to their land can not become a topic for discussion. This is our land, and it does not matter what is written in the Qur'an. If we do not have such a right, then what can we talk about? When Sadat began to make more and more claims, I wrote a note to Begin: "Get up from the table."He just waved it off . But the Arabs know how to behave in such cases.During the negotiations in Paris, Arafat demonstratively left the table, and Albright (the secretary of state at that time) ran after him with shrieks: "Mr. Arafat, Mr. Arafat!" ... The Arabs do not care what is written in the TANAKH, he does not even want See the TANAKH. And if you show them what they say, they say that these are Jewish fabrications. In the Arab market, the one who offers the first is losing. If you suggest, you are immediately told: this is not enough. And the more you offer, the more appetite it awakens. You must force the other side to offer - this is one of the main laws of the game. Our politicians think about retaining power for the next couple of years, and the Arabs think of long-term categories . Add to this "useful idiots", and you will become clear the whole picture of what is happening.
- How to relate to Lieberman's proposals on the exchange of people and territories?
- It's a delicate move. He knows that the Arabs will never go for it, and if so, they will be to blame for the failure of the talks . The Arab culture of negotiation is inconceivable for a Westerner. For example, in the Arab sector in Israel, huge funds are invested, and taxes in the municipal treasury of Arab cities practically do not arrive. This is the traditional approach: to take, and then to shout "to us do not give". I remember how the representatives of the Arab sector addressed me with a complaint that their municipalities do not have funds due to a negative balance. I suggested: we put a shekel on every your shekel. They thanked and left important . Because they were not originally going to pay taxes. And how will they pay taxes if the power there belongs to several clans ?! Hence, they must collect money from their own family members. Why, if they already get everything they want? When in the autumn of 2000 they staged a bacchanal of violence, and police killed 13 raging demonstrators,Barak promised them 4,600 shekels as compensation. For what? For the fact that they paralyzed their actions half the country? Is this not absurd?I believe that the law on loyalty is necessary: you can not be a citizen of the country that contains you, and at the same time support its enemies.
- How likely, from your point of view, is the West's realization of the threat emanating from Islam?
- I'm not too optimistic. Socialist, liberal ideology has reached the limit of its absurdity. Political correctness is its product, linking the hands of the West. Obama is the embodiment of this worldview, he is the first anti-American president of America.
"He is supported by 80 percent of American Jews ...
" Jews have a guilt complex before blacks, before the Third World, before all the "oppressed ." As for Obama and his entourage, it's hard to say what they have more, hypocrisy or ignorance. He pretends that he does not know that Islam legitimizes slavery. During a speech in Cairo, he managed to actually compare the Holocaust and the situation in Gaza. This was recently unthinkable for an American statesman .
As for Europe, its peoples have lost their national identity, and it is the basis of national survival. In the EU, identity cards have been abolished, Europeans have been deprived of their roots, and Muslims impose their own standards of life on them. In one Germany there are 4800 mosques! According to experts, if current trends continue, in 25-30 years Europe will become Islamic.
- What are your forecasts for Russia ?
- Not too bright. The problem here is not in the absence of national consciousness, but in demography. Russia never recovered from losses during the years of war, repression and Stalin's camps, when tens of millions of young men were destroyed , the color of the nation.
- You said that almost all the concessions were made right. Does this mean that there is actually no right camp in Israel?
- Theoretically, there are right-wingers in Israel, but in reality they sing to the tune of the left. This is an old phenomenon. Begin, despite the victory of "Likud" in 1977, went to negotiations only with the consent of Moshe Dayan. Although the right-wing coalition is in power today, the left is determining the political course. The tone is set by Barak . He is supported by the media, bohemians, leftist intellectuals , and behind them, in turn, is Europe. We have a stalemate: we left Gaza, where an openly hostile terrorist formation arose, and we continue to supply them with products and essential goods. We feed and treat terrorists who want to destroy us .At the same time, Europeans reject Lieberman's initiative to create his own economy and infrastructure in Gaza so that it does not depend on Israel. Europe has created an absurd situation, in which Israel, without being an occupier, continues to be it. We must abolish, denounce all agreements in Oslo, which henceforth do not oblige us to anything, since a hostile formation has been created in Gaza, and declare that by a certain date (so that no one can accuse us of inhumanity), for example, by May 2011 Year, the border with the sector will be completely closed . Let the Palestinians themselves, led by Hamas or the Europeans, build power stations, businesses, modern hospitals here ... The US strengthens the border with Mexico, although Mexican refugees do not pose any threat to US security .The tragedy is that ideology dictates politics in Israel. Although it should be the other way around: state interests should define ideology.
- Recent events show that Israel can cooperate with Arab countries .Egypt and Jordan, like Israel, are interested in weakening Hamas.
- Such cooperation is purely tactical. Egypt has signed many agreements in various fields, but are they being implemented today? Is there tourism from Egypt? Anyone wishing to visit Israel will be questioned why he is traveling to our country. The media tirelessly write that Israel is a fraudulent state, and the Jews themselves are liars and rascals. In the Cultural Center of Cairo, Hebrew is studied by officers of the Egyptian special services. At the book exhibition in Cairo, I saw the Torah and the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" lying side by side. "Mein Kampf" here is a bestseller. Scientists of Egypt call the "Protocols" a serious study and say that even if they are fictional, they contain plausible facts.
- To what extent is the fundamentalist Wahhabi Islam different from traditional Sunni Islam?
- In Islam there is no division into moderate and radical directions.Moderate Islam is an invention of the West . Islam was originally a fundamentalist teaching, based solely on the Quran and the sacred texts. By definition, there are no other versions . There are also Sufis - mystics, but they do not play a role in the definition of religious and political dogmas. If you want to draw a conclusion about the nature of religion, pay attention first of all to eschatological prophecies . According to Islamic doctrine, the Messiah (Mehdi) will not come until the Jews are killed, and Christians will not burn in hell. This is taught in schools, and not only Wahhabi. - Nevertheless, in the Middle Ages, Islam was tolerant of Jews. - Firstly, it is far from as tolerant as we are trying to imagine , and secondly, and this is the main thing, this tolerance was explained by the subordinate and humiliated position of both Jews and Christians. They were tolerated while they wanted to endure, no more and no less. - Do you think Israel should strike at Iran, while this country did not receive nuclear weapons at its disposal? " I am categorically against any military action against Iran." This will sharply worsen our situation, without changing the situation fundamentally . Bombing of nuclear facilities (even if it proves successful) will suspend the Iranian program for a year, but the political damage will be enormous. We will rally the Iranians and find ourselves in international isolation. The national pride of the Iranians will be hurt, and any cooperation with the opposition will be impossible. Of course, after the Americans leave Iraq, Iran will actually establish control over its neighbor, and there will be massacres in this country. But this does not concern us. The strategy should be expressed in the purposeful support of the opposition. However, Europeans are too indecisive, and Obama actually supported the ruling regime, not speaking in support of the opposition after the elections.Sanctions imposed against the regime are too limited and belated. By the way, do you know how "Obama" translates from Farsi? "O" means "he", "ba" - "c", "ma" - we. "He's with us" ...
