…Not only is the land for peace theory dangerous; it has little logic to recommend it, perhaps diplomatically, but not militarily. Giving away land for peace means exchanging strategic positions for a mere piece of paper. And it is legitimate to question how much that piece of paper is worth. For the Arabs, invoking that old bugaboo of moral relativity, have broken every treaty they have ever made with israel. They don’t appear to have nation building as a priority. And, for that matter, they also have a sorry record of keeping the agreements they have made among themselves. The current turbulence, upheavals did not arise in a vacuum.
Many times in their internal propaganda, the Arabs have said that their involvement in the peace process is part of a larger holy war to liberate Palestine. Anwar Sadat put it very directly when he explained to the Arabs why he visited Jerusalem: He told them he paid lip service to the concept of peace because he knew that in this way he could receive more from Israel than he could ever win in a war. Afterwards, he explained, once Egypt’s position was improved and Israel’s was weakened, he could wage war from a position of strength.
A look at the school textbooks and news media in Egypt- a country officially at peace with Israel- reflects whether or not the Arabs have taken the concept of peace seriously. Their press, government controlled, seethes day after day with anti-Israel editorials and anti-Semitic caricatures. At school, in their history classes, children are taught about the imperialist intent of the Zionist invaders. And every Friday, a message of hatred resounds from the mosques. And odd way to keep the flock united.
Benny Morris interview. (see link at end)…The objective is to expose the goals of the Palestinian national movement to extinguish the Jewish national project and to inherit all of Palestine for the Arabs and Islam.” …
… “The Zionist movement started out calling for the establishment of a Jewish state on all the territory of the Land of Israel, but from 1937 on, its leaders gradually abandoned the claim of ‘it’s all mine’ and adhered to the ambition to form a sovereign Jewish state in part of the territory of the Land of Israel. Thus it changed its approach and consented to territorial compromise: that is, to the idea of two states for two peoples, a decision that derived in part from the logic of dividing the land between the two peoples living in it.”
Hands resting on a wooden table, Morris cites venom-filled quotes from the Palestinian National Charter, the Fatah constitution and the Hamas charter. He asserts that, unlike the Zionists, since its inception the Palestinian national movement has never retreated from its demand to establish a single state in the disputed territory.
“The Palestinian national movement has remained unchanged, throughout the different periods of the struggle, whether under the leadership of Hajj Amin al-Husayni or his successor, Yasser Arafat,” says Morris with near-palpable disgust. “It did not even change during the years of the Oslo process. In the end, both sides of the Palestinian movement − the fundamentalists led by Hamas and the secular bloc led by Fatah − are interested in Muslim rule over all of Palestine, with no Jewish state and no partition.” …Read More:http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/magazine/benny-morris-on-why-he-s-written-his-last-word-on-the-israel-arab-conflict-1.465869