Points 1-3 make sense, but Arab "outrage" is not a significant factor
Reader comment on item: "Transfer" the Palestinians? Reasons Against

Submitted by Aaron (United States), Feb 26, 2009 at 19:04

I understand points #1-3, but I don't really get #4. Arabs/Muslims certainly would be "inflamed" by any sort of transfer program, but the extent and significance of their outrage would really depend more on Israel's attitude than on anything else. A decisive Israeli move, possibly in the context of a military confrontation, would likely leave Arabs resigned to their fate of having "lost again" to the hated Zionists.

A vacillating or hesitant Israeli expulsion event (ca. Yitzhak Rabin's unexpectedly temporary expulsion of Hamas agents to Lebanon) would simply encourage jihadists, rabble rousers and the local potentates to prepare for the next round to win more 'Jewish-occupied land'.

Anyway, Arabs and Muslims tend to be outraged by any Israeli military or counterterrorism success. While points #1-3 are certainly valid, I don't see Arab outrage in the event of a Palestinian "transfer" being any greater cause for concern than the regularly scheduled Arab rage against the Jews.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the Guidelines for Comments. For informational purposes, we identify countries from which comments are sent.

Daniel Pipes replies:

You imply that hostility to Israel could not increase, which is obviously wrong. Plus, you ignore the body of Palestinians who accept Israel, on which see my article, "'The Hell of Israel Is Better than the Paradise of Arafat'" and related writings.