Ianiv Lowy: Time To Deploy Ariel Sharon Tactics

An Op-Ed by Ianiv Lowy

Ianiv Lowy is an Israeli born Canadian citizen. He has a Masters degree in Government, Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security studies from the IDC in Herzliyah Israel. To contact him please send emails to ianivl3@gmail.com








When you speak with the average Israeli, they almost tend to go silent on the matter of who the last effective Prime Minister was in terms of Israel’s security and use of military resources. Perhaps it is because they live in the moment and for the moment, and Ariel Sharon is unfortunately infamously known as the Prime Minister that unilaterally withdrew all Israeli settlements and military positions from the Gaza Strip. This ultimately led to the situation today with Hamas ruling the enclave and if not launching themselves, allowing other terror groups in the strip to freely launch rockets into neighboring Israeli towns and cities. It would be easy to contest and say it wasn’t entirely Sharon’s doing for the situation today, considering how the Bush administration was so keen on seeing that their “road map to peace” plan go into effect and allow elections openly knowing Hamas wouldn’t play by the rules of democratic elections. That discussion can go on for ages and should be left for another day. The issue at stake is today’s situation, and how Israel should handle the recent spate of events unfolding including the recent kidnapping and murdering of three Israeli teens in Hebron as well as the continuous rocket barrage from Gaza. With that being said, no Prime Minister proved as effective as Ariel Sharon when it came to silencing the terrorists.



We tend to quickly forget who was almost single-handedly responsible for ending the 2nd Intifada and silencing the Palestinian terrorist groups. Before him both Benyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak faced early elections because they couldn’t handle the heat. Then came Ariel Sharon, and he put into effect immediate harsh measures. Those measures need to be put back on the table. Netanyahu needs to remember what Israel was like when it faced a serious threat greater than today with suicide bombers causing mass casualties. While the situation right now is a serious threat, it is on a fairly lower scale than what was during the 2nd Intifada and that plays to Israel’s advantage, because Netanyahu needs to just flex that same muscle and it would guarantee the silence he is requesting of Hamas. Amassing troops along the Gaza border and then going on public air to issue a warning and stating that Israel will meet silence with silence is only prolonging the inevitability of more rocket fire. This strategy might work for the next month, three months or even a year but it won’t solve anything. Before Netanyahu was elected Prime Minister for a 2nd time, he was an avid right-winger supporting Sharon’s tactics. Once in power though, he chose the path of diplomacy trying to improve Israel’s image in both the political and media arenas. It clearly makes no difference, anti-Israel advocates are for the most part anti-Semitics cloaked in sheep clothing, it’s something only Jewish people can understand and identify with because it’s been the same old story since the beginning of time and even he knows it. Therefore, let’s show what Israel is made of again because we know we can and we know we do not have to answer to anyone when it comes to the safety and well-being of the country we fight so hard for day in and day out. Let’s go back to Ariel Sharon’s tactics that is, targeted killings of any and all terrorists, home demolition of terrorists, night curfews and arrests, and creating a buffer zone.

We need to start by showing that if you like to target civilians just because they hold Israeli passports, then you will be targeted for assassination. Any and all Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, and other terrorist group members must be made accountable, whether high ranking for allowing it to happen or if driving a car on the way to a mortar shell launch. They must all be made fresh targets. Ariel Sharon did this so effectively to the point where all PA and Hamas administrative members were dressing up in costumes and women’s clothing and driving in unmarked cars for fear of their life. This strategy must be put back in place. Forget the media, forget the backlash, this is about Israel’s right to a quiet and peaceful life.



Whether by targeted killing, arrest, or just knowing the involvement of a terrorist in any operation or attempt to operate against Israel and Israelis, their homes must be demolished. Ariel Sharon had no problem demolishing anyone involved in attacking Israel during the 2nd Intifada, especially those of terrorists who had succeeded in attacking or bombing Israel. Once Ehud Olmert came into power, he allowed this issue to become a matter for the courts where they placed serious restrictions on the ability for the IDF to continue demolishing homes. However, let’s face the facts, Ariel Sharon faced a lot of opposition abroad and from the courts during the execution of this plan but once it started bringing positive results, everyone went silent. It needs to be put back on the table and back into action, without a place to sleep these terrorists will be exposed and their families punished for raising casual murderers with no human remorse.

Perhaps one of the most effective of Sharon’s policies was the fact that once 8 or 9pm came around, no one was allowed to leave their homes in both the West Bank and Gaza. Anyone who did was asking for questioning or an arrest or was out for the purpose of attacking the IDF. That helps filter some of the perpetrators and allows the military to strategically deploy across the territories so that they can search houses, buildings, etc. for weapons and for terrorists. Human rights activists can cry wolf all day long but the fact of the matter is, if you want to start rounding up all the ammunition that these terrorists are hiding in their homes, their schools, their mosques and their businesses there is arguably no better way than to have them all stay out of the army’s way while the searches and questioning are conducted. It proved quite effective back then and I see no reason why it wouldn’t right now.

Some might contest that creating a buffer zone means re-occupying parts of the Gaza Strip. While the West Bank has security zones and checkpoints in place, Gaza terrorists are free to roam awfully close to the fence and launch rockets into Sderot or Ashdod and other neighboring Israeli cities. This needs to stop. Using military resources to create trenches, protective zones, guarding posts, etc. the IDF can effectively make life for rocket launching terrorists that much harder if not impossible without being caught in the act or before the act. It would definitely expose them much quicker and make it that much harder for them to strike at any Israeli town or city. Even after the 2nd Intifada and up until the unilateral withdrawal, the IDF buffer zone made it near impossible for terrorists to get close to Israel. It doesn’t have to be permanent, it just needs to be there long enough until all the terror groups in the strip understand that the fun is over for them and they either shape up or shift out.



The best part about deploying all those tactics is that Netanyahu can still go and play the diplomatic game. Truth be told, whether some nations or most nations condemn the actions, they were all so quick on the trigger to condemn the killing of an Arab teen in Jerusalem without even knowing if it was a revenge killing but some of them, including President Obama and his foreign secretary John Kerry, took days to condemn the kidnapping of the three Israeli teens. Netanyahu had to personally call EU President Ashton and implore her to make a public condemnation about the kidnappings otherwise she never would have. So if the world doesn’t care and in fact doesn’t even put in a single effort to help and protect the one democracy in the middle east, the only one that is keeping the region afloat not just with security but economically, then why should Israel care what they think anymore? The answer is that Israel shouldn’t, not until it can live peacefully and freely, and only then should Israel be open for any suggestions from outsiders with little or no concept or understanding of the region with which Israel resides in.

Ianiv Lowy: Exploring The Core Issues Of Islamic Roots

An Op-Ed by Ianiv Lowy

Ianiv Lowy is an Israeli born Canadian citizen. He has a Masters degree in Government, Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security studies from the IDC in Herzliyah Israel. To contact him please send emails to ianivl3@gmail.com

It’s funny to think that I was planning to write this article two weeks prior to the Boston Marathon bombing. It was something that I had been evaluating, researching and for the most part just simply thinking about for months; and that is why is it that when Muslim children and young adults in the 21st century decide they want to explore their roots they end up flying half way across the world to their home town whether it be it Bahrain, or Saudi Arabia, Chechnya or anywhere else in the Middle East, Gulf region, Caucus region, Indonesia, Malaysia, etc. the list goes on where there are large Arab and/or Muslim populations and then they come home all radicalized? Is it supposed to mean that what they are discovering is that Islam at its ancient, historical and modern cores is defined as grassroots evil, violent and destructive? Truth be told, no religion in the world was formed on the basis of evil or violence or murder or death. They were formed as a means to find peace and to live among others in civilized peace. Islam is no exception, however, it definitely has been lost in translation and its followers are all over the place making their own interpretations, and making their own assumptions with no unity but also no one to blame but themselves, a responsibility they have yet to mature up to.



I’m Jewish and I was born in Israel. I lived in Israel the previous 6 years of my life before moving back to North America. A healthy chunk of the reason I moved back was to rediscover my roots. It certainly wasn't the intentional part, in fact when I first decided to move it was because I was simply adventurous and young and felt like Israel would be a great place for many things like partying and having fun, beaches, great weather, warm people, great food, it’s a better gateway than Canada is to travel to other parts of the world, and so forth. Unknowingly, I was discovering my roots, I learned all about my peoples’ history, my country’s history, the culture, improved on my Hebrew, I even ended up with 2 degrees from Israeli universities. When I discovered my roots, I didn't become radicalized. Yes at times I had true anger and rage towards our Arab and Muslim neighbors, towards the Palestinians, etc. but I wasn't ready to sneak into their marketplaces, schools and busy intersections to go blow myself up and cause mass casualty and havoc. Judaism doesn't have one mention of that, and it’s safe to say all Jews know that. I feel it would also be safe to say that although Catholicism led to the Holy Wars, it was still war fought between militaries and armies, they never averted to terrorism based on causing maximum destruction and civilian causalities. I don’t believe Catholic or Christian churches preach that anywhere. Unfortunately I am not attuned with the Koran but it would be my educated guess to say that it doesn't mention killing yourself to inflict maximum causalities on others who aren't Muslim; it doesn't say make bombs and kill people who live differently than you. It does however; seem to be the only religion with such a conflict of interest that it became such a touchy subject for us all. Jihad has 5 pillars, none of which suggest violence and suicide are the solution. These days though, you might go and ask one Somali cab driver who agrees with you, the next one who will want to change the subject, and the third one who might actually have the nerve to argue with you meaning you might be talking to someone who is on the verge of being radicalized. Then they wonder why Islamophobia exists.



Islam in that sense is a very fragile religion. One man interprets it how he wishes based on the mosque he goes to. That mosque is based on the Imam who is then based on his fundraisers; it’s similar to the way government is structured and other religions. Unfortunately for Islam though, when your roots are located in countries with totalitarian dictatorships that prevent practically any and all forms of modern education, then you will go back to where you were born to discover that you do not have just 3 cab drivers with different explanations and beliefs but more like 3 million different views. Typically what we have been seeing is homegrown terrorists are kids and young adults who are for lack of a better word losers, outsiders with little to no friends, probably bullied and made fun of for all we know because of who they are. They seem to have failed to assimilate into the western world, or at least believe they have. At that point when they return home to find their roots, they practically go out looking for the preachers with the radical viewpoints because it brings them a sense of belonging, of family, of honor and of trust that no one else is giving them. They are fragile and a perfect score for the extremists. Does this mean bad parenting? Partially yes, and the other part I would say is due to the fact that there are still mosques even in Canada and USA that have these Imams preaching this madness, and just like all Jews know about what’s going on their communities, and just like all Catholics and Christians know it too, it alarms me how much people of the Muslim communities seem to keep a mum on it.

In Judaism the last thing we could afford is to be reigned in on because we didn't pay attention to our own children in our own backyards, schools, and synagogues only to find out they laced a backpack full of C4 & TNT and blew up a public building. It would be a complete shame, completely against the religion. It would then make all the anti-Semites and biased activists point the finger at Israel. Most other religions would agree that it is completely against the book. When it comes to Islam however, somehow they keep getting away with these hall passes. They don’t have to explain much except that they are shocked and appalled like everyone else. No one seems to be demanding that they reign in on their own people, since they know and understand them the most. The Muslim communities of the West have to clamp down on the bullshit (pardon my French) that lurks through their streets. I find it extremely hard to believe they don’t know about it. That they don’t know which mosque is preaching what, to whom and by who is to me a whole load of nonsense and blatant ignorance. Why is it that everyone else is urged to do so but they don’t seem to want to tackle the elephant in their room? It’s because the governments of the West want to believe that affirmative action prevails over logical evaluation. They fear upsetting the Muslim communities, making them feel left out; making them feel like assimilation isn't working. The irony here is that they only fear this because it will lead to radicalism. So they make it a taboo to speak about and leave them be. What they seem to fail to comprehend, most likely on purpose, is that these people came from 3rd world dictatorships that prevented them from proper educations, which feeds them lies and teaches them hate. They ran away as fast as they could from those countries, so they should feel privileged to live in the West. They should be thanking our countries for taking them in and should therefore respect all ways of life and laws within the lands in which they now subside. We shouldn't be paying them lip service and treading on thin water to please them, it should be the complete opposite. Otherwise the policy should always be an open door; if you don’t like it here please feel free to go back to the radical Islamic nation state you came from. Take for example what happened in Denmark when the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed were drawn. What gives you the right to start smashing in windows, lighting stores and streets on fire and chanting death to America and hunting the cartoonist down so you can slaughter him? If you don’t like the freedom of expression and freedom of speech with which Denmark has provided you then please there is the door, go back to Saudi Arabia where no such freedoms exist.



I am not preaching violence nor am I preaching retaliation at the very least. What I am preaching is that the Muslim communities must do a lot more than what they currently are to rid the radical elements that exists within their own people, and that western governments must not only help them to do so but must put extreme pressure on them to do so. They need to recall why they ran away from the tough and usually treacherous life they once had in the Gulf or Middle East or whichever 3rd world dictatorship and be extremely appreciative and ready to help and make change in their new 1st world lifestyle, otherwise they will never truly be a part of the educated world and Al Qaeda will never cease to exist.

(BLOG) Op-Ed: Exploring The Core Issues Of Islamic Roots http://t.co/yvORiFHbl4
— Israel Muse (@israelmuse) April 22, 2013

Ianiv Lowy: The Return Of Gilad Shalit And The Bigger Picture

A Strategic Review by Ianiv Lowy

Ianiv Lowy is an Israeli born Canadian citizen. He has a Masters degree in Government, Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security studies from the IDC in Herzliyah Israel. To contact him please send emails to ianivl3@gmail.com

It cannot be denied that Gilad Shalit’s return to Israel, to his home, and to his family and friends is a joyous occasion for the entire nation, even for those of who opposed it; one of Israel’s own has returned to freedom from the grasp of enemy hands. The Netanyahu government paid the heaviest price yet in Israel’s history for the release of an Israeli soldier. It is therefore easy to argue that Israel showed its flexibility but more so that hostage taking is a profitable market for Arabs and Hamas might just as well be preparing for the next kidnapping as a result. However, many fail to realize the strategic timing as well as the political realm that might just come to life because of this moment.



In the United States, two outstanding events took place before and after the announcement that Israel struck a deal with Hamas to return Shalit home. Firstly, the US had extracted information from an Iranian captive that the Iranian government planned and was directly involved in an assassination attempt on the Saudia Arabian ambassador to the US as well as the bombing of Saudi and Israeli embassies in Argentina and abroad. Secondly, Hilary Clinton had visited Libya the day of Gilad Shalit’s release, citing the most senior US official yet to visit and acknowledge the Libyan Transitional Council as the new leader of Libya. What this means in the bigger picture is that the US is slowly tightening the noose on Iran and separating it from influencing Libya’s outcome but more importantly loosening its grip on its proxies, beginning with Hamas.

With the reality on the ground in Syria, Hamas no longer has a safe haven in Syria. Damascus is slowly sliding into civil war. The Syrian government shelled out billions in their attempt to squash the resistance, leaving them next to bankruptcy. The sanctions the EU and US have placed on their central banks forces them down to their last lifeline, Iranian bank loans but that can also last only so long. Furthermore, Hamas went against Iranian wishes when they opposed Syria’s crackdown on its civilians. This means Hamas needs a new home. When they originally approached Egypt, they were flatly denied. Now with the Shalit deal in place, the US and Egypt permitted Hamas delegations as part of the deal to begin setting up a new political base in Egypt. Lest we not forget, Hamas is the birth child of the Muslim Brotherhood, already headquartered in Egypt. Therefore, the real deal is that the US realizes that their support in the Arab Spring allowed the Muslim Brotherhood, a very influential force in the so-called Arab Spring to resurface. They cannot turn back on their support for the ‘people and civilians’ so the best solution is to get the Brotherhood on their side. After all, the Muslim Brotherhood is a political movement; enough financial, economic and strategic incentive can change their constitutional beliefs in one day (although it will take a much longer dedication to complete that task successfully with the Muslim Brotherhood).



The PA may have isolated themselves more than Israel ever could with their attempt to launch a unilateral bid for statehood. The only thing that can reverse that now is a Palestinian unity deal not just in words but in writing and in action. If that doesn’t happen Hamas may just stay on course to open a secret diplomatic and strategic channel with the West and that means they will privately stop their charter of assault on Israel. This is swaying Hamas away from the grip and dependence on Iran. This also continues to show the true face of Russia and China, whom of which vetoed crucial sanctions on Syria only because they sell weapons and armament to the Syrian government. The United States representative used the harshest words yet to explain this, with Russia replying that the US is trying to inch closer to Iran with every move; as if that is a wrong strategy considering Iran’s publicly openly violent rhetoric on the West and it’s calls for Israel’s destruction.

Ultimately Israel stands to gain from this because the Muslim Brotherhood may well just be the strongest political power involved in the Arab Spring and if the US and the EU can tone their hatred rhetoric of Israel down and instead open up political and strategic channels with them, it will give some peace of mind to Israel that the Arab Spring won’t turn into a cold winter for them. The Shalit deal cleared a lot of political turmoil and speculation on Israel that it was isolating itself, and Netanyahu respectably checked off one if the not the most crucial “to-do’s” on his list as PM. Now Israel can focus on the political turmoil surrounding its borders and more effectively work indirectly with Hamas to shrink the importance of the PA's statehood bid. After all, the PA statehood bid may be the direct reason as to the timing of Shalit’s release, and may just have been the light at the end of the tunnel that sealed the deal for his release. This could very well signal a turning point with Hamas but more so it may just have marked the first crucial steps in weakening Iran’s influence in the region.

Ianiv Lowy: Palestinian Statehood, An Israeli Invention – A Result Of Democratic Rule And Tolerance

A Strategic Review by Ianiv Lowy

Ianiv Lowy is an Israeli born Canadian citizen. He has a Masters degree in Government, Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security studies from the IDC in Herzliyah Israel. To contact him please send emails to ianivl3@gmail.com

By now, most of us are well aware of the recent Palestinian unity deal between rival factions Hamas and Fatah and the subsequent bid to render a Palestinian state by approaching the UN for approval. The PA’s Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad had sought to sidestep the pressure placed upon them and their administration from the US as well as the Mideast Quartet in reviving peace negotiations with Israel because ultimately hard and bold concessions would have to be made. Hence, the best alternative was to concede to a fellow Palestinian faction, better to concede to people of your own roots rather than the Jewish state right (considering a final peace status would most likely result in recognizing Israel as the Jewish State)? Yet again however, the Palestinian Authority took steps that were too myopic, not considering in the context of things the possible far-run effects that are just now unfolding.



For instance, Prime Minister Fayyad was forced to release a public statement on 03 July 2011, explaining that government employees will only be receiving half their salaries because “international donors were not making good on their pledges”. These international donors consist of fellow Arab nations as well as European nations. However, with the EU’s economic distress looking more and more dim as well as the ‘Arab Spring’ that is forcing Arab nations to recede outsource funding until they solve their own domestic issues, the PA now all of a sudden looks towards their popular Western sources, aka the United States, to bail them out of this new hole. What do we see all of a sudden? The PA knows the US will bail them out but only if they drop their UN bid for statehood. So, they laid down a couple of the usual pre-texts, Israel should withdraw to ’67 borders and halt settlement construction; two issues of which can be discussed in negotiations anyway. But hey, it’s nothing new after all, the PA doesn’t want to be seen speaking to a right-wing government no less than actually getting any closer to reaching a final status deal. I mean, they’ve already sought to overture the Oslo Accords and everything the PA, Israel, the US and the Mideast Quartet worked for up until this point since the early 90’s by heading to the UN for statehood and avoiding contact with Israel at all costs. Well that is a new approach, but what isn’t new is the PA’s lack of appreciation or understanding of how far they have come, since 1967 in terms of just the mere freedom to take such an approach, they could only thank Israel if they did.

Sure, Mahmoud Abbas does not want to be seen as the man who spoke with hard-lined right winger Netanyahu far less than he wants to be put down in the history books as “betraying” his people by agreeing to peace with a right wing Israeli government. Lest we forget that it was a right-wing government that got Egypt to the negotiating table and ultimately signed a peace treaty with them. We also can’t forget that it was also a right-wing former military man and politician, Yitzhak Rabin, that during his tenure as Minister of Defense for the Israeli right-wing Likud party (during the 1st intifada), he laid the ground work for the Israel-Jordan peace treaty, before leaving to head the left-wing Labor party (which won the next national elections and placed him as Prime Minister) and once in place as leader of the Israeli state, finalized the treaty with his Jordanian counterparts. Nonetheless, it’s not about being scared to lose your life like Anwar El Sadat or the fear of domestic assassination like Yitzhak Rabin, it’s more so just the lack of appreciation or mere understanding that thanks to Israel’s annexation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967, the Palestinian people no longer had to live oppressed, in fear and under strict confines to survive like they did under Egypt’s rule of the Gaza Strip or Jordan’s rule of the West Bank.

Egypt placed military rule over the Gaza Strip from 1957 to 1967. During that tenure, the Palestinians were truly refugees. They were not absorbed as Egyptians nor given any sort of landed immigrant or citizenship status. A constitution was drawn up that gave the Egyptian military commanders full discretion on Gaza. “There were no elections. A puppet government automatically ratified all legislation that the governor brought before it. In 1965, even this façade of local autonomy collapsed when the Egyptian army dismissed the legislature.” Strict curfews were placed, in which no one was allowed outside their homes after 9pm until dawn or they would risk death. Other oppressive techniques were used such as the enforcement of secret police, leaving practically anyone vulnerable to sudden questioning, detainment or imprisonment. Due to their refugee status, most Palestinians were refused salaries or work, were barred from owning land and thousands of young Gaza residents were forced to conscribe to the Egyptian army.



It can only lead one to imagine what kind of intifada or revolution would need to take place to fight for sovereignty against the Egyptian military rule. How many deaths would be required? How many families would be lost? Would it look anything like the revolts happening now in Libya, Syria or Iran? However, before you can even get to those questions, one would need to ask if it would even be possible to speak up and have the freedom of expression, the freedom to gather in groups and march towards Egypt in demand of autonomy or sovereignty, the way they were allowed to do so under Israel’s occupation. Clearly, it’s a possibility the Palestinians only saw a light to after Israel took them over. Israel, the single democratic state in the region, permitted them to assemble their own rule and governance and to take the steps needed so that they no longer have to rely on Israel. Ariel Sharon, considered one of Israel’s strongest hard line right-winger leaders took a bold move in implementing, the first step in the late George W. Bush’s 2003 Road Map plan, and unilaterally at that, to secede from the Gaza Strip. In return, all Israel received was an Iranian-Syrian-Hezbollah proxy neighbor known as Hamas. But Israel’s intentions since 1967 had consistently been to give the Palestinians autonomy and sovereignty; they were lands acquired as a result of war and were not in Israel’s grand scheme of things except to be used diplomatically as bargaining chips to end hostilities with its neighbors. With regards to Jerusalem, it was ruled firstly by the British, then by Jordan which voided UN Resolution 181 that was to ensure Jerusalem be an international city, while also barring any Israelis from entering it hence violating the Armistice agreement that ended the Independence day War in 1949, and then finally Israel; any legal claims to the city by today’s Palestinians is merely a far cry from reality. Regardless, Egypt was more than happy to give up the Gaza Strip to Israel, they no longer had to place military rule over it and the Palestinians were even more ecstatic, they were no longer ruled by dictatorship. They could now return to ‘normal’ civil life without fear.

Observing occupation under Jordan, while not nearly as oppressive, was still futile. Unlike any of the other Arab nations that absorbed the Palestinian refugees (up until today), Jordan was the only one to give them citizenship. However, they still lived in refugee camps and depended almost entirely on UNRWA assistance for survival. UNRWA reported in 1956: "One of the obstacles to the achievement of the General Assembly's goal of making the refugees self-supporting continues to be the opposition of the governments in the area." Sir Alexander Galloway, a UNRWA official who quit in frustration, observed bitterly: "The Arab states don't want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders don't give a damn whether the refugees live or die." So of course, with knowledge of that, Jordan was more than prepared to give up the West Bank.

What happened as a result of Israel’s annexation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967? The development of roads, towns, cities and state institutions that today has allowed the PA to qualify for a statehood bid with the UN. If only the PA could realize that the reality in which they reside in today and the capacity for statehood that they have built for themselves is a result of being “occupied” by the only democratic state in the region and not their fellow Arabic theocracies and dictatorships, then maybe, just maybe, they would be approaching Israel with unilateral concessions with an open handshake for peace and not the other way around. Perhaps then we could finally lay to rest the popular expression/belief that if you give the Palestinians a hand they will want the whole arm. Israel has done a lot more for their cause whether directly or indirectly than any other nation or state in the region, arguably more than the Palestinians themselves and recognition of that could also lead the PA government to the end of hostilities, fears and mistrusts with Israel.

Ianiv Lowy is an Israeli born Canadian citizen. He has a Masters degree in Government, Counter-Terrorism and Homeland Security studies from the IDC in Herzliyah Israel. To contact him please send emails to ianivl3@gmail.com