Managing Editor

In order to make decisions about the future, one must look to the past for guidance.

In determining whether or not Israel should adhere to a two-state solution in order to bring about peace, one must look back to World War II. It was then that the first traces of appeasement politics were brought forth in hopes of avoiding a World War and maintaining global peace. The British did not want to fight and stood by as the Germans took over Europe. They finally did step in, but it was almost too late.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Middle East is just a smaller scale version of this issue. If the Israeli government offers land as part of a two-state solution, they will be following the same path as the British did with Hitler and Neville

Chamberlain’s appeasement policies. As a result of British’s actions or lack thereof, Hitler almost fulfilled his Final Solution. Much like during World War II, appeasement will only prove to be a temporary patch to the conflict. The enemy will undoubtedly grow to become greedier and power hungry.

Just after Hitler came to power, he had his eyes set on invading the Rhineland. The Allied Powers, who had set the Rhineland as a post-war buffer zone in the Versailles Treaty, saw Hitler as dangerous. By 1938, most British politicians thought war with Germany was probably inevitable, but that for a few years at least Britain and her allies would not be ready to fight. Thus, they needed time to build up their military.  Some also thought it was still possible to smooth Hitler’s rough edges and bring him into the family of European nations.  The British had what seemed like a brilliant scheme to try to tame Hitler, but also win time to prepare for war; thus, appeasement.

Britain’s policy of appeasement seemed logical because they thought they would attract German interests to get them into the system rather than opposed to the system. Military

officials told British politicians, who actually thought war likely, that they wouldn’t be ready until 1943, so they had to buy time. At the same time, they also wanted to make sure they didn’t rush to an unwanted war like the First World War years before.  The policy did buy some time for Britain to prepare for war, but Britain took it too far and waited too long.

Most people misunderstand appeasement; most people who criticize appeasement don’t know what the real policy actually was. It would have worked if the leader of the opposing party was not aggressive or easily satisfied. Unfortunately for the British and her allies, Hitler proved to be one of the most aggressive leaders this world has ever seen and the policy of appeasement failed miserably. Unfortunately for Israel, the Palestinian leadership falls under the same category.

Hitler claimed he had an Otto Van Bismarck-like character; he undid the injustice of the Versailles Treaty, and worked to restore glory back to the German people.  But he was lying and fooling a great deal of people in the process.  He laid out a war plan to his generals as early as 1935 and brought forth a Final Solution to “the Jewish question” soon thereafter. Similar to the Middle East conflict, the Palestinians may say that they will be peaceful if a two-state solution is brought forth, but Israel does not know what their true intentions are. It is safe to predict that they will continue their violence until they hold the entire state of Israel.

The Israeli government should study the striking parallels between the present day and World War II if they want to make the right decision. If they do not want history to repeat itself than they should continue fighting against their Arab neighbors until peace is agreed upon. Unlike Britain, Israel does not have to wait to build up its military. They have proven that they can win wars and bring about peace through means of surrender. This peace agreement will likely result in a cold peace, as is the case with Egypt after the Six Day War, but it is peace nonetheless. Moreover, it is a peace that will not achieved through appeasement, a policy that will lead to more conflict down the road.

Respond to the above editorial by clicking here.

Please Note: The opinions in the above article are those of the writer and do not in any way reflect those of TeenSpeak Online.