The Historic Mission of Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu
By Edward Topol
In my previous article, “Who Will Fight Global Antisemitic Propaganda?”, I proposed that, at their meeting in Mar-a-Lago, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu develop a joint program to combat the international antisemitism plaguing our planet. First, they should implement Charlie Kirk’s proposal to create the Israel Truth Network (ITN) or, better yet, a World Jewish Broadcasting Co (WJBC). This multilingual internet broadcasting corporation could quickly and effectively use AI and the talent of its young employees to refute any antisemitic and anti-Israeli slander and inform the world about the realities of Israel and the Middle East. After that, it would be good to create, following the example of Klondike, a digital State of Israel on the internet with its own president, currency, citizenship, tourist service, and criminal code.
I cited Charlie Kirk, realizing that without his authority, it’s unlikely anyone in the White House would listen to my proposal.
Since we’re now discussing an even broader program, I would like to present the names of five authorities in support of my proposal: Henry M. Jackson and Paul Dominique Laxalt, both former U.S. senators; George Shultz, former U.S. Secretary of State; Yitzhak Rabin, former Israeli prime minister; and Benjamin Netanyahu, the current Israeli prime minister and captain of the Israeli special forces.
In 1987, Yitzhak Rabin argued at international conferences that the world faced three types of war: nuclear, conventional, and international terrorism. He claimed that terrorism was relatively inexpensive and highly effective at spreading fear and terror. For many people around the world, fear of terrorism had become a normal way of life. Therefore, Rabin proposed that the response to international terrorism must be international. Without an international center to direct and coordinate the fight against terrorism, real progress would be impossible. This center should operate in four main areas. First, intelligence gathering and counterintelligence. Second is protecting energy networks and transportation routes. Third, it should conduct military operations in emergency situations. Fourth is political action against states that initiate and support terrorism. Rabin argued that the mere existence of such a center would deter the growth of international terrorism, not to mention its effectiveness in suppressing and punishing terrorism.
Building on Rabin’s idea, Paul Laxalt wrote that the International Center for Combating Terrorism should be an effective and strong body, like NATO, not an amorphous one like the UN. Since terrorists infiltrate and spread through countries like parasites, devouring their hosts, collective cooperation among governments is necessary to expel them. This cooperation must be formalized into a law signed by all countries.
George Shultz, while serving as U.S. Secretary of State during the Reagan administration, was a prominent advocate for an active approach to counterterrorism that went beyond passive defense to include preemption, retaliation, and the use of military force. We should not rule out preemptive attacks on terrorists before they attack us, Shultz argued. And we should not apologize for this. If we learn that Iraq or Libya has acquired nuclear weapons, for example, should we wait for them to use them? If we learn that a group of terrorists is about to shoot down a passenger plane, should we wait until they fire? No, we have the right to defend ourselves before such an act of mass murder occurs. We must make it clear to terrorists that they will be found and punished, as will the countries that support them. By closing their embassies and offices, we could cut off their diplomatic and economic relations with the West. The future of democracy demands the elimination of international terrorism, Shultz asserted.
International terrorism is a modern form of warfare against liberal democracies, declared Senator Henry M. Jackson. The idea that someone is either a ‘terrorist’ or a ‘freedom fighter’ cannot be accepted by society. Freedom fighters and revolutionaries don’t hijack buses full of civilians; terrorists do that. Freedom fighters and revolutionaries don’t seize and detain schoolchildren; terrorists do that. Freedom fighters don’t take planes full of citizens, women, and children hostage; terrorists do. It’s a shame that democracy continues to associate the word ‘freedom’ with terrorism!
Benjamin Netanyahu, in his books International Terrorism: Challenge and Response (1981) and Terrorism: How the West Can Win (1986), proposed not only military sanctions and an economic blockade, but also a ban on the use of air routes, airfields, and seaports in civilized countries by countries that sponsor terrorism. He also welcomed the idea of creating a unified International Center for Combating Terrorism. Rather than waiting for the next crisis or terrorist attack, governments should prepare plans and military forces for immediate action in emergency situations. These forces should train together, learn about each other’s bases and means of transportation, develop uniform methods of communication and cooperation, and study each other’s military equipment. Under no circumstances should governments rule out a military response to terrorist actions, even if there may be innocent civilian casualties on the other side. Fearing such casualties would make waging war on terrorism viable only in the skies over Antarctica. Responsible governments are indeed concerned about minimizing civilian casualties during military operations. However, they cannot grant immunity to an aggressor simply because they are hiding behind civilians. It would be a tragic mistake to give terrorists reason to believe that there are any circumstances under which they are immune from retaliatory military action.
Netanyahu also proposed that civilized countries develop a unified anti-terrorism doctrine. This doctrine would facilitate the creation of a unified Center for Combating Terrorism. Conversely, the creation of such a center would facilitate the development of the doctrine.
This was said almost forty years ago. As we know, an international center for combating terrorism was not created forty, thirty, or even ten years ago. Isn’t this why Islamic terrorism has grown so unchecked that the British and Germans are afraid to fly their flags on their homes and Christians are canceling holidays?
As they say, еeverything new is soon forgotten. I don’t claim to have originated the idea of creating the International Counter-Terrorism Center (ICTC); I simply remind the Israeli Prime Minister of the urgent need to present his ideas to President Donald Trump. The ICTC would be effective in fighting terrorist organizations such as ISIS, Hezbollah, the Yemeni Houthis, Al-Qaeda, Al-Jihad, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Muslim Brotherhood, and, of course, Hamas. (Oh, how we missed the ICTC on October 7, 2013!)
As for lone wolf terrorists, they can also be addressed through the law of collective responsibility. In the event of an individual or group terrorist attack, such as the recent one in Australia, not only would the terrorist’s families and close relatives be deported from the country, but also another hundred or two hundred neighboring tribesmen. I assure you that, after two or three such decisive government actions, ethnic communities themselves will block individual terrorist attacks!
However, it is not my place as a writer to dictate joint action plans to presidents to save our civilization. My job is to urge them to fulfill their historical missions and remind them of their capabilities.
—
Книги Эдуарда Тополя «Кремль уголовный», «Сквозной удар», «Влюбленный Бисмарк», «Японцы в Сибири, трогательные повести» и «Однажды в России, в США и в Израиле» можно заказать в
Серия «Книги Эдуарда Тополя» – BAbook и ISIA
Автор статьиЭдуард Тополь Писатель и публицистЭдуард Тополь – писатель, сценарист, продюсер, кинодраматург, публицист. Его романы переведены на множество иностранных языков.
By Edward Topol
In my previous article, “Who Will Fight Global Antisemitic Propaganda?”, I proposed that, at their meeting in Mar-a-Lago, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu develop a joint program to combat the international antisemitism plaguing our planet. First, they should implement Charlie Kirk’s proposal to create the Israel Truth Network (ITN) or, better yet, a World Jewish Broadcasting Co (WJBC). This multilingual internet broadcasting corporation could quickly and effectively use AI and the talent of its young employees to refute any antisemitic and anti-Israeli slander and inform the world about the realities of Israel and the Middle East. After that, it would be good to create, following the example of Klondike, a digital State of Israel on the internet with its own president, currency, citizenship, tourist service, and criminal code.
I cited Charlie Kirk, realizing that without his authority, it’s unlikely anyone in the White House would listen to my proposal.
Since we’re now discussing an even broader program, I would like to present the names of five authorities in support of my proposal: Henry M. Jackson and Paul Dominique Laxalt, both former U.S. senators; George Shultz, former U.S. Secretary of State; Yitzhak Rabin, former Israeli prime minister; and Benjamin Netanyahu, the current Israeli prime minister and captain of the Israeli special forces.
In 1987, Yitzhak Rabin argued at international conferences that the world faced three types of war: nuclear, conventional, and international terrorism. He claimed that terrorism was relatively inexpensive and highly effective at spreading fear and terror. For many people around the world, fear of terrorism had become a normal way of life. Therefore, Rabin proposed that the response to international terrorism must be international. Without an international center to direct and coordinate the fight against terrorism, real progress would be impossible. This center should operate in four main areas. First, intelligence gathering and counterintelligence. Second is protecting energy networks and transportation routes. Third, it should conduct military operations in emergency situations. Fourth is political action against states that initiate and support terrorism. Rabin argued that the mere existence of such a center would deter the growth of international terrorism, not to mention its effectiveness in suppressing and punishing terrorism.
Building on Rabin’s idea, Paul Laxalt wrote that the International Center for Combating Terrorism should be an effective and strong body, like NATO, not an amorphous one like the UN. Since terrorists infiltrate and spread through countries like parasites, devouring their hosts, collective cooperation among governments is necessary to expel them. This cooperation must be formalized into a law signed by all countries.
George Shultz, while serving as U.S. Secretary of State during the Reagan administration, was a prominent advocate for an active approach to counterterrorism that went beyond passive defense to include preemption, retaliation, and the use of military force. We should not rule out preemptive attacks on terrorists before they attack us, Shultz argued. And we should not apologize for this. If we learn that Iraq or Libya has acquired nuclear weapons, for example, should we wait for them to use them? If we learn that a group of terrorists is about to shoot down a passenger plane, should we wait until they fire? No, we have the right to defend ourselves before such an act of mass murder occurs. We must make it clear to terrorists that they will be found and punished, as will the countries that support them. By closing their embassies and offices, we could cut off their diplomatic and economic relations with the West. The future of democracy demands the elimination of international terrorism, Shultz asserted.
International terrorism is a modern form of warfare against liberal democracies, declared Senator Henry M. Jackson. The idea that someone is either a ‘terrorist’ or a ‘freedom fighter’ cannot be accepted by society. Freedom fighters and revolutionaries don’t hijack buses full of civilians; terrorists do that. Freedom fighters and revolutionaries don’t seize and detain schoolchildren; terrorists do that. Freedom fighters don’t take planes full of citizens, women, and children hostage; terrorists do. It’s a shame that democracy continues to associate the word ‘freedom’ with terrorism!
Benjamin Netanyahu, in his books International Terrorism: Challenge and Response (1981) and Terrorism: How the West Can Win (1986), proposed not only military sanctions and an economic blockade, but also a ban on the use of air routes, airfields, and seaports in civilized countries by countries that sponsor terrorism. He also welcomed the idea of creating a unified International Center for Combating Terrorism. Rather than waiting for the next crisis or terrorist attack, governments should prepare plans and military forces for immediate action in emergency situations. These forces should train together, learn about each other’s bases and means of transportation, develop uniform methods of communication and cooperation, and study each other’s military equipment. Under no circumstances should governments rule out a military response to terrorist actions, even if there may be innocent civilian casualties on the other side. Fearing such casualties would make waging war on terrorism viable only in the skies over Antarctica. Responsible governments are indeed concerned about minimizing civilian casualties during military operations. However, they cannot grant immunity to an aggressor simply because they are hiding behind civilians. It would be a tragic mistake to give terrorists reason to believe that there are any circumstances under which they are immune from retaliatory military action.
Netanyahu also proposed that civilized countries develop a unified anti-terrorism doctrine. This doctrine would facilitate the creation of a unified Center for Combating Terrorism. Conversely, the creation of such a center would facilitate the development of the doctrine.
This was said almost forty years ago. As we know, an international center for combating terrorism was not created forty, thirty, or even ten years ago. Isn’t this why Islamic terrorism has grown so unchecked that the British and Germans are afraid to fly their flags on their homes and Christians are canceling holidays?
As they say, еeverything new is soon forgotten. I don’t claim to have originated the idea of creating the International Counter-Terrorism Center (ICTC); I simply remind the Israeli Prime Minister of the urgent need to present his ideas to President Donald Trump. The ICTC would be effective in fighting terrorist organizations such as ISIS, Hezbollah, the Yemeni Houthis, Al-Qaeda, Al-Jihad, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Muslim Brotherhood, and, of course, Hamas. (Oh, how we missed the ICTC on October 7, 2013!)
As for lone wolf terrorists, they can also be addressed through the law of collective responsibility. In the event of an individual or group terrorist attack, such as the recent one in Australia, not only would the terrorist’s families and close relatives be deported from the country, but also another hundred or two hundred neighboring tribesmen. I assure you that, after two or three such decisive government actions, ethnic communities themselves will block individual terrorist attacks!
However, it is not my place as a writer to dictate joint action plans to presidents to save our civilization. My job is to urge them to fulfill their historical missions and remind them of their capabilities.
—
Книги Эдуарда Тополя «Кремль уголовный», «Сквозной удар», «Влюбленный Бисмарк», «Японцы в Сибири, трогательные повести» и «Однажды в России, в США и в Израиле» можно заказать в
Серия «Книги Эдуарда Тополя» – BAbook и ISIA
Эдуард Тополь – писатель, сценарист, продюсер, кинодраматург, публицист. Его романы переведены на множество иностранных языков.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий