The Law of the Peace Process

by Caroline B. Glick
June 27, 2003 

This week, US Sen. Arlen Specter submitted a troubling request 
to the US Justice Department. Specter asked that the US attorney-
general request that Israel extradite convicted Hamas terrorist 
Hassan Salameh to stand trial in the US for the murder of three 
US citizens. 

Salameh was one of the commanders of Hamas at the time of his 
arrest in 1996. He was sentenced to some 50 consecutive life 
terms in prison for his direct involvement in the murder by 
suicide bombings and shooting attacks of scores of Israelis 
from 1994-1996. 

Given the steep sentence, why would Specter seek his extradition? 
Perhaps Specter is disturbed by what has become the state of the 
Israeli criminal justice system since 1993. For instance, 
Specter may be aware of the story of Nasser Abu H'meid. 

Abu H'meid is one of Fatah chief Marwan Barghouti's deputies. 
He was sentenced to seven consecutive life sentences plus 
50 years in prison last December. Abu H'meid was charged and 
found guilty of seven counts of murder and more than 100 charges 
of attempted murder. 

The thing about Abu H'meid is that in the early 1990s he was 
convicted of nine counts of terrorist murder and sentenced to 
nine consecutive life sentences, only to be released a few 
years later as a confidence-building measure for the PLO. 

Then again, maybe Specter is aware that that PLO bomber Ahmed 
Jbarra served but 27 years of his life sentence for the murder 
of 14 Israelis in the 1976. Because of his early release, 
Jbarra sat in prison for less than two years for every Jew he 
killed. Jbarra signed a form upon his release last month stating 
that he would not engage in hostile activities against Israel. 
And yet, the day he left prison he embraced PA chief and enemy 
of Israel Yasser Arafat, and days later accepted the position 
of Arafat's advisor. 

Then too, maybe it isn't the justified fear that Salameh may 
one day go free to murder again that motivated the senator to 
act. Maybe he doubts that being in an Israeli prison is 
sufficient to neutralize the threat emanating from hardened 
murderers like Salameh. After all, behind the entire story of 
Hamas's theatrical decision to take a short break from its 
genocidal program against the Jewish state stands Marwan 
Barghouti. 

Barghouti, who is currently standing trial for the murder of 
scores of Israelis, has orchestrated the negotiations with 
Hamas that are taking place simultaneously in three countries 
and the territories. He sent emissaries to Lebanon to meet 
with Hizbullah commanders to pressure them to work out a deal 
for a prisoner swap together with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. 
The deal would include his release from prison. Barghouti's 
emissaries, acting at his direction, have spoken with Egyptian 
intelligence officials as well as Hamas leader Khaled Mashal 
in Syria and Egypt. The fact that Barghouti is capable of 
arranging and coordinating this international operation from 
behind bars makes a mockery of the criminal justice system in 
the country. 

Of course, the source of the problem does not lie with the 
prisons or the courts. After sentencing Abu H'meid, the Jerusalem 
District Court justices made this point clear in publishing the 
following statement: "It should be pointed out that we are 
talking about someone who was previously sentenced to life 
terms and it seems that those punishments were not enough to 
deter him, and only by keeping him behind bars will he be 
prevented from carrying out criminal acts in the future." 

The point was directed not at the parole board but at the 
government. It was the government that decided to allow 
Abu H'meid and thousands of other terrorists to go free over 
the past decade. And it is the government that, to no small 
extent, bears responsibility for allowing them to murder again. 

Today we see that the hope engendered by the 1993 Oslo Accords 
and by George W. Bush's speech last year demanding Palestinian 
reform proved to be baseless. Mahmoud Abbas is a terrorist, 
and so his security chief, Muhammad Dahlan. Neither man has 
any intention of either ending terrorism or enacting reforms 
that would allow for political participation by Palestinians 
who oppose the PLO's aim to destroy Israel. 

On Thursday morning, Dahlan's "security" chief in Gaza, Rashid 
Abu Shabak, announced that his forces are willing to take 
security responsibility in Gaza. But Shabak himself is wanted 
for murder by Israel. 

In an Israel governed by the rule of law, not only would the 
government not be negotiating with Dahlan, Abbas, and their 
ilk, it would be trying them for murder and sending them to 
prison. Amazingly, what we find is that far from bringing 
democracy and peace to Palestinian society, every move by 
Israel to placate the Palestinian leadership has involved the 
undermining of Israel as a state of laws. 

The erosion of the criminal justice system's credibility in 
exercising its lawful power to prosecute mass murderers is 
only one aspect of the breakdown of Israel's legal system 
following its attempts to cut a deal with the PLO. Another 
glaring example is found in law enforcement. On Thursday 
morning, the IDF began evacuating a home for troubled youth 
and three mobile homes belonging to their instructors at 
the settlement of Adei Ad. 

Adei Ad, adjacent to Shilo and Shvut Rahel, is an agricultural 
community established five years ago. It is home to some 14 
families and an agricultural yeshiva. The community is well 
established and sits on government-owned land. The four 
structures that the IDF intended to destroy have been standing 
for close to three years and were built with government 
approval. The occupants received no prior warning of the 
IDF's intent to expel them but were, according to Segula Melet, 
a resident of the community, "taken by complete surprise when 
the army trucks appeared this morning with the troops and the 
bulldozers." 

In an attempt to thwart the decision to illegally expel the 
residents, the Council of the Jewish Communities in Judea, 
Samaria, and the Gaza Strip petitioned the Supreme Court. 
The court ordered the government to defend the IDF's move. 
"Let's see what Ariel Sharon comes up with," Melet told me. 
"It will be interesting to see how the prime minister justifies 
this illegal act." 

This seemingly egregious denial of due process to the residents 
of Adei Ad is all the more startling when contrasted with the 
government's refusal to contend with the rampant and systematic 
illegal building carried out by Beduin in the Negev. Just 
10 minutes outside of Beersheba it is nearly impossible to 
walk 10 meters without running into another illegally constructed 
structure on state-owned land by Israeli Beduin. 

Commenting on this state of affairs, Prof. Eliav Shochetman from 
the Hebrew University Law School says, "The first rule of a 
properly functioning state is equality before the law. The point 
when political considerations are allowed to influence the 
fairness of the law enforcement and judicial systems is the 
point where the law enforcement and the judicial systems begin 
to unravel." 

On Wednesday, President Bush reiterated his firm stance that 
Hamas must be dismantled and not permitted simply to stand down 
for a short period as Abbas wishes. And yet, while a reasonable 
demand (given that the road map explicitly stipulates that the 
PA must dismantle terrorist organizations), the manner in which 
the president stated the case shows the moral infirmity of the 
entire attempt to have a peace process with terrorists. 

Bush said, "Progress toward [peace]... will only be possible 
if all sides do all in their power to defeat the determined 
enemies of peace, such as Hamas and other terrorist groups." 
But Hamas is not simply an enemy of "peace." Hamas is an enemy 
of Israel. The obfuscation of the fact that Palestinian terrorists 
are enemies of Israel and must be defeated by Israel is the 
reason that the justice system is rendered impotent in carrying 
out its duties. 

In a normal country, there could be no question that those 
wishing to massacre its citizens and undermine its laws and 
national identity are enemies of the state. But in Israel, 
every time a move is made to cut a deal with the PLO, 
the national identity is trampled under the peace process 
steamroller. 

Victims of war crimes are referred to as "victims of peace." 
Enemies of Israel are defined as "enemies of peace." Citizens 
are denied due process in the "interest of peace." This being 
the case, victims of terrorism cannot be assured of legal 
redress. Their murderers are granted immunity from prosecution. 
Why? Because of what Secretary of State Colin Powell refers 
to as the murderers' "high profile" in the peace process. 

Advocates of the peace process often argue that there can be 
no justice without peace. But given Israel's experience over 
the past decade, it seems truer to say that peace must be 
predicated first and foremost on justice. Until Israel is able 
to mete out justice fairly and without prejudice under its 
laws, its enemies will continue to work towards its destruction 
with impunity. And no peace will be achieved.