Save Our Sovereignty by Rob Dermer May 29, 2003 Deciding whether the worst consequence of our government's decision this week to endorse the road map is its accession to a terror-fueled acceleration of Palestinian sovereignty or its complicity in the diminution of Jewish sovereignty is not easy. At first glance, the blatant reward for terror that the road map calls for is particularly infuriating. The Palestinian leadership is now in a better diplomatic position than it was 32 months ago when their terrorist war began. In September 2000, it will be recalled, the Palestinians had to actually sign a piece of paper agreeing to 'end the conflict' with Israel in order to get a state which would greatly multiply their destructive capabilities. Now they only have to keep their powder dry for six months. This is quite an achievement, particularly when September 11 is factored into the equation. Arafat and the rest of Palestinian Terror Inc. launched the latest salvo in the 55-year-old Arab war against Israel, believing that they could get most of what former prime minister Barak offered at Camp David without agreeing to "end the conflict." Things were going pretty smoothly for them - i.e., Israel was largely blamed by the world for defending itself against a pack of murderers - until September 11. The Bush-propelled aftershocks of that seismic event, which have already toppled two regimes, should have buried Arafat & Co. long ago. But Jewish blood proved less ruddy both to the world and to our own government. Arafat escaped the hangman's noose, and Sharon spent eight more months swatting terrorist mosquitoes before waging a year-long war he was not willing to win. Now, with his nation battered, he is willing to deal. Palestinian terror and Israel's response to it have added a macabre twist to the well-known Yiddish story of the distraught man who comes to his rabbi complaining of the lack of tranquility at home. After weeks of advising the man to place an ever- expanding contingent of livestock within his cramped house, one day the rabbi tells the man to remove all the animals. Overnight, a domicile that was once a source of anguish was transformed into Shangri-La. With its vote this week, Israel's government has shown that it views a return to the situation that existed in September 2000 as a "paradise" for which concessions should be made. The Palestinians, who were responsible for turning that ostensible paradise into hell, have surely learned a lesson. Having kidnapped Israeli quiet, they are now preparing to collect their ransom. And they will surely be back for more. BUt Even more troubling than the government's capitulation to terror may be its willingness to cede Jewish sovereignty. The road map calls for the so-called Quartet (America, Russia, the EU, and the UN) to monitor compliance with each phase of the peace process. Perhaps there are some people in the government who believe that having credibly monitored Sadaam's compliance with international resolutions, Russia, the EU and the UN can be expected to play an equally constructive role here. Others may take comfort in the fact that one of the 14 reservations to the road map that were included as part of the government's decision is a provision stipulating that the monitoring mechanism will be under "American management." But the history of the "peace process" would suggest otherwise. The "road map plus" that cabinet members believed they were voting on will not withstand the international pressure that will soon begin to work its perverse magic. With the world - including President George W. Bush - convinced that rapid progress to a two-state solution is essential for peace to take hold in the region, anything that is perceived to be an obstacle to that solution will be disregarded. These disregarded "obstacles" will include not only all of Israel's current reservations to the road map but also Palestinian compliance with what is actually required of them in the document itself. The "road map plus" is sure to dissolve into a "road map minus." But the problem with American monitoring is not merely a practical one. American monitoring is also wrong in principle. The American president is not the sovereign of the Jewish State. It is one thing for Israel to take into consideration what America says. In fact, Israel's national interest demands that it do so. But it is quite another to cede to a third party, no matter how friendly, the right to determine Israel's future. Only the people of Israel, represented by their elected government, should make the critical decisions that affect their future. True, there have always been decisions affecting Israel's security that were not made in Jerusalem - the decision by the United States to go to war in Iraq is but the latest example. But the same is true for all countries, including superpowers. For instance, decisions affecting the peace and security of the American people were made not only by presidents in Washington but also by kings in London, dictators in Tokyo, totalitarians in Moscow, and terrorists in Kabul. The essence of sovereignty is that when a nation can decide its fate, it does. For Israel, that means any decision that can be made in Jerusalem must be made there. But in agreeing to the road map, the government of Israel agreed that they can be made elsewhere. The very idea that America or anyone else should determine whether or not the Jewish State has made adequate strides toward peace, or whether its security demands are sufficiently met, is an affront to the people of Israel. It suggests that this democratic nation, which has always dreamed of living in peace with its Arab neighbors and which has paid such a high price for the failure of that dream, cannot be trusted to do all that is necessary to realize that dream. For 55 years, the world has thought that the people of Israel were an obstacle to peace. Sadly, this week the government of Israel agreed with them. ---------- The writer is a political consultant who lives in Jerusalem.