I was just reading a 2007 interview Sheldon Adelson gave to the Kahanist Jewish Press. In it, he rejects the idea of a two-state solution, which is not news. But the rejection of any rights for the Palestinian people, and his imputation of genocidal intentions to the Palestinians raises the question: how would Adelson resolve the conflict? In fact, I wonder whether any interviewer has asked him. If not, they should. Because the passage below is friggin’ scary:
There won’t be a two-state solution; there won’t be a one-state solution. The Palestinians want a “no state solution” for the Jews. They don’t want Jews at all. So all of this balagan about the settlements – it’s not about the settlements. It’s something to delay having to sit down and negotiate over a table that will have to lead to a conclusion that they will never agree to. They will have to agree that this is the end of the conflict and they will have to surrender what they call their “right of return to Israel proper.” They will never do either of those things. They don’t want the Jews or any other religion to be alive, so how are they going to get to the point of peace?
There isn’t a Palestinian alive who wasn’t raised on a curriculum of hatred and hostility toward the Jews. So how can you talk about giving up land? They publicly acknowledge that they have a multi-phased program. They’ll do it in steps: They’ll take the West Bank, then they’ll take a piece of the Galilee, and piece by piece they’ll want the rest of the land of Israel. There’s no chance for peace, and the settlements are just a red herring issue.
If you parse this carefully, you’ll note that Adelson first denies a two state solution, then denies the anti-Zionist formula for a one-state solution. At first, I even thought he was denying a right for Israel to have its own state. But what he really meant was to deny the anti-Zionist version of a single Jewish-Palestinian state.
If you continue, you realize that he’s ascribed such genocidal/exterminationist aspirations to Palestinians and foresees absolutely no possibility that they will ever agree to a peaceful settlement on Israel’s terms. The only possible outcome then can be either Israeli genocide against the Palestinians or forced population transfer. This means that Adelson isn’t just right-wing on Israel, but that he’s a Kahanist. The fact that this interview appeared in a publication for which Meir Kahane was once an editor and weekly columnist, then is no accident.
Frankly, I’m shocked that no one has asked the question or gotten an answer from him on this important question.
Why is it important? Because if, God forbid, Mitt Romney becomes president, Sheldon Adelson will have given $100-million or more (my prediction: possibly $200-million) to fund his campaign. For that hunk of change you get a helluva lot of political leverage to determine what U.S. policy toward Israel will be. You would get a U.S. president who would possibly support Israel’s annexation of the West Bank. A president who might even look the other way if Israel expelled Palestinians from the West Bank. Certainly, a president who would never make a peep if Israel became a Likudist state discarding democracy (except possibly for Jews). Be afraid. Be very afraid.