Unpublished Letter to the Editor,

an answer, sent December 12, 2005, to the piece

“Tactical Rhetorics” by John Bunzl, in: Der Standard, December 12, 2005

Even when the international community of nations (among this highest representatives of the UN and not only „the West“, but e.g. Russia) was ready to vehemently condemn the periodic rabble-rousing propaganda of Iran’s President Ahmadi-Nejad against Israel’s right of existence (recently backed by his highest government representative Khameini), why should the politologist Dr. John Bunzl worry about?

By playing down this propaganda to be just “tactical rhetorics”, he comfortably can deposit his own “tactical rhetorics” concerning the Palestinian theme, and he does not need more than citing the Palestinian intellectual Mashala to drop polemics himself. As expected, the historic context completely slips his mind.

This would not deserve a scholarly answer, but an also polemic one.

Nonetheless, historic facts: In the Roman Empire, Palestine was the Latin name for the conquered territory of the Jews, who steadily settled west but also east of Jordan River – in spite of all the expulsions – during the complete course of history up to Ottoman Empire and further on. The first partition of historic Palestine was caused by the British mandatory power, which created the part of Transjordania (later Jordan) with predominant Arab population and the part of (“rest”-)Palestine with predominant Jewish population. Therefore the second partition of this rest-Palestine was caused by the Partition Plan of the UN in 1947, accepted by the Jews only, while the Arab neighbors immediately attacked the new, tiny state, proposed by the UN.

Since Israel’s Independent War 1948 until the Six Day War 1967 the “Palestinians” have been West-Jordanians and for their most part they still live in the Jordan Kingdom. Besides, today’s King of Jordan has a Palestinian wife.

Just since the usurpation of the western orientated Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, by some few socialist-revolutionary Palestinian groups around Arafat, had failed and they had been expelled (“Black September” 1964) of Jordan (at that time including the West Bank!!!), a political need aroused for an own, rather artificial Palestinian narrative and for quasi to invent oneself as an own Palestinian people, which therefore - as a political group - at least since 1964, not just since 1967 stood there “without an own territory”.

It is politically understandable, that this relatively young Palestinian narrative, to which also Dr. Bunzl subscribes so reliably, suppresses all memory of these facts – also the one, that it was King Abdullah of Jordan who rejected the return of the West Bank on the occasion of negotiations on the Peace Treaty between Israel and Jordan – because in the sight of world public it gives a better impression “to be forced to reach a modus vivendi with ‘this people’ Israel” (cit. Mashala by Bunzl). That the State of Israel also would be pleased at last to reach such a modus vivendi, free of terrorism, with “this people” of self-defined Palestinians, for politologist Bunzl is not worth any quotation.

It is not understandable, from no aspect, to trivialize Ahmadi-Nejad’s inhuman, hateful and really dangerous propaganda against Israel’s right of existence to “tactical rhetorics” - without any need and concern and while living as a Jewish scholar in peaceful Austria.