Latest / Infidels / How Western Good Intentions Turned Into Strategic Self-Deception | Einat Wilf

Transcript

How Western Good Intentions Turned Into Strategic Self-Deception | Einat Wilf · Infidels

• Richard Landes: We're here with Anat Wilf, who is an author, thinker, major, and analyst of the problems of Israel's relationship with her neighbors, and also a past Knesset member and possibly a future Knesset member. And author of a terribly important book entitled The War of Return: How Western Indulgence of the Palestinian Dream Has Obstructed the Path to Peace. So, Einat if you could walk us through your view of What happened with the Oslo peace process? Why and why it failed? We'll start there. Dr. Einat Wilf: So the first and most important thing to remember in the context that set the Oslo peace process to begin with is the 90s. Because there's a tendency today to discuss only Oslo in the Israeli kind of navel gazing tendency without remembering that Israel is never alone. Israel is always a part of the world. The 90s were a terrible time for pessimists. Everything that we were told would never happen happened. The Soviet Union, the evil empire, collapsed overnight like a house of cards. The countries of Eastern Europe became free. I still remember sitting with my father watching on television the flags with the hole, the people in the kind of outside in the square. Northern Ireland signed the Good Friday Agreement. Mandela was released from pres from prison in a part hide in South Africa, came to an end. It even had a name that era. It was called the end of history. And that notion that pessimism has no more room in that new world also essentially was part of the mood in Israel. And because it had to do, first of all, with objective reasons. Up until that moment, the backers of the Palestinian Arabs and their movement was the Soviet Union. It backed them with training, with funding, and most importantly, with narrative control, with essentially literally creating the whole idea of what today I call Palestinianism, this ideology that there's a people here that is oppressed and seeking freedom. the Soviets gave all that backing, literally creating it. and what happens is that in the early 90s, the Palestinian Arabs not only lose completely the Soviet backing, because they support Saddam Hussein when hyperpower America goes to war. You know, it's not today's America, people forget. The moment when America emerged as kind of the definite leader of the Cold War, the definite also ideological leader, cultural leader. And when it was, you know, going to war to essentially ensure that this new world order is set, the Palestinian Arabs went with Saddam Hussein, and as a result, they were quite isolated in the Arab world. So they are at their weakest. Point in history. Against that background, there is a thinking that this has created an opportunity to settle the Palestinian Arab issue once and for all. Richard Landes: there was pessimism was viewed negatively, indeed even almost sort of warmongering if you were pessimistic. What happened to the first of all Describe the difference between the way the Palestinians viewed this process and the Israelis viewed this process and the degree to which Israelis were exposed to what Palestinians thought. Dr. Einat Wilf: So from the Israeli side, I'll separate between two ideas. On the Israeli side, there were definitely those who, in the global spirit, really hoped that this is our opportunity to put the whole conflict behind us. Again, there was a name for it, a new Middle East, Shimon Paris, Yossi Balin embodied it more than anyone. The idea that we can Finally take care of this one issue. The Palestinian Arabs will have their state demilitarized, autonomous, that they'll be on their own. We will no longer have to kind of be in control. And the Arab world will finally let us be because this issue is solved and we can speak of a new Middle East where there is economic cooperation and travel and tourism. This was the most optimistic vision. Now that the protocols from the government have been opened, it's important to note that the politicians did not share that sunny vision. You know, after Rabin's assassination, he was remade as a peace-seeking hippie, which he never was. And on the eve of his assassination, he gives a speech in the Knesset about his vision, which is to the right. Of what Benjamin Atanyao said in his Bar Illan speech. You know, he said there will not be a military force west of the Jordan River, it will not be a state, it will be less than that. I mean, and if you look at the government discourse, they are very worried. They have let's say they don't have illusions about who the Palestinian Arabs are. But they also feel that it would be wrong not to take advantage of this moment and at least explore the opportunity. So I think you know, today there's a tendency to play it all in one color. Everyone was like these peaceful hippies, and there was definitely that part. But there was also the more hard-nosed old labor. We need to explore this moment in history, give it a chance. That's where the Israeli side is. The Palestinian-Arab side is essentially managing its situation without changing its ideology. And that's the side that was not really acknowledged in Israel. Because they are at their weakest point. Because the Soviet Union is gone, because they need the United States, the United States is the only hyperpower, because the Arabs hate them. Essentially, they are using this process in order to get breathing room, to get back to power, to bring back their people from exile and Tunis. But there is no indication throughout their 90s that they have really departed. From the ideology that I've since named Palestinianism, the ideology that prioritizes the destruction of the Jewish state over building something for their own. I will also add that there is something that I also came to name West planing, could easily be understood as neocolonialism. The idea that even if the Palestinians don't want a state, And even if they remain attached to the ethos of resistance and perpetual refugeehood of return, we will force them to want a state. So there's also a lot of this attitude that persists to the present, that we don't actually care what they want, we will force them to want what we think they should. Richard Landes: You think that's what Clinton was thinking? Dr. Einat Wilf: I don't know that he was thinking it consciously, but that was clearly the attitude. Richard Landes: Okay, and and so you have a number of incidents like the Kudaibiah speech, which was repeated a number of times, the one he gave in South Africa, I and these had minimal impact on the Israeli public because in fact the press largely was in favor of the plan and felt that this would harm it. Dr. Einat Wilf: That's part of it. I think there was even something more basic. two elements. First, the idea that these are just words. So they talk. He's saying it to the base. He needs to pacify the extremists. Yeah. So I think there was that thinking. one of the things that I had to realize, and that also we still struggle with. There's this guy who does a lot of beautiful videos comparing kind of Western and Eastern philosophies. And he shows that in Western art, kind of what is often highlighted is the nude, you know, the greatest pieces of Western art, David, and you know, they are nude because in in the Western idea, when you when you unconceal, you discover truth. Truth. Beauty is when things are unconcealed. That's when you find truth. In all great Chinese art, everyone is clothed because who you are is who you are to the public. And in that sense, the Arab world is much more of that culture. The idea that who you are to the public is the truth. And what happens is that as a result, when Westerners hear Arabs say things in closed rooms. They value it as the truth. they said it to us secretly. That must be the truth. And there's a tendency to downplay, therefore, what gets said outwardly, because this is how it is in the West, and certainly politically, they're just saying it, you know, that's what they need to survive politically. So I think there was a real tendency to discount it, and combined with the kind of this neocolonial attitude of. We don't actually care what they're saying because we're going to force them to the box that we want them to be in, which is a people who want to build a state. Richard Landes: Yeah, and in a sense, I mean my sense of Clinton and of many of the people in the peace camp was that they were completely convinced that this positive sum solution of land for peace would work. I mean Clinton apparently Arafat Spend was the major visitor to the White House of all visitors during Clinton's presidency. And he was completely convinced that Arafat would say yes. So when the no came, followed two months later by the Intifada, it was a rude shock to everybody except those who had started to pay attention and realized what a disaster this was headed for. What I'm interested in is what was the response of the peace camp in Israel? I know that the peace camp in America and in the West. blamed Israel for it. But did the peace camp in Israel, who had more or less exiled anybody who objected as a right wing warmonger, did they apologize to them? Was there a Kheshbon Nefesh? What's that? Dr. Einat Wilf: There was the the Israeli peace camp for all intents and purposes collapsed. But it collapsed without a reckoning. So what does it mean? It meant that politically it was gone. When Ehud Barak came back from Camp David, and again, Ehud Barak comes from that kind of hard-nosed old labor view, and he went to Camp David saying, essentially, we'll give it a shot. If it fails, we've exposed. They don't want a state. If it wins, New Middle East. So again, the same attitude we see now in the protocols that this is the 90s, everything has changed. We need to give it a chance. But we might also fail. Again, they were not some hippie peacenics as some revisionist historians try to make them out to be. When he comes back and says, We have no partner for peace in Arafat at this time. A very limited, by the way, saying in Arafat at this time, people basically shot the messenger. And the the peace camp collect collapsed from that moment on, you're essentially seeing the fall of the Labor Party and also the issues. The people who begin to head the Israeli left talk about economic issues. Religion and state issues. But to the present, they no longer touch the idea of peace because the number of Israelis who remain convinced that Israel didn't try hard enough. And remember, later we have the disengagement, we have Almert doubling down on the Barack offer and even more. So by now, the number of Israelis, even before October 7th, who were genuinely Kind of believe that if Israel had only offered more, there would have been yes. There's barely any left. Certainly not enough for politics. So the Israeli peace camp, as such, as the camp that believed in the sunny promise of just give them a state and we'll have peace, that collapsed. It no longer ever politically tried to make its case ever again. But it did so without a reckoning. So there was never a moment where leaders, whether it's Olmert or Barack, you know, my view is that Olmert and Barack in their pension years had one role and one role only: to go around the world and to say, we offered everything, the other side wouldn't say yes. Instead, They've completely what do you say, abnegated or this role? Almer goes around with the delusional belief that he was this close to making peace, even though Abu Mazdin himself never corroborates his his side of it. So again, West planing neocolonialism, the same attitude. Barack has become obsessed with Netanyahu, but again. There has been no reckoning with the ideas. And as a result, we find ourselves in a place where Israeli politics has been organized for about two decades now around Netanyahu, which is a stupid way to organize your politics, rather than about what. and this is also what I think deteriorated the right. You know, some people tell me, why don't you say that you're right wing? And I say, look, when I went through this process, supposedly I was you're talking about apologizing, right? Supposedly I was supposed to find a home among the people who said no, no to Oslo, no to the disengagement, and all that. Okay. I go and talk to these people. And I discover a bizarre addiction to what we call in Hebrew buying quiet, a bizarre addiction to a s a kind of helplessness that says, what can we do? This is a religious war, this is that, this is jihad, and therefore we we are destined to occasionally fight them. And what can we do? And in the meantime, we'll give them billions and hope for the best. Like I didn't find any space that I would say in the old times would be the Ben Gurian space, the Golda space, the Mapai, the old labor, the one that, on the one hand, understood our enemies, but also took action and were not fatalists. And in many ways, that's what I'm missing in Israeli politics today. That's what I hopefully I'm trying to reintroduce, a combination of. Of clear sightedness about what we're facing, but no helplessness and fatalism. Richard Landes: And creativity, yes. and in fact, that's also missing in the West. I mean, across the Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Yes, yes. Richard Landes: democratic countries, there's no intelligence center of people who care and who are willing to acknowledge the problem. Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes, you have some of them, Richard Landes: Which bring Dr. Einat Wilf: interestingly, in Denmark, in Sweden, but you are right that they remain anomalies, like a Danish prime minister who will talk about you cannot have an advanced social welfare country with open immigration and especially immigration that does not share your value and that is willing to take pretty harsh actions to really. You know, ensure that people are educated differently from childhood, that kind of creativity, willingness, combination of both openness and harshness, you're right, is sorely missing. Richard Landes: Tough love. There's no Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Richard Landes: tough love. A friend of mine, you know Basam Eid. Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Richard Landes: So he once said to me, the Palestinians have the best enemy they could possibly have and the worst friends they could possibly have. Dr. Einat Wilf: Very true. Richard Landes: Okay, so now let's pursue this a little further because, as you know, Ed Miliban just gave a speech in which he opens by saying. The only solution to this is a two state solution. Why is the West incapable of acknowledging this problem? That the two state solution is not only is it a fantasy, but it's one that literally weakens Israel in the West. Dr. Einat Wilf: I'll say something even more basic. I say it especially in Israel. The two-state solution has always been a Jewish discourse. And as a result, a Western discourse, but it's only ever been a Jewish discourse. We argue amongst ourselves. Are you for? Are you against the two-state solution? Here, I'll give you an example. Whenever Netanyahu would go, he likes to say, I. Prevented a Palestinian state, even though he said yes to one three times. But he goes Richard Landes: Right. Dr. Einat Wilf: and says that. Every time he says that, I like to tweet that it's not nice to take credit for the one real achievement of the Palestinian national movement. Because actually, no Israeli leader has ever prevented a Palestinian Arab state in Gaza and in Judean Samaria for this simple reason that they never prevent. Wanted a state for themselves if it has to live next to a Jewish state. In fact, going back to Barack and Olmert, when Olmert begged them to take a state, they couldn't say yes. So it's always been a Jewish discussion. It's never, ever been an Arab discussion. There has never been a single moment when there was an Arab vision of peace. Where they live next to a Jewish state in any size in the land of Israel. So so for me it's even more basic. It's this internal Jewish and by now Western discourse that completely ignores what the Arab side to their credit is clearly and consistently saying and doing. So sometimes people in Israel, so I That in Israel, because in Israel, some people still spend valuable political and you know capital on this useless discourse in order to kind of identify people politically. Are you for a two-state solution? Are you against a two-state solution? And I'm like, Jewish discourse, useless. How about we all focus on where the real problem is that they don't want. Anything constructive. So and and the reason I I do that, some someone sometimes jokes that I'm doing something very non-Jewish, that I'm taking away things for Jews to argue about. But so people sometimes people tell me, you know what, Enath? Let's say you get everything you want. You get, you know, the Arabs truly become Zionist. Then do you give them a stake? And I tell them, look, I'm done. Deciding what they should want. You know, their tragedy, and as a result, our tragedy and the global tragedy is that they don't know, we don't know, and in fact, nobody knows what they want when it's not the destruction of the state of Israel. We don't know what they want as a positive vision. So my only argument is this: I have one goal and one goal only. The destructive vision has to go. What emerges in its place once they are capable of voicing a positive vision, I have a hundred percent certainty, not 99.9, that the Jews will happily reach a mutually agreeable settlement. But first they have to want something that is not our destruction. Really basic. Richard Landes: Right. You said that right. All right, yeah, and and you say that in your book that that you know the Israelis, if they were presented with a genuine offer, would probably in large numbers rally around the idea of two states. so Dr. Einat Wilf: What it is. I'm not even saying what it is. Is it another state? Is it seven Richard Landes: Right, right, right. Dr. Einat Wilf: emirates? Is it being Jordanian citizens? Is it immigrating to Somaliland? I literally have no idea. I'm just saying the day they can say what it is is the Richard Landes: Gotcha. Right. Right. Dr. Einat Wilf: day we will reach an agreement. If anything, I find that the Israelis are too eager, that you know, we need to just hold back a little. We say yes to things that are so little. So I that's not my concern. Richard Landes: Right. Now let's go back to the Europeans and the well let's let's call it the West. Let's go back to the West. Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Richard Landes: because in some senses the reason why Palestinians or the Palestinian leadership, we don't really know what Palestinians think as a whole, but the Palestinian leadership consistently refuses a state is because they are supremacist Muslims and the idea that there would be free infidels. In the midst of what should be Dar al Islam, and for the the the radicals in that group, the whole world should be Dar al Islam, is completely unacceptable. So, in a strange way, by denying that that's the Palestinian take on Israel, they're also ignoring that that's the take of their own Muslim supremacists in their midst. Dr. Einat Wilf: it could be a way to ignore it. I will say this the reason that Palestinianism is so successful as a Western ideology Richard Landes: Yes, why? Why? Dr. Einat Wilf: is because it is not just Islamic supremacism. If that were the case, I would say in many ways, easier to address. What because it coalesced in the battle against Jewish sovereignty. It always made alliances with the greatest Jew haters in every given moment. So Palestinianism has absorbed into it Nazi influences from the Nazi propaganda in Arabic in the 30s and 40s, from pan Arabism, which was also, of course, Nazi influence. Clearly the Soviet anti Zionism. The phrasing of Palestinianism as a battle for freedom, justice, against oppression, all this language which now thrives so effectively in the West, the impact of Islamist ideologies. So Palestinianism, even more than Islamic supremacism, is the most effective toxic brew that actually Speaks to the West in its language. That is why kind of the Soviet creation of Palestinianism has been such a great export. And in many ways, we're now in a bizarre position where you can see that some in the Arab world are growing somewhat exhausted by that ideology, while some in the West are newly excited by it. Richard Landes: Yeah. Right, right. Dr. Einat Wilf: so Yeah, so that's what I'm saying. It's it's something that that is harder to just say, okay, this is Islamic supremacism. This is clearly one of the ideologies that plays into it, but because it has absorbed so much of the West's own language into Richard Landes: Right. Dr. Einat Wilf: that ideology, it is far more effective and sticky and global as a result. Richard Landes: Right. So one of the things that you left out of the language of the West that it's adopted is supersessionism. In other words, the Dr. Einat Wilf: Mm-hmm. Richard Landes: appeal to people, whether they're secular or religious, Christian, progressive, the idea that the Jews should have their own state seems to be anathema. There's the it's almost as if the idea that Jews would have independence and sovereignty and be able to defend themselves was was somehow unacceptable. And the appeal to that by the Palestinians has made, I think, enormous headway. It's it's almost as if the West supersessionism is the soft underbelly through which the Palestinians invade. But you know, you distinguish Palestinianism you distinguish Palestinianism from from Islamic supremacism, but in fact Palestinianism is one of the major tools that Islamic supremacists in the West use to advance their cause. Dr. Einat Wilf: certainly, again, because it's so effective and it speaks a Western language. something about there's no doubt that even the West, there's a great book by Tom Holland, not Spider-Man, the historian, about how Christianity made the West. And he shows how even the most secular progressive ideologies are, you know, a Christian by any other name. Richard Landes: Reflect this, yes, yes. Dr. Einat Wilf: There's no doubt the appeal when I tell people that Palestine, to the extent that it ever meant a people or a place, has become a symbol of supersessionism, of the world without the collective Jew, literally from the river to the sea. And it's no coincidence that all the evil words, racism, apartheid, colonialism, genocide, Nazism, have been. kind of made to associate with Israel and Zionism and all the good words, justice, equality, freedom, rights, are placed next to Palestine. And when people see things like queers for Palestine and they're like, ha ha, chickens for KFC with morons, what Richard Landes: Yeah. Dr. Einat Wilf: they don't understand is the very dark ideology underneath. Because if Palestine is this symbolic kind of marker of the world without the collective Jew, then Palestine is utopia because utopia, salvation, a clean world is what we have when we eradicate the evil that is the collective Jew. So if you understand Palestine as utopia, then everything you want, queer rights, fighting climate change, everything you consider a positive cause becomes Palestine, and it actually makes a bizarre sense. Richard Landes: Right. And okay, so let's imagine. let's imagine how can we build an intelligence center which is willing to grapple with the deep-seated ideas not only of Muslim supremacism, but also some of the deep-seated ideals of Christian supersessionism, recently seen in the Irish A president telling Israel they should turn the other cheek, which I I don't think the Irish have ever done. And one of the ironies of history is that when you get secular progressive governments, they're the first governments to try and implement the Sermon on the Mount as foreign policy. No Christian government in the Middle Ages was pacifist. Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Richard Landes: So how do we get that center, which for 25 years has been utterly absent? Dr. Einat Wilf: I yes, I'm signed Richard Landes: Yeah. Dr. Einat Wilf: because I do not have an answer. It is the answer that is it's the question that I struggle with in Israel. Right? When I started my kind of political path, but even before October seventh, people would tell me, Ana, who even talks like you in Israel? And and I would say, look, it's either four or five people who have since become my best friend. Or it's 70 to 80 percent of the Israeli public. My political run was very much a part of it. And clearly I did not get 70 to 80% support, even though I believe that the ideas that I convey sit on the broadest Israeli consensus. But why doesn't it get a political kind of expression? Richard Landes: Truck. Dr. Einat Wilf: I don't know. I can tell you that I even spoke with bigger parties. And they made it very clear to me that they don't want to touch this issue. They said every Richard Landes: Yeah. Dr. Einat Wilf: time we mention Palestinians, we lose two seats. And just as before October 7th, I'm like, you think you don't need Richard Landes: Interesting. Dr. Einat Wilf: to address it? They're gonna make sure that you have to address it. They're going to address you if you don't address it. I'm like, so Richard Landes: Right. Dr. Einat Wilf: so I live in the space where I think I'm addressing the core issues, Palestinianism. The global assault on the collective Jew in the West, what you what you call the combination of Western supersionism with Palestinianism. And I'm like, these are the most important consequential issues. And how come those are not at the forefront of what we're talking about? I literally don't have a good answer. You know, I'm struggling. I try to convey to the Board of Peace. Don't Build Gaza until you realize the people of Gaza actually want to build. That should be like, how many times do we have to go through a loop? I have myself on video by now four times. Every time there's war and reconstruction, war and reconstruction, every time I go on TV, and I was like, why? Why would we want to rebuild? For an ideology that wants to destroy. How about we first make sure they don't want to destroy? And then, by the way, they're gonna need nobody's help because they are perfectly capable people, just with a terrible ideology. So I don't know, is this this neocolonialism, this West planing? I can share with you that there is one sentence that when I say it, meets with a complete wall. The sentence is Palestinians are adults. Boom. Unacceptable. The idea Richard Landes: It's amazing. Dr. Einat Wilf: yes. The idea that they are a people fully knowledgeable of the ideology they hold, that understand what they're fighting for, willing to sacrifice for it. Long before October seventh, Western delegations coming to Israel. They hear my talk. At the end of it, they're like, but don't the people of Gaza want a better future for their children? And when a Westerner asks that, they mean a white picket fence, college, a good job. And I'm like, yes, they do want a better future for their children. It so happens that the better future that they imagine is one in which there's no Jewish state. And for that future, they're willing to fight and sacrifice and Give them the respect of taking them at their word. And that is Richard Landes: Right, right. Right. Dr. Einat Wilf: nobody does that. Or not nobody, but it's it's a block. Richard Landes: It's a block. And and it's really interesting because in a sense the inability to hold the Palestinians responsible for their own behavior, the the sort of lack of agency, on the one hand is kind of racist. It basically says Dr. Einat Wilf: course Richard Landes: these people aren't going to change, so I'm not gonna bother criticizing them because and this is the second point, when I criticize them, they get angry. So Dr. Einat Wilf: Yeah. Richard Landes: the way to avoid that whole thing is just not to talk about it. And and I do think that one of the major ways that we can start moving forward, the West as well, and the West with their own Muslims, is to start pushing back. Instead of saying, yes, Islam is a religion of peace, say, look, you got a long history of war. What have you got to say about it? How how are you dealing with this? So I think on the one hand, That's a very important point that we start treating l them like adults. And my sense is that they constantly exploit this stupidity on our part and have contempt Dr. Einat Wilf: for for sure. Richard Landes: for us. They know we're a bunch of racists who aren't willing, who don't have the courage to say what. But let me go for a second thing, and and this is something, you know, I was here in the nineties during the peace process, and in fact, during the nineties, I was very enthusiastic, and then I began to realize there were real problems. And then I came back in 2003, and of course it was the height of the antifadah. Now, one of the striking things that I felt was that this is like what happened is an open wound. Israeli society has never addressed it. That are there people who were enthusiastic for the peace process. Who could be brought to discuss what the errors of the Oslo process were and why people like Itamar Marcus and Yigal Karmon who translate what Palestinians say to each other, what Arabs say to each other, need to be honored rather than rejected as a bunch of warmongers. Dr. Einat Wilf: again, this is tough because in many ways, people like you mentioned, Igal and Itamar, who I deeply appreciate. And I often joke that we can close down most of our intelligence agencies and just, you know, memory is more than enough for us to know what we're facing. and again, the reason I was able to say that nothing good is happening in Gaza is that I listen to what the Gazans were saying publicly and did the rare act of giving them the respect of taking them at their word. That's it. End of story. The tragedy specifically of Israel is that again, all our politics became organized around a single person. And therefore, like be just talking about the issue itself rather than it immediately being, so you're with him against it. It's like it's just become toxic. horrible and has in many ways deprived us of an honest conversation about what were the issues. and I will also say that The message is a tough message, right? Even if you don't even go to the Islamic su supremacism, you just deal with Palestinianism. If the message is we are surrounded on our very borders, in our very midst, by enemies in which there's no difference between Hamas and Fatah, Gaza and the Palestinian Authority, it's only a difference of tactics, not of goals. That except for rare exceptions, rare and courageous exceptions, they are united in the goal of no Jewish state. It's overwhelming. Because as long as you tell yourselves the problem is BB, the problem is settlements, the problem is occupation, you're like, okay, then I know what to do. Get rid of baby, get you know, get out of the territory, you know, dismantle settlements. You have action. And Zionists want action. You know, that's kind of our thing. We need to be able to shape history. And I think for a lot of people it's overwhelming. I can share with you that my co-writer Adish Schwartz for the War of Return and October Return, he went to give a talk in Kfar Aza, one of the places where there was an actual massacre on October 7th. And he came back, he called me. We're each other's self-help line. He called me and he's like. A knot at the end of my talk, they said I was depressing. He's like, those are the people that stood Richard Landes: Yeah. Dr. Einat Wilf: in the massacre, and I'm, you know, I'm depressing. and you go back to the issue of can we find a center? Can we find a place that acknowledges what our enemies want, but then does not. retire to just giving them money and hoping for the best, like or or just fighting them in sev in rounds. Can we actually have something that's more intelligent? And and that's what I'm trying to do, but all I can Richard Landes: Right. Dr. Einat Wilf: share with you, super hard. Richard Landes: Well, listen, you you phrased it very nicely. Zionists like, and by the way, that's true of Westerners in general, they like to take charge of history. and so here's a way to take charge of history. Start rethinking the massive errors that you've made in the past and continue to make in the present. All right. Thank Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Richard Landes: you, Enat. Here's hoping that conversation gets going. Dr. Einat Wilf: Thank you. Maybe I can can I just say one thing for the Richard Landes: Sure. Dr. Einat Wilf: future? Because it's very important for me to always say one thing. As long as the Jewish people want to be sovereign, it's in the land of Israel. And given the seventh century Arab and Islamic conquests, we are damned or destined to remain a Jewish minority in an Arab and Islamic Middle East. So one of the things that is most important. Important for me, and I know that you will treat it in your series, that even if it's crazy, even if it's long term, even if it rests on very kind of very far interpretations of Islamic surahs and texts, I think it's ultimately important that we also uphold, even if it's small, even if it's marginal, a vision of Islamic non-supremacism. Of an Arab identity that is not obsessively anti Israel. That's we Richard Landes: Yes. Yes. Yes. Right. Right. Hear it Dr. Einat Wilf: have to uphold that vision. Richard Landes: right. He Right. Here at on Infidel Awareness Month, we c we talk about neighborly Muslims. That is Muslims Dr. Einat Wilf: Exactly. Richard Landes: who can be neighbors with you without feeling that if you don't convert to their religion, you're insulting them. So yes, so Dr. Einat Wilf: Exactly. So the vision of neighborly Arabs and Muslims is our vision for the region. Richard Landes: And it seems to me that it should be a major demand from the West. I mean the West should Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Richard Landes: be saying to the Palestinians, Look, you show us that Islam is a religion of peace, make peace with the Jews, because if you can't live with them, you're not gonna want to live with us. Dr. Einat Wilf: Yes. Thank you, Richard, and thank you for all your amazing work. Take care. Richard Landes: All right. Thank you, Enan. You're welcome.