The Doctrine of Beitar

• 116 -

is not an iron wall, but a myth. Such clichés are our undoing; and therefore it is not just a pleasure, but a sacred duty — to denounce the empty rhetoric and to prove both its cruelty and its insincerity.

It means only this: that with the Arabs of the Land of Israel no agreement is possible, so long as the Arabs have a single spark of hope to get rid of us. They will not agree in exchange for any sweet words or for any important promises, precisely because they are not a rabble, but a living nation. A living nation gives way on such great and important questions only when all hope of getting rid of us is lost. Only then, when they see not a single breach in the iron wall, only then will the extremist groups with their slogan "No, absolutely not!" lose their influence, and influence will pass to the moderate groups. And then these moderate groups will come to us, with a proposal for negotiations and mutual concessions.

And only then will they begin to settle with us peacefully on specific matters, such as a guarantee against the expulsion of the Arabs, such as equality of civil and national rights; and I believe and hope that then we can indeed give them such commitments, which will be satisfactory, and the two peoples will be able to live in peace as good neighbors. But the only way to such an agreement is an iron wall, that is, a power in the Land of Israel that will not collapse under any Arab pressure.

In short: the only way to achieve an agreement in the future is the absolute renunciation of all attempts towards an agreement today.

1. The morality of the "Iron Wall" is immoral, they say. I say: not true. It is one of two things: either Zionism is morally good, or it is morally bad. This is a question we should have settled before we became Zionists. And we, in truth, have already settled it for ourselves, and for the vast majority of us. In the affirmative, meaning, we have recognized that Zionism is morally good, a sublime and just thing.

And if it is just – then justice must be achieved, regardless of the consent or refusal of anyone. And if Joseph or Shimon or Ivan or Ahmed wish to disturb us, we must not let them; and if they wish to disturb us with their ideas, because it is not convenient for them, we must prevent them from using force, we must make it impossible for them "to exist by force against our rule." And the very act of self-defense, this is moral in any society.