As shown by two statements on the same day last week (Aug. 24), leading Western politicians are going beyond these minor specifics to address the civilizational heart of the matter.

David Cameron, the British shadow education secretary and one of the Conservative Party's bright prospects, defined Britishness as "freedom under the rule of law," adding that this expression "explains almost everything you need to know about our country, our institutions, our history, our culture - even our economy." Peter Costello, the treasurer of Australia and regarded as heir apparent to Prime Minister John Howard, asserts, "Australia expects its citizens to abide by core beliefs: democracy, the rule of law, the independent judiciary, independent liberty."

But it was the British shadow defence minister, Gerald Howarth, who went the furthest, suggesting in early August that all British Islamists must go. "If they don't like our way of life, there is a simple remedy: go to another country, get out." He directed this principle even to Islamists born in Britain (such as three of the four London bombers): "If you don't give allegiance to this country, then leave."

Read this story....

Thus is the pie-in-the-sky notion that the PA is on the verge of establishing a stable civic society in Gaza has been dashed against the hard rock of the reality. Until that reality is recognized, the optimistic plotline emerging after the Gaza withdrawal must be seen as more fiction than fact.

Focus on the "right of return," then, will remain at the heart of future developments in all-Arab Gaza. According to that ostensible "right," which in fact does not exist and which has been rejected by George W. Bush, all Arabs who fled Israel in 1948, and their descendants (now up to the fourth generation), have an inalienable right to return to the land and the homes from which they fled. This means that, for instance, places such as Ashkelon, which lies within the Green Line demarcating Israel's borders since the 1967 war, will become the province of Palestinians.

To bolster their demand for repatriation to Israel, the refugees insist that they do not belong permanently in the areas in which they live now. This is not just the policy of the UNRWA, it is the policy of the Palestinian Authority. The PA, from its inception, has made clear that those registered with UNRWA as refugees are not part of its body politic and would not be considered citizens of Palestine should an independent state arise. The PA defines itself as a temporary host to the refugees and no more. There is a dark logic to the PA's position: Incorporating the Palestinian refugees would seriously undermine, if not totally nullify, the "right to return" upon which the PA insists.

The Palestinians of Gaza would cling to their stateless status with similar desperation. Indeed, there are instances of refugees starting riots inside the camps at precisely the point at which the interests of the PA had been advanced and the refugees suspected that their cause was going to be sold out — so determined were they to prevent loosing the "right of return" during negotiations for a state. It is no accident that much of Palestinian terrorism—including the manufacture and firing of rockets—is centered in the UNRWA camps of Gaza. There reside the people who have been fighting not to "liberate" Gaza from Israeli control, but to force Israel into allowing them to return to homes within the Green Line inside Israel.

Read this story....