[Pre-order a copy of David Horowitz’s next book, America Betrayed, by clicking here. Orders will begin shipping on May 7th.]

Headline: “Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich aims to legalize 68 outposts in Judea and Samaria and has instructed various ministries to prepare to provide them with public services.”

Although Israel’s Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich and Minister of National Security Itamar Ben Gvir are portrayed as extremist fringe politicians within Israel and by the world for claiming all the land “from the river to the sea,” truth is that this has become the national, centrist consensus in Israel.

After October 7, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been adamant that in the future Israel will exercise 100% security control from the river to the sea, which means sovereignty.

In other words, Netanyahu is in total agreement with the “extremists” – and likewise with every Israeli Jew and Druse with a brain and self-respect.

What is so strange and even weird about many Israelis is that official Israel never makes this claim — when international law supports it. The Palestine Mandate of the League of Nations in 1922 allotted Eastern Palestine (as it was then known) a.k.a. the eastern bank of the Jordan River and beyond, to the Arabs, and Western Palestine to the Jews. Indeed, in the earlier Faisal-Weizmann agreement of January 3, 1919, they both foresaw such an arrangement. 

In history, “Palestine” never existed for Arabs and Muslims and this is why Faisal had no objection to calling the Jewish state “Palestine.” Two years later, the Mandate even explicitly recognized the “historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine” and the “grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country.”

But many of today’s Israelis have never staked their claim to all the land “from the river to the sea.”

Why not?

It is doubly weird since the Palestine Mandate was preserved as a living legal instrument embedded in the United Nations Charter of 1945. That Charter contains the “title deed” to all the land “from the river to the sea” bestowed upon the Jews.

One reason for the Israeli refusal is the baseless fear that if Israel does claim sovereignty, it will have to grant citizenship to the Muslims there — whose favorite political movement is Hamas. And, of course, with citizenship comes a vote in the Knesset.

But where is it written that the victor in war must grant citizenship to the defeated enemy and especially when the enemy’s Koran sanctifies “oppressing and humiliating” Jews?

For sure, Jewish sovereignty “from the river to the sea” would be the antithesis of the TSS (Two-State Solution) which is a euphemism for Israel handing over Judea and Samaria to Hamas. Since 2006, Hamas has been the favorite political party of these Muslims, so the TSS calls for, in effect, handing Judea and Samaria over to them. This is what President Biden and Secretary of State Antony Biden want for Israel.

No sober, mature Israeli Jew or Druze can agree to that, especially after 10/7.

A second reason why Israel recoils from the thought of claiming all the land “from the river to the sea” is that it puts the kibosh on statehood for the “Palestinians” — which will make Israel-haters world-wide very angry, since the post-religionists who founded the state in 1948 wanted, in the title of Netanyahu’s’ 1993 book, A Place Among the Nations.

If the No. 1 concern of the 193 nation-states in the UN is the absence of a state for the “Palestinians” (a verbal hologram of a nation), so Israel should want the best for “Palestinians” too. Indeed, the prime minister has spoken of a better tomorrow for the people in Gaza after the current campaign to exterminate the Hamas demoniacs ends. So, official Israel, no matter the party in charge, has always held out for the possibility of creating the TSS “under the right conditions” that have never materialized.

Thirdly, what deters official Israel from claiming all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza is that it is too “religious” a claim for the state’s post-religious elite. Netanyahu is a self-defined secular man, no less than the Marxists Rabin and Peres who wanted to be rid of Judea for being “too Jewish,” too religious, which is why Israel’s leftists prefer to use the term “West Bank,” the name antisemites also use.

If Israel were to claim sovereignty as per the UN Charter, as the legitimate landlord it would have the right to evict squatters, especially when so many are proven, antisemitic, homicidal sex maniacs capable of vicious cruelty. Israel has the right not to suffer the behavior of such neighbors. How many other nations among the 193 UN member-states over the last two decades have been targeted with tens of thousands of rockets, bombs, incendiaries?

Israel as the legitimate landlord will have the right to evict the 70% of the Arabs in the Strip supported by UNRWA, which has been proven to be a front organization for Hamas that turned the Strip into one gigantic terrorist camp.

Israel will have the right to demolish this greatest welfare scam in history. The so-called “Palestinian refugees” in Gaza are neither Palestinian nor refugees. Their grandparents were refugees, but commonly not “Palestinian” in the least. They were migrant workers from all over Araby who ran from the war when their Arab brethren launched their attempt at preventing the dhimmi Jews from breaking free of Muslim “oppression and humiliation,” their fate for fourteen centuries according to the Koran — versus the Arabs with roots and property to protect and worry about. One reliable figure for the refugees was 590,000 of them – versus the 150,000 Arabs who did not run and became citizens of the new state along with the Jews. They were left alone by the new Israelis.

For the first decade after Israel’s War of Independence, the label “the Arab refugees” was universal. Everyone including other Arabs called them “the Arab refugees,” generically, because they were a mixed bag of men from Morocco, Yemen, Syria, Iraq, etc. with nothing “Palestinian” about them. Rebranding them the “Palestinian refugees” was a later psychological warfare tactic.

In sum, according to the United Nations Charter, the Gaza Strip, an artificial district produced by the Arabs’ aggression in 1948 against the Jews, is legally Israeli territory and besides legality, Israel has the human right to do whatever is necessary to prevent ever again the recurrence of an October 7. Israel has the human right to never again suffer diabolical cruelty at the hands of these barbarians. The cruelty involved the terrorists forcing parents to watch as they chopped off the fingers of their children, raped and killed them, and stuffed their shrieking babies onto the burning coils of electric ovens.

Israel has not only the legal but moral right to exercise the age-old wisdom: “To the victors go the spoils.” Israel has as much of a right to keep the Gaza Strip as the U.S. had in 1848 when victorious over Mexico it kept about of a third of Mexican territory.

Israel will have the right to engineer the humane expulsion of the UNRWA freeloaders to any of the fifty-six officially Muslim states, twenty-one of them officially Arab too.

Let them take care of their fellow believers in the One True Faith.