"First of all, Arafat is wrong. Jerusalem is Israel's capital, will never be divided, and will remain the capital of the State of Israel, the capital of the Jewish people, for ever and ever"
About this Quote
Netanyahu’s phrasing is engineered to do what peace-process language usually avoids: slam the door, loudly, and make the sound itself politically useful. “First of all, Arafat is wrong” isn’t an argument so much as an opening move in a power contest, reducing a complex territorial and religious dispute to a simple moral error committed by a singular antagonist. It’s debate as branding: one side speaks truth, the other speaks falsehood.
The sentence then escalates from policy to permanence. “Jerusalem is Israel’s capital” is a claim of present fact; “will never be divided” is a preemptive strike against negotiation; “will remain” turns into a promise to voters; “for ever and ever” steps outside politics into liturgy. That last phrase is doing heavy cultural work, borrowing the cadence of prayer to sacralize sovereignty. It’s not just that Jerusalem must stay united; it’s that its status is placed beyond the reach of ordinary democratic change, international pressure, or diplomatic trade-offs.
The subtext is aimed in multiple directions. To Israelis, it signals steadiness and defiance, a leader refusing the language of concession. To Palestinians, it telegraphs that core aspirations will be treated as non-starters. To foreign mediators, it narrows the agenda in advance: don’t bring proposals that touch the city’s partition or shared governance. In context, with Oslo-era negotiations and Arafat as the personification of the opposing claim, this rhetoric functions less as description than as boundary-setting: a maximalist line meant to harden identity, consolidate a domestic coalition, and redefine “peace” as acceptance of an already settled outcome.
The sentence then escalates from policy to permanence. “Jerusalem is Israel’s capital” is a claim of present fact; “will never be divided” is a preemptive strike against negotiation; “will remain” turns into a promise to voters; “for ever and ever” steps outside politics into liturgy. That last phrase is doing heavy cultural work, borrowing the cadence of prayer to sacralize sovereignty. It’s not just that Jerusalem must stay united; it’s that its status is placed beyond the reach of ordinary democratic change, international pressure, or diplomatic trade-offs.
The subtext is aimed in multiple directions. To Israelis, it signals steadiness and defiance, a leader refusing the language of concession. To Palestinians, it telegraphs that core aspirations will be treated as non-starters. To foreign mediators, it narrows the agenda in advance: don’t bring proposals that touch the city’s partition or shared governance. In context, with Oslo-era negotiations and Arafat as the personification of the opposing claim, this rhetoric functions less as description than as boundary-setting: a maximalist line meant to harden identity, consolidate a domestic coalition, and redefine “peace” as acceptance of an already settled outcome.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|
More Quotes by Benjamin
Add to List
