The triumphs of French diplomacy sometimes rival those of French feats at arms. Just days ago, the French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy declared that Iran is a stabilizing force in the Middle East. Today, the Jerusalem Post reports, he had to eat his words, after Iranian Prime Minister Mahmoud Ahmadinejad once again called for Israel's elimination, this time at an emergency meeting of leaders of Islamic nations in Malaysia. Douste-Blazy condemned Ahmdinejad's statement as "absolutely unacceptable from anyone, especially from a head of state," proving that France retains a shred of principle under all that self-serving cynicism.
Douste-Blazy said that the crisis had presented an opportunity for Iran to "show that it can play a positive and stabilizing role in the region," but added that Ahmadinejad's statement "confirmed that this is not the case."
Of even greater interest was Ahmadinejad's statement itself. He said, " "Although the main solution is for the elimination of the Zionist regime, at this stage an immediate cease-fire must be implemented." The translation from Islamic fascist double-speak: "Our side [Hezbollah] is losing."
To fully appreciate Ahmadinejad, as well as previous offers to Israel of a truce from Hamas, one needs to learn a little Islamic history, courtesy of Alex Safian, of the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA). In jihadist ideology, a truce can be offered to the enemies of Islam only for tactical reasons - principally when the enemy is strong and the Muslims are weak. The truce period is to be used to change the balance of forces. When this is accomplished, and the stage has been set for a Muslim victory, the truce must be broken. This strategy follows the practice and teachings of Islam's founder, the Prophet Mohammed, who arranged a 10 year truce with the Quraysh tribe in 628, when his forces were not yet powerful enough to defeat the Quraysh. The truce has been known since then as the "Treaty of Hudaybiyah," after the site near the Quraysh city of Mecca where itwas negotiated. Less than 2 years later, when Muslim forces were sufficiently strong, the Quraysh were defeated by the Muslims andMecca captured. The Arabic term used to describe the truce with the Quraysh was hudna - the same word used by Hamas in their "truce"offers to Israel. Yasir Arafat, may his memory be erased, also described the Oslo Accords between Israel and the PLO as a "hudna" in a speech made to an Arabic audience shortly after the famous handshake on the White House lawn. This should have been a warning to Israel and the United States about the disingenuousness of Arafat regarding long-term peace with Israel, but it was not heeded.
Ahmadinejad wants a hudna as well. He is very forthright about his intentions. He tells Israel, "I intend to destroy you, but I am not strong enough yet to do so. Let's call a truce to give me time to bolster my forces, and then I can kill you." What fool would accept such an offer?