THE OSLO DEBATE: FAILED HYPOTHESIS? OR PERHAPS TREASON? Gil-White vs. Einat Wilf
She says the experiment failed. He says the experiment was a lie. And the death toll keeps rising.
ISRAEL: HOW TO WIN?
an MOR series in collaboration with the Israeli channel Arutz Tov.
Previous conversation in this series:
Below is a debate between Dr. Einat Wilf and Francisco Gil-White on the supposed logic of the Oslo Process, which brought the terrorist PLO/Fatah (now rebranded the ‘Palestinian Authority’) into militarily strategic territory of the Jewish State. The gravest security problems that Israel faces—including the genocidal attack of 7 October 2023—stem from the failed Oslo Process. Wilf and Gil-White discuss why the Oslo Process was even attempted in the first place. They do not agree.
BEFORE YOU PRESS ‘PLAY,’ you may want a bit of context, in which case we suggest reading first the background materials just below the video. It ain’t a lot of text, and it’ll give you exactly what you need to grasp who the participants are, and what is at stake.
Einat Wilf presents the Oslo Accords—which brought the terrorist PLO/Fatah into the Jewish State, to govern the Muslim Arabs in the militarily strategic territories of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza—as a social and political experiment that was premised on the following hypothesis: If the Arabs get some Israeli land, there will be peace. But the empirical evidence, she says, has now shown that the Arabs will not give peace in exchange for land. On this question—though not on others—Wilf now agrees with the Israeli right: there can be no peace through negotiations, because Muslim civilization, and the Arab Palestinians more specifically, are not really interested in it. What they want is an antisemitic genocide. In Wilf’s view, therefore, the hypothesis that mobilized the Oslo Process, that the Arabs might live in peace if they were given some Israeli land, has now been tested and refuted.
Francisco Gil-White agrees that the Oslo Process cannot produce peace—but asks a sharper question: Why was it even attempted? Is it really possible that Israeli bosses—and their foreign policy advisors—didn’t already know, before running this alleged ‘experiment,’ what the outcome would be? He reminds Wilf that ‘the Palestinian Authority,’ PLO/Fatah, is directly and criminally descended from the Shoa (Holocaust) via Hajj Amin al Husseini, father of the Arab Palestinian movement and one of Adolf Hitler’s top Nazi exterminators.
And he reminds Wilf that, in the 1970s, in Lebanon, PLO/Fatah armed and trained the guerrillas that installed Ayatollah Khomeini in power, and then also helped Khomeini to set up his terror infrastructure—all of it dedicated to repeat the Shoa in Israel.
Moreover, in 1974 PLO/Fatah created the infamous Plan of Phases, in which they stated they would negotiate with Israel but only to obtain a better position from which to destroy her. Why didn’t Israeli bosses explain all this to the Israeli Jews before running their Oslo ‘experiment’?
Who is Einat Wilf?
Dr. Einat Wilf has a Ph.D. in political science from Wolfson College, University of Cambridge. She is a prominent leftist and feminist Israeli intellectual, and a former politician and an author recognized for her influential work on Zionism, Israeli foreign policy, and education reform.
Wilf spent her military service as an intelligence officer, and then, after a stint as a strategic consultant for McKinsey and Co., she became a foreign policy advisor to both Shimon Peres and Yossi Beilin, both recognized architects of the Oslo Accords.
Her subsequent political career, including her tenure as a member of the Knesset, was marked by continued commitment to the two-state solution on which the Oslo Accords—and the entire Oslo Process of many years—was premised.
She has played a significant role in shaping the discourse around the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and other topics via her books, such as My Israel, Our Generation (2007), Back to Basics: How to Save Israeli Education (at No Additional Cost) (2008), Winning the War of Words: Essays on Zionism and Israel (2015), and Telling Our Story: Essays on Zionism, the Middle East, and the Path to Peace (2018).
Her most influential and controversial work to date is The War of Return (2020), co-authored with journalist Adi Schwartz. In it, Wilf argued that the Palestinian insistence on the “right of return” was the central obstacle to peace.
More recently, in the aftermath of the Hamas massacres and hostage-taking of October 7th, 2023, Wilf has gone beyond her arguments in The War of Return to conclude that the Oslo Process is a ‘failed experiment.’ The hypothesis that peace with Arab Muslims could be achieved by relinquishing land, she says, has been demolished. It is not merely a question of the “right of return,” an item one might haggle over in negotiations, but rather on the fundamental and complete disinterest of the Arab Muslim world—and the Arab Palestinians more specifically—in any kind of peace, and their simultaneous commitment to destroying the Jewish State in genocide.
Who is Francisco Gil-White?
Dr. Francisco Gil-White is a Mexican and American political anthropologist trained in both evolutionary game theory and sociocultural anthropology, with a Ph.D. from UCLA. His early work focused on explaining the cognitive adaptations responsible for various emergent social processes that are heavily recruited to shape political life, such as ethnic organization and prestige hierarchies. His theory of ethnicity and racism won him the New Investigator Prize from the Human Behavior and Evolution Society, and his theory of prestige, co-written with Joseph Henrich, is recognized as the definitive work in the field.
He finished his Ph.D. thesis in Philadelphia on a research-fellow grant from the Solomon Asch Center for Study of Ethnopolitical Conflict, a think tank created jointly by the political science and psychology departments at the University of Pennsylvania. Upon completing his thesis, he began also his new job as professor in the UPENN Psychology Department, teaching Biocultural Psychology and the Psychology of Ethnicity and Racism.
Gil-White turned his attention to the Arab–Israeli conflict—one of the Asch Center’s central research areas—and began investigating the origins of the so-called Arab Palestinian movement. He then learned something that, in all of his vast education, nobody had ever mentioned to him: that the Founding Father of the Arab Palestinian movement, Hajj Amin al Husseini, had been one of the top leaders of Adolf Hitler’s Final Solution, the extermination of the European Jews. Husseini recruited and trained many thousands of Bosnian and Kosovo Muslims to create entire Muslim Divisions of Himmler’s SS. And according to Dieter Wisliceny, Adolf Eichmann’s own right-hand man, in testimony given before the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, Husseini managed the death camp system together with Eichmann.
Since
Husseini had survived the war to become Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas’s mentor, creating for them the terrorist group Al Fatah, which by 1970 had swallowed the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization);
PLO/Fatah was introduced into militarily strategic territory of Israel via the Oslo ‘Peace’ Process, then renamed ‘Palestinian Authority’; and
PLO/Fatah played the key role creating the jihadi Iran of Ayatollah Khomeini, whose regime has had as its existential mission the genocidal destruction of Israel,
it seemed to Gil-White that Husseini’s story was highly relevant to Jewish and Western audiences. Because the State of Israel—supposedly—was not created as a death camp, but, to the contrary (supposedly), as a shield to protect the Jewish people from genocide.
Yet, as Gil-White also documented, despite Husseinni’s world fame during and immediately after World War II, all public discussion of him in media and academia had abruptly ceased right around 1968. As if the Earth had swallowed Husseini, nobody discussed him or his role in PLO/Fatah—whether in media or academia—in the context of the pressure to sign the Oslo Accords that brought PLO/Fatah into Israel.
Indeed, such was the silence surrounding anything about Husseini that it was even possible to become an ethnic-conflict specialist, Ph.D. in hand, without ever hearing, not once, about Husseini, as had happened to Gil-White. So he wrote an article documenting the entire history of the Arab Palestinian movement, and published it in Israel National News (Arutz Sheva).
And right away, UPENN fired him. That story is here:
This experience sparked Gil-White’s lifelong effort to understand better the larger political and geopolitical system that has been shaping Western history for millenia, and the power elites that manage our reality while they prepare and carry out all the necessary preparations for another genocidal attack against the Jewish people. The result has been a series of books called The Collapse of the West: The Next Holocaust and its Consequences (presently in Spanish but soon also in English), and an internet communication effort via articles, online courses, and videos called The Management of Reality.
Readers are invited to…
Give a like on YouTube
Subscribe on YouTube
Share the video with others
Share also MOR’s SPANISH YouTube channel.
For more content, visit our hub.
And… subscribe here:
Thanks for the enlightenment about Husseini. With that in mind one wonders about Trumps suck-up to the Arabs and Syria. Now Israel is totally surrounded by those who wish Israel off the map. Trump is selling them the weaponry. Is he abetting the next Holocaust?
Her problem with “the timeline” is that the Arab/Muslim world is on its own “timeline” of eternity coming from Muhammad’s conquest of Mecca to the Mahdi’s “inevitable” conquest of the rest of the planet. Our secularized leadership thinks in terms of cost/benefit balance, rational self-interest and some empathy towards the non-western world as fellow partners in humanity. Their opposite viewpoint is salvation versus damnation, the value of jihad and martyrdom, and total rejection of the non-Muslim world as infidel dogs unworthy of any respect. But also on the Western side there may also be a utilitarian inclination to view the State of Israel as the most untidy complication in an envisioned global governance in which neither Jewish nor Muslim aspirations are really valued but each is exploited only to serve the globalists’ agendas.