The Case Against Disengagement

Yoram Ettinger

While the dramatic drop in 2004 terrorist activity is attributed, mostly, to IDF’s re-engagement with major towns in Judea & Samaria (J&S), the Oslo-driven “disengagements” have ignited an unprecedented wave of Palestinian terrorism. Each square inch ceded to the Palestinian Authority (PA), since 1994 has become the largest terrorist base in the world, a safe haven for Islamic terrorists, a platform of anti-US and anti-Jewish PA terrorism.

The creation of the PA has inspired anti-US terrorism in the Mideast and beyond. The July 2000 “disengagement” from So. Lebanon has propelled Hizballah from a local to regional stature, plaguing US troops in Afghanistan and Iraq and energizing Palestinian terrorism.

Abu Mazen – a chief architect of PA hate-education, the engineer of PA co-existence with Hamas and a Holocaust denier – does not represent a strategic departure from past PA conduct. 

“Disengagement” would advance terrorism, rather than peace. If the PA gets territory in return for terrorism, why would it, or any other Arab party, conduct terror-free negotiation with Israel?! While Mideast peace has been driven by deterrence, “disengagement” (retreat) undermines deterrence, and therefore fuels pressure and violence. Rewarding terrorism with disengagement, would transform Jerusalem, Ben Gurion Airport, Afula, Netanya and other major towns into a potential missile range.

President Bush’s call for a total freeze of all settlements, his comment that “any final status agreement [including the “claim of return”] will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes”, and his refusal to finance the “disengagement”, confirm that “disengagement” would not produce US dividends to Israel. His friendly statements were not ratified or legislated by Congress, which merely passed a non-binding resolution.

Israel has not controlled Gaza Palestinians since the 1994 “disengagement”. Therefore, the “disengagement” would not impact at all Israel’s demography.

“Disengagement” would not be financed by the US. It will increase budget deficit, avert economic recovery, worsen unemployment, increase taxes, impose government bonds, cut human services and infrastructure expenditures, etc.

“Disengagements” have symptomized the Oslo Process – land for terrorism, a setback to intelligence-gathering, deterrence, pre-emption, and to the pursuit of peace, a bottomless keg militarily, diplomatically and economically.

back to top

Israel’s Tenured Radicals

David Hornik

Radical Israeli academics deny Israel’s legitimacy, advocate its destruction, and compare it with the Nazi and other worst regimes in history. They also call for widespread insurrection and mutiny by Israeli soldiers and support international efforts at boycotting Israel and ostracizing the teachers and students of these universities themselves.

Although academic radicalism is common throughout the Western world, and is not new in Israel where it dates back to prestatehood days, it is particularly dangerous at present when Israel, not only surrounded geographically by enemies as in the past, is also the subject of an intensifying worldwide delegitimation campaign with a strong anti-Semitic coloration. A new website, Israel Academic Monitor, exposes the ongoing abuses by Israeli academics who, calumniating Israel in their writings and in both domestic and foreign forums, lend encouragement to the enemies of the state and provide a steady stream of incendiary material that is regularly featured in anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic websites and publications. Donors who seek to help Israel by strengthening its academic institutions need a better awareness of some of the objectionable things being done with their money, and to condition their future contributions more carefully. For Israel, the fight against radicals who condemn the very society that grants them freedom, employment, and platforms to express their views, while showing sympathy for the society’s genocidal foes and striving to train generations who will think and act as they do, is a fight of nothing less than existential proportions.

back to top

The Image of Evil:
The Bitter Experience of a Lecturer in Post-Zionist Academia

David Bukay

The article deals with distressing personal experiences, which the author underwent as a result of the joint activity of two students, an Arab (Fahdi Abu-Yunis) and a Jew (David Merhav), with the support of an Arab lecturer (Dr. Assad Genaam), and with the approval and encouragement of campus lecturers famous for their post-Zionist opinions.

The article focuses on their tendentious and well-coordinated tactics and modus operandi intended to besmirch, denounce, misrepresent and distort the words and the reputation of a lecturer who is “not one of them” – i.e. who has different opinions – through extensive use of the internet (in three languages), and with the close active support of the irresponsible and unscrupulous media, which neither checks, seeks to clarify nor relates to reality or to the facts, but rather uses its unlimited power to establish and disseminate clearly false accounts.

The article exposes the problematic nature of the preponderance of media outlets, their pursuit of sensationalism and scoops, and the absolute lack of responsibility for their publications, to the point of genuine incitement and license to kill.

The article deals with the fanatic radicalism of the post-Zionists, who seek to liquidate all who disagree with them, and all means are legitimate in achieving this objective, including deceit, libel and direct attacks. The affair also proves once again the irresponsibility of the media. Also the Rector of the University has summed up the investigation very clearly and unequivocally, the media has its own devastating agenda, and the criminal is the hero.

For anyone seeking to understand their modus operandi and the methods, which they employ – my experience is enlightening.

back to top

Advanced Technology As A Force Multiplier

Azriel Lorber

The term “Force Multiplier” became current during the Cold War. The United States, and its NATO allies, held that if war came to Europe, sophisticated weaponry, based on advances in miniaturized electronics and micro-computers, in which the West had the edge, could stop the numerically superior Soviet forces, without resorting to nuclear war. This philosophy led to the development of a wide range of precision guided munitions and brought about the introduction of advanced techniques for the handling of combat forces – C3I (Command, Control, Communications and Intelligence). This last development extended the meaning of the term from actual weapons to other systems that enable a given force to work more efficiently. While superior weapons (as compared to those of the adversary) do constitute a force-multiplier, such superiority, and the advantages it confers, may be very short lived if not exploited correctly and decisively. On the other hand, better force management has longer lasting effects.

Advanced technologies that could be defined as Force Multipliers face several problems. Two of these are the skepticism of the various “Old Guards” and the necessity of occasionally investing considerable resources in indispensable support of these highly advanced systems.

Modern Force Multipliers cover the whole gamut of military operations. These technologies can contribute to better mobility of troops and the ability to penetrate the enemy’s territory; efficient management of logistics and stocks; operational planning; situational awareness under combat conditions and data fusion of information from disparate sources; improved unmanned vehicles for hazardous missions; improved survivability of troops in combat, and when necessary, advanced and speedy treatment of casualties and last, but not least, advanced weapon concepts.

Contrary to popular perceptions, suitably tailored advanced technology can significantly contribute in the so called asymmetric warfare (against less technological foes), to the war against terrorism and also support combat operations in urban warfare scenarios.

Finally it should be borne in mind that there is a definite shift in the character of technologies that are critical to efficient fighting. From pure weapons, intended to physically harm the enemy there is a shift towards the introduction of combat supporting technologies that, although do not directly affect the enemy, nevertheless are vital to the better management of the military effort.

back to top

Ehud Barak: “Syria Is Not Ready For Peace”

Yaakov Meiron

Ever since the 1991 Madrid Peace Conference, for nine years, up to March 26, 2000 - Israel held peace talks with Syria under four Israeli Prime Ministers: Yitzhak Shamir, Yitzhak Rabin, Binyamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak.

Syria obtained in these negotiations full satisfaction of its most extravagant claims - while Israel, the victorious and supposedly clever side - appeared in these negotiations in a most clumsy manner. None of the facts relating to the area under discussion, no international agreement, no Security Council Resolution, were raised by Israel in support of any one of her timid submissions. Vital interests of Israel gained no hearing. Israel gave the impression of being grateful to Syria for being so good as to talk to her.

The present article tries to pinpoint the causes which led to the poor performance and to the poor results.

back to top

Demography: Fear Vs. Reality

Ezra Sohar

Israel takes special interest in that which is referred to as the “demographic problem”, which deals with the quantitative ratio between the Jewish and Arab populations in Israel. This article analyzes several fundamental demographic concepts and details Arab and Jewish history in the Land of Israel and the State of Israel from a demographic perspective.

Hundreds of articles have been published in the Hebrew press on this topic, the decisive majority of which report an increase in the percentage of Arabs relative to the Jews or anticipate an Arab majority in Israel at one point or another. Most of these prognostications have already proven inaccurate.

Summarizing and cross-checking the data leads to the following conclusions:

1. The element of immigration and emigration are central to Jewish demography and of great importance to Arab demography.
    

2. The trends in the Arab birthrate were incorrectly assessed due to the Israeli demographer’s European education and thought processes. Data indicates that the trends in the Arab birthrate like those in Europe and elsewhere perform in accordance with the Swedish model.
    

3. There is a conspicuous decline in all components of the Arab birthrate between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. This is part of a global phenomenon, which especially applies to the Arab and Moslem countries in the Middle East.
    

4. Data indicates that since the end of the War of Independence, no significant change in the quantitative ratio between the Jews and Arabs has transpired in the State of Israel or between the Mediterranean and the Jordan, and it turns out that there are many fewer Arabs residing in Judea, Samaria and Gaza than previously assumed.
    

5. The numerous predictions of an Arab majority, to be actualized on various dates, some of which have already passed, have proven fallacious.
    

6. There is no evidence supporting the assessment that the Arab birthrate (Arafat called it the “Palestinian womb”) will endanger the Jewish majority in the foreseeable future.
    

7. Failure to curb the granting of residency and citizenship in the State of Israel to Arabs from Judea and Samaria or from neighboring countries is liable to alter the quantitative ratio between Jews and Arabs in the State of Israel in the Arabs’ favor.

back to top