The Planned
Ethnic Cleansing
and Some of Its Consequences
Arieh Stav
An Introductory Comment
When Rabin and Arafat shook hands on the White
House lawn on September 13, 1993, thereby granting the Oslo Accords a final seal
of approval, Nativ published an expanded issue in mournful colors.
The issue was devoted to an analysis of Rabin’s course of action and its
anticipated ramifications for the Jewish state. In retrospect, the
prognostications, from that period, tragically, were almost entirely realized.
The projected end result of the present ethnic cleansing program from the Sharon
school is easier to predict than that of its predecessor. That is because we are
familiar with all of the components of the national tragedy, which befell Israel
(referred to as “The Rabin Legacy”), and Sharon is deepening the rift in each
and every area. At the same time, this article will most likely be greeted with
disbelief and claims that it contains significant exaggerations etc. However it
is appropriate to mention that had someone stood 15 years ago and claimed that
Rabin would grant legitimacy to Arafat and the terrorist organizations or
asserted just three years ago that Sharon would carry out a campaign of ethnic
cleansing against his own people, he would have been considered out of his mind,
or more mildly as one making a mountain out of a molehill and promoting
unwarranted panic. To our credit, we can determine unequivocally: We said all
that and we were right.
First we must assert, firmly and unambiguously,
that in employing the term “disengagement” Sharon and his government are
following in the footsteps of the tyrannical regimes, which conceal their
intentions in an Orwellian “Newspeak”. “Disengagement” is nothing other that
“ethnic cleansing”, and it should not be called anything else. The definition of
“ethnic cleansing” – a term coined by Drazen Pewtrovic, an expert in
international law at the University of Sarajevo after the civil war in
Yugoslavia, states: “Ethnic cleansing means the eviction by force of citizens
belonging to one ethnic group from their land and homes and the transfer of the
cleansed territory to another ethnic group.” Pewtrovic’s definition was the
criterion employed by the International Court in The Hague when they placed
Slobodan Milosevic on trial and characterized his actions as “a crime against
humanity whose perpetrators are criminals”1
Thus the definition of ethnic cleansing, in its
entirety, applies to the action, which Sharon and his government are plotting.
The fact that the deportees will be granted remuneration is secondary in this
respect and will be dealt with below.
There is one substantive difference between
Sharon’s intentions and the actions of Milosevic and others like him: Milosevic
evicted a hostile population with which he had a hundreds-of-years long blood
feud and he transferred the cleansed territory to his countrymen; Sharon is
evicting his own countrymen and transferring the territory to murderers of his
people, erstwhile allies of Hitler and his present-day successors, who openly
and publicly declare that their objective is the destruction of the Jewish
state. This phenomenon, anchored in Jewish pathology, unparalleled in the
history of nations, is the essence of the Chosen People School of fascism.
Mussolini, Stalin and Milosevic and the like massacred the enemies of their
country and worked to enlarge, strengthen and extend it. The Jewish fascist –
and it makes no difference whether he emerged from the Hashomer Hazair school or
from the Sycamore Farm mafia, acts as if possessed to liquidate his country by
means of glorification of the enemy.
Towards the Destruction of
Settlement in Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley and the Golan
It goes without saying that the destruction of the
settlement in Gush Katif and northern Samaria is a preliminary stage leading
towards the destruction of the settlement in Judea, Samaria and the Golan
Heights and the transfer of Jerusalem to the Arab enemy. This course of action,
which will leave the State of Israel a bleeding stump, will necessarily lead to
a withdrawal from the 1949 armistice lines to the partition borders. This
process, in the midst of which we find ourselves today, was determined in the
Camp David Agreements, in the most severe historical failure in the brief
history of the State of Israel. In the Six-Day War, Israel routed its enemies in
a defensive war more moral than any other in the modern age. Not only was it
Israel’s right to keep the entire Sinai Desert, it was its obligation, based on
the principle of natural justice anchored in international law: “Ex injuria
jus non oritur”, according to which the aggressor must be punished!
Every proper country conducts itself in that manner. Based on that principle, at
the end of the two World Wars Germany lost many territories, among them those
which it ruled for hundreds of years, like East Prussia, Pomerania and Silesia.
The Jewish state acted accordingly in the War of Independence after defeating
the enemy, which deigned to conquer it and annexed many territories, which
doubled its size relative to the partition borders.
Fifteen million Germans were evicted from their
land and their homes and dispatched to the German interior. However, in contrast
to the actions taken by Germany’s enemies, victorious Israel did not deport the
Israeli Arabs – the spearhead of the Arab enemy’s attempt to destroy the nascent
state. This was a historic blunder whose steep price is being paid by the Jewish
state today, with an Arab fifth column coalescing within it.
Thus, relinquishing Sinai to Egypt was a blatant
violation of the principle of justice at the foundation of international law,
and an act of rewarding the aggressor. Destruction of the settlement in Sinai,
unprecedented in the history of Zionism, by none other than Ariel Sharon, along
with the recognition of the “legitimate rights of the Palestinian people”,2
were the first nail in the coffin of Zionism, hammered in by Menahem Begin with
much fanfare and revelry.
Thus, one ought not to be misled by pipe-dreams of
the type spread by Sharon’s emissary of iniquity, Dov Weisglass, see the
interview with him.3 There is no more contemptible lie than the claim
that by means of evacuating parts of Judea, Samaria and Gaza, Israel will
strengthen the settlement in Judea and Samaria. The polar opposite is true:
Implementation of the “Road Map” and the establishment of a “Palestinian state”
are designed to bring an end to the Jewish settlement in Judea and Samaria. This
is the first stage in the Arab plot to bring about the destruction of Israel,
and these actions of the Israeli Prime Minister support their plot.
If the reader were to claim that what is written
here is exaggerated and outrageous, here is a direct quote, definitive evidence
straight from the horse’s mouth. This is what Sharon said during his sane
period: “Any relinquishing of territory, even partial, is a surefire formula
for national suicide”.4
The Fourth Geneva Conference and the
Settlement in Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, the Jordan Valley and Jerusalem
Ethnic cleansing of Jews from Judea, Samaria, the
Jordan Valley and the Golan Heights, 270,000 people, 80,000 households, a
comprehensive industrial and agricultural configuration, will engender an
economic crisis, which the state will be unable to bear. The cost of the present
transfer is estimated at 1.3 billion dollars. Destruction of the settlement in
the remaining sections of Judea and Samaria, the Jordan Valley and the Golan
Heights (on the basis of the precedent of the reparations per family in Gaza)
will approach a sum equivalent to half of the gross national product of Israel
and beyond – and that is only the civilian component. Replacing the loss of
deterrent military capability will double the total.5 As this
country, indeed no country could survive economically when losing its gross
national product; the remaining alternative is to evict the settlers from their
homes without compensation. As it is difficult to imagine that the IDF or the
police will dirty their hands by participating in that crime,6 the
task will be assigned to the “Quartet Army” units. That is the essence of the
Arab demand to deploy a European army in the “territories”, in order to ensure
the orderly establishment of the “Palestinian state”. The assignment of this
army, in coordination with comprehensive Arab terrorism and Israeli indifference7
(until then the Israeli Government will malign the settlement, like the
provocation, at Sharon’s command, of the eviction of the residents of Shalhevet...),
will be to evict the settlers from their homes at gunpoint. The action will
receive the blessing of the international community through characterization of
the settlers as “war criminals” based on the Fourth Geneva Convention,8
which states: “The occupying power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own
civilian population into the territory it occupies”.
To date, Israel claimed that the Fourth Geneva
Convention does not apply to it as:
The territories are not “occupied” in the sense
referred to in the Convention, as Israel fought a defensive war and its right
to those territories stems from the right of the attacked, which defeated the
aggressor;
Israel did not occupy the land of a sovereign
country, but rather regions overtaken by Jordan in the 1948 war;
The Land of Israel in its entirety including both
sides of the Jordan River was promised to Israel a commitment ratified by the
League of Nations in the British Mandate.
All three of those assertions will henceforth be
refuted by the Sharon Government, as deportation by force of a civilian
population – is tantamount to an admission that the settlement of those
territories was undertaken in violation of the Convention, and in doing so
Israel is making amends for the injustice. The reader claiming that this is
merely far-reaching speculation on the part of the undersigned should reread the
statement by Javier Solana, representative of the European Union for foreign
policy and security, who explicitly declared that “Although the European Union
congratulates the Israeli Government decision to evict the settlers from Gaza
and Northern Samaria, it must be clear that the Community sees this as merely a
first step towards the evacuation of all of the settlements from the occupied
territories”.9
Application of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which
establishes that the settlers are war criminals who were settled by an
aggressor/occupier in an occupied country, to the settlement in Judea and
Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and Jerusalem, has been on the
European Parliament’s agenda for years. To date no resolution has been adopted
on the matter, due to the resolute opposition voiced by Israel and its few
European Union friends. Although the first stage – labeling products
manufactured in Judea, Samaria and the Golan, so that they may be expunged from
the list of exports to the European Union, was adopted with the blessing of
Deputy Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, the Europeans require a more dramatic and
firm precedent, and that is the entire essence of the present deportation. By
deporting them, Sharon is inscribing the mark of Cain on their foreheads and
granting legitimacy to those seeking to apply the Fourth Geneva Convention to
Israel.
The Military Failure
One of the more severe phenomena taking place in
our country since Sharon’s transformation is in the area of Egypt. Egypt, “the
most dangerous of Israel’s enemies” in the words of the then Deputy Chief of
General Staff Matan Vilnai, is openly preparing for war with Israel, in three
areas:
The Egyptian arms race and its military
expenditures far beyond any security needs;
De-legitimatization of the Jewish state in every
possible international forum, from the UN and its institutions to the European
Union;
Dehumanization of the Jew by means of
anti-Semitic tools inherited by the Egyptians from the Nazis.
Thus, for example, the anti-Israel pogrom at the
conference in Durban. South Africa was prepared two weeks in advance by the Arab
League in Cairo. That which Israel refers to as “Palestinian terrorism” is
actually a low-intensity war, which Egypt is conducting against Israel. This
explains the steady supply of arms and ammunition delivered, for convenience
sake, through subterranean tunnels and referred to by Israel as “smuggling”. The
regular meetings between the heads of Egyptian intelligence and Arafat and the
heads of the terrorist organizations are for no other purpose than to coordinate
the military actions against Israel. It is worth remembering that the act of
recalling the Egyptian ambassador is the first stage prior to the severing of
diplomatic relations and declaring war.
Beginning with his first day in office, Sharon has
been knowingly and systematically been concealing the truth about Egypt from the
public. His declarations on the matter to the foreign press are designed to
grant legitimacy to every Egyptian act of destruction. This reached its peak in
the directive to congratulate Mubarak personally and the Egyptian Government for
their role in the wake of the bombing of the hotel in Taba and the murder of
Israeli citizens. The present course of action of withdrawal from Gaza and
relinquishing the territory to Egyptian military administration, i.e.:
deployment of an Egyptian military force on Israel’s border, is a strategic
failure, which can be accurately described as nothing less than “apparent
treason”. From now on, even before the establishment of an independent Arab
country in the Land of Israel – and all the more so after the establishment of
the “Palestinian state” – any Israeli attempt to stage a retaliatory action in
response to an act of terrorism will be deemed an act of war on the part of
Israel and will therefore lead to the deployment of the Egyptian Army in Sinai.
Already today, the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria will
place the power plants in Hadera (14 km) and Ashqelon (8 km), which provide most
of the state’s electricity needs, into the range of Qasam and Katyusha rockets.
The Road Map
It is important to remember that the program known
as the “road map”, which was designed to establish a “Palestinian state” and
restore Israel to the June 4, 1967 borders, was never an American attempt to
impose upon Israel a course of action which is, for all intents and purposes,
the beginning of the end of the Jewish state and the destruction of the third
Temple. More than the (American) calf wanted to nurse, the (Israeli) cow wanted
to feed. It was Sharon who undermined the American president and not the
opposite. It was Sharon who provided the plan with the seal of approval of the
Prime Minister of Israel and swore to implement it. This forum is insufficient
to convey the astonishment evoked by the document among friends of Israel in
both houses of Congress in Washington. However, in a proper country it is
reasonable to assume that the Prime Minister is acting in the best interests of
his people, not contrary to those interests. Thus the large, vigorous pro-Israel
lobby, ranging from AIPAC and a majority of the members of Congress in both
houses to the tens of millions strong Christian community, was completely
paralyzed by the government of the Jewish state.
A rank and file member of Congress is willing to
confront his president but he certainly will not be more Zionist than an Israeli
Prime Minister. It was Yizhak Shamir who absorbed the SCUD missiles during the
Gulf War with no response and was hauled as a criminal before the Madrid
Conference; it was Rabin in 1995 and Netanyahu in 1997 who torpedoed the
transfer of the American embassy to Jerusalem; now it is the turn of the
greatest liquidator of all.
The International Aspect
Israel’s status, difficult and problematic since
its inception, has dipped to unprecedented depths since the insanity known as
the “Oslo Accords”. In their wake, Israel became a doormat trampled by every
pariah. The French ambassador to England allowed himself to publicly
characterize it as “that shitty little country”; a discussion takes place in the
press raising doubts regarding Israel’s very right to exist and the American
struggle against “fundamentalist Islam” is being paid for (as usual) in Israeli
currency. Now, the Israeli Prime Minister, who until recently was maligned with
every derogatory epithet possible in the western press, against whom in the most
literal sense a blood libel was conducted and whom the International Court in
The Hague was implored to place him on trial for wars against humanity – he is
the man who himself granting legitimacy to the disparagement of his own country
and he is cooperating with the most despicable of Israel’s enemies. Suddenly he
is informing us that Israel is an occupying country, that terrorism is rewarded
with an Arab country in the heart of western Israel and that an ethnic cleansing
should be carried out against his people.
This frantic abandonment of all of Israel’s most
fundamental principles, this admission of the failure of Zionism and of national
bankruptcy, will cause the flame of anti-Semitism to burn as it never has
before. Return to the June 4, 1967 borders will immediately lead to
international pressure to implement UN Resolution 194 regarding the return of
refugees to their homes, as Sharon has undermined the moral basis for Israel’s
opposition. Concomitantly, Arab pressure accompanied at first by the European
Union and later by the State Department in Washington in order to “ameliorate
the historic injustice caused the Palestinian people by the Israeli occupation
during the 1948 naqba (tragedy)”, as Arafat noted before the UN
Secretary-General in their September 1999 meeting.
Why?
To the question “why”, it is apparently only
possible to respond using pathological tools inherent to the Jewish soul, and
that too is uncertain as Jewish pathology is also an unusual phenomenon in the
entirety of the Chosen People’s mental afflictions. It is customary to posit
that in times of distress the public chooses the one among them who is head and
shoulders above the rest – see the cases of Churchill, De-Gaulle and Roosevelt.
Why the Jewish people choose specifically its destroyers and demolishers to lead
them towards a national holocaust – that is a riddle with no solution as is
unprecedented in the history of nations. However, Sharon’s case is unusual even
relative to the frauds and opportunists, which the Jewish people have chosen to
rule over them. The reference is to the aspect of corruption from the “Sycamore
Farm mafia” school.
Shimon Peres, to his credit, documented his
spiritual transformation from a sane Zionist to the Baron Munchausen of the “New
Middle East” in a book bearing that title. Peres’ philosophy, moonstruck and
pathetic though it may be, is nevertheless a systematic code in which he
communicates his spiritual world to the public. The Israeli Left, which gains
its spiritual strength from self-hatred, historical blindness and adherence to
every hater of Israel, also has a systematic code that it presents to the
public; see the Beilin syndrome and the Geneva Program. Compared to Sharon,
though, Beilin and Peres can expect a place among the 36 righteous men. Sharon
changed his stripes overnight with no explanation. The few statements of
blather, which he released to a few journalists (interviews on the eve of the
Jewish New Year or his speech at the Herzliya Conference), are not even an
insult to the intelligence as Sharon never responds to the questions asked
anyway. Thus, by means of elimination, there is only one plausible explanation,
which MK Zvi Hendel pithily characterized: “The depth of the evacuation equals
the depth of the investigation”. Below is the account, which Hendel, who was
then Deputy Education Minister, claims to have received from one of the
participants.
“The Depth of the Evacuation Equals
the Depth of the Investigation”
In late 2003, distressing information reached Dov
Weisglas, esq., Sharon’s attorney and chief of staff: The contents of the
revised indictment against Dudi Appel in the Greek Island matter. The revised
indictment stated that Gilad Sharon had received an astronomical salary for
relatively marginal consultancy services in the mega-deal in which the
contractor sought to purchase the Greek Island of Petrocolus for the purpose of
building one of the largest vacation sites in the world there. In paying that
salary to Gilad Sharon, Appel apparently sought to obtain assistance from the
Prime Minister himself in consummating the deal.
Weisglas was distraught. He understood perfectly
the connotation of “bribery” – the legal term for the deal described above. He
shared his concerns with the “farm forum”, the Prime Minister’s support group,
which would regularly meet on the farm: His sons, Omri and Gilad, Weisglas,
public relations consultant Eyal Arad and others.
Weisglas was determined: “If the indictment
includes the section about bribery, we are in a lot of trouble. We must take a
drastic step to stop this course of action”. The question was what is that
“significant step”, which would be able to stop the indictment snowball. “Look,
Arik”, Weisglas said, “You have no choice. There are many precedents in the
world when a leader of a nation undertakes a significant national enterprise,
investigations against him are closed. That is your chance”.
For a moment, a proposal was raised to go to war,
however that was immediately rejected. It was clear that the Left would not
forgive Sharon, with his problematic past in that area, for going to war. “We
need a political initiative”, Weisglas said.
Then Eyal Arad said: “Arik, go for a total
evacuation of the Gaza Strip. The Right will support you on that issue because
they have already become accustomed to the idea. Everyone hates Gaza and no one
will oppose an action of that sort. It will extract you from the legal muddle.
It is the easiest step to market to the public. Come on, go for it”.
Sharon disagreed. “Have you gone mad?” he asked
those present, “The settlement there is a strategic asset. I truly believe that.
It was but a few months ago that I explained that to Mizna”.
The discussion ended with no decision. Time passed,
the apparent bribery story gained momentum in the media. The “farm forum” sought
a different step, which would be dramatic enough to dissuade the Attorney
General from pursuing his plan to indict, but found none. Three weeks later, the
“farm forum” reconvened. This time it was the turn of Gilad, Sharon’s
“right-wing” son who was considered to be the smart one in the family, to be the
primary speaker. “Father”, he said to him, “We have no choice. Nothing else can
save us. We must go for an evacuation of the Gaza Strip”.
This time, the father agreed with his son. Shortly
thereafter, on February 2, 2004, Sharon announced his “disengagement plan”. It
goes without saying that his action was successful. From that date on, the Greek
Island matter disappeared from the public agenda and Sharon became a media
darling and a cultural hero of the extreme Left.
*
As there is no other plausible explanation for the
phenomenon of a man who in one fell swoop tramples everything in which he
believed, which is, not coincidentally, the essence of Zionism – there is no
avoiding the conclusion that Sharon sold out the Land of Israel for personal
gain. Quisling and Petain would be blushing in shame.
Endnotes
1
Drazen Pewtrovic, European Journal of International Law, Sarajevo
University Law School, 1994.
2
This is the English version (Legitimate Rights of the Palestinian
People) signed by Menahem Begin at Camp David. The Hebrew version “Israeli
Arabs”, which is not legally binding, was conceived to mislead the Israeli
public. As this is the first case in which Israel signed a document
recognizing the “Palestinian People”, Begin’s portrait should hand next to
Arafat’s as the father of the Palestinian state.
3
Ari Shavit, Haaretz, October 6, 2004.
4
Ariel Sharon, The Jerusalem Post, April 4, 1991.
5
Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto, “At What Price the Golan Heights?”, ACPR Policy Paper
No. 5.
6
Difficult but not impossible. It is worth remembering that 9 of the 11
gulag commanders under Stalin were Jews and that moral corruption and
self-hatred are intrinsic to the soul of the Jewish radical. Thus, “Peace Now”
quickly issued a statement that Sharon need not be concerned about refusal to
serve when the day arrives and to that purpose introduced a campaign entitled:
“For Every Soldier Who Refuses, I Volunteer”. See the Peace Now website.
7
The cooperation of the Israeli Government with Arab terrorism can be
diagnosed these days. In light of the daily mortar bombardment of the Gush
Katif settlements – the IDF response ranges from total inaction to sporadic
retaliation with tank shells. The clear message was internalized by the other
side. The shelling of Sderot ceased and it is now totally focused on the Gush
Katif settlements.
8
Geneva Convention, Article 49.
9
Javier Solana in an interview with Der Spiegel, October
19, 2004.
Arieh Stav is the editor of
Nativ. The reader can find a more comprehensive analysis of the
Jewish pathology in his book The Israeli Death Wish, Modan
Publishers, 1998 (Hebrew).
|
