|
Aborting the Danger in its Incipient Stage
Editorial
The public mandate which Ariel Sharon received, an
open, sweeping vote of confidence – for the first time relieved of the
curse of Arab irredentism whose estrangement from the State of Israel
prevented their participation in the most recent elections – is
unprecedented in its scope. An overwhelming majority of 70%, among them
many constituents of the camp traditionally affiliated with the Labor
movement, who understood, employing healthy common sense, that is:
whatever was left of it after the media brainwashing campaign, the
magnitude of the impending disaster resulting from the Oslo conspiracy.
Everyone now knows that there neither is nor was there ever a "peace
process", but rather a repeated attempt to destroy the State of Israel
through a combination of terrorism, political delegitimization and the
negation of strategic assets. All of these serving as a prelude to a
comprehensive war. As always, Egypt is leading the pan-Arab strategic
process. The two overriding trends which exemplify the region attest to
this: a. Arms proliferation, especially weapons of mass destruction and
the means to deliver them, i.e. ballistic missiles; b. A rise in the level
of virulent anti-Semitism which is designed to lead to the
delegitimization of the Jewish State and the demonization of Jews. The
present phase is designed to transform the territories, which were
relinquished to the Palestinian Authority as a staging ground for
terrorism against Israel. The comprehensive acquisition of shoulder
missiles, Katyushas and mortars, blatantly delivered from Jordan, Lebanon
and especially Egypt, have led to an escalation of the terrorist alignment
which is quickly adopting a Lebanese character. Already, every settlement
located within a few kilometers of Area A is under threat of mortar fire.
Today, these are the kibbutizim, moshavim and towns adjacent to the Gaza
Strip, Sderot, Kfar Saba or settlements in Judea and Samaria. Tomorrow, it
will be Rosh Ha'ayin, Petah Tikva and Lod, along with a significant number
of the central traffic arteries in the country which are already partially
paralyzed. With the acquisition of shoulder missiles, Ben-Gurion Airport
will become a central target of terrorism. In practice, it will not be
necessary to intercept a commercial aircraft. The mere potential and
implicit threat will lead to the cessation of foreign companies' flights
to the State of Israel's central international airport. Can one even
consider endangering 400 hostages to the mercy of Arab barbarism?
Relinquishing territories in Western Samaria to the Palestinians will
bring much of the Dan region, in which 70 per cent of Israel's Jewish
population and a similar percentage of its industrial infrastructure are
concentrated, within Katyusha range. The establishment of a Palestinian
state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, as conceived by Sadat will lead to a
military pact with Egypt and Syria, according to the PLO's phased plan:
“Once it is established, the Palestinian National Authority will strive to
achieve a union of the confrontation countries, with the aim of completing
the liberation of all Palestinian territory, and as a step along the road
to comprehensive Arab unity” (paragraph 8). Therefore, if the Oslo process
does not cease immediately, Israel will find itself surrounded by Syrian
and Egyptian tanks, not in Sinai and the Golan, but on the outskirts of
the Dan Region.
As a result, this
danger should be aborted in its incipient stages, meaning dismantling the
Palestinian Authority and eradicating enemy weapons from the Western Land
of Israel. A decisive action on Israel's part will more than hint to the
Arab world that it had better not get entangled in another war. There is
no doubt that the price will be onerous. European community sanctions are
possible, the Arabs will beat the drums of war, the American State
Department will "lose its cool" and our local leftists will be consumed
with hatred. However, all of these are immeasurably preferable to the
likely alternative. Israel must rid itself of its image as a sacrifice
being led to slaughter that everyone nods at, pities and overtly and
covertly views their wretchedness with contempt. Israel has very powerful
allies in the American Congress, and with Clinton's departure, in the
White House as well. The Europeans, cognizant of the Moslem invasion of
Rome, Paris and London, are mindful of the danger posed by the Arabs and
therefore the possibility that they will support Israel – if it displays
the resolve to stand up for itself – cannot be discounted. In any case,
Israel has no alternative.
A.S.
The Editor's column
does not necessarily reflect the opinions of Nativ's Editorial Board.
back to
top
Israel’s War with the Palestinians:
Sources, Political Objectives and Operational Means
Yitzhak Klein
Israel is engaged in a war with the Palestinians;
force is being used against it for political ends. Its task is to cause
the Palestinians to desist from those ends; that is the essential
political objective of the war. To do so, however, Israel must first
determine what those ends are, and what means will suffice to cause their
abandonment. Palestinian society is dominated by the PLO in the form of
the Palestinian Authority, which is the bearer of a malignant form of
Palestinian nationalism that defines itself in terms of the elimination of
Israel. This is confirmed by analyzing Palestinian policy toward Israel,
and political discourse about Israel, and by comparing it with other
authoritarian regimes that have been motivated by politicidal ideologies.
Israeli responses to malignant Palestinian nationalism can, in theory, run
the gamut between containment and outright assault. The former is
inappropriate in an environment of open, constant combat. The PLO/PA
leadership is likely to prove inured to limited offensive measures meant
to pressure its economic interests or the Palestinian population. Israel,
therefore, must attain two objectives. First, it must utterly destroy the
PLO and its forces wherever they may be found. Second, it must inflict on
Palestinian society the experience of defeat, so as to thoroughly
discredit malignant Palestinian nationalism in the eyes of the
Palestinians themselves. Careful military preparation and management of
Israel’s international relations should prevent regional or international
intervention and create a window of opportunity for Israel to produce a
fait accompli. Those Palestinians willing to abandon malignant
nationalism should be afforded the opportunity to govern themselves in
peace.
back to
top
Religious
Visions and Sacred Terror: The Case of Islam
Charles Selengut
This essay compares and contrasts modernist,
traditionalist and transformative responses to the experience of
“cognitive dissonance” in the Muslim community as Islam faces
disappointment at its failure to fulfill its religious duty to expand and
create a universal Islamic civilization. The paper discusses the theology
and ideology of a growing and increasingly mainstream militant Islam that
refuses to accommodate to modernity and religious pluralism and has
developed innovative theological justifications for the expansion of
violent jihad as the means to achieve Islamic hegemony.
The paper considers the work of Sayyid Qutb and Abt
al-Salem Farji, the authors of AL-Faridah al-Gha’ibah, (The
Neglected Duty), two scholarly but widely popular militants who have
provided new potency to the classical Islamic view of jihad and
violent confrontation as the way to realize the Islamic vision of an
expanded Dar al-Islam with everyone living according to shari`ah
law. The new militancy permits no compromise with modern norms of
democracy and political pluralism and has championed violent jihad,
including murder and assassination, as “sacred terror” and as the singular
means to realize Islamic religious goals.
back to
top
Peace, Peace and No
Peace
Raphael Israeli
During the failed Camp
David II Conference of July 2000, Barak had demanded that Arafat commit
himself to the finality of the Israeli-Palestinian Accords, and Arafat
declined. If one looked at the Egyptian-Israeli Peace Accords of 22 years
ago, where the Egyptians signed an agreement that signaled the end of the
conflict with Israel, one would stop wondering why Arafat rejected Barak's
generous offer.
In fact, the Egyptians
undertook to maintain their ambassador in Israel, but as soon as there is
a problem, they withdraw him: first during the Lebanese war, and now when
the second Intifada broke out. They accepted to put an end to incitement
against Israel and the Jews, but they pursue their virulent anti-Semitic
onslaughts day in, day out, as if the peace accords were never signed.
All this shows that
the anti-Semitic infrastructure is so firm in Egypt and the rest of the
Arab world, that there is little chance to have any of them commit itself
to stop incitement, and if it does obligate itself, it will only be in
order to violate that commitment.
Much of the blame for
this state of affairs lies with Israel, which has been courting Mubarak in
spite of the fact that he has consistently, and expectedly, sided with the
Palestinians. Israel made him the arbiter for peace and is repeatedly
humiliating itself at his feet while he continues to repudiate it and has
refused to clamp down on the vitriol of his state-controlled media. So,
why should he change?
Israel was reluctant to deal with Haider, in spite of
the fact that he apologized for his past utterings, has never done any
harm to Jews, and was left out of the government of Austria. But Mubarak,
who engineered the killing of many Jews, is heading the Egyptian state,
has never desisted from the anti-Semitic onslaughts in his press, and
backed Arafat in his intransigence against Israel, remains the darling of
successive Israeli governments. This is hard to understand and accept.
back to
top
Nuclear Programs of Arab and Islamic States: Capabilities, Strategies, and
Implications
Gerald M. Steinberg and Aharon Etengoff
In this chapter, we will describe and analyze the 1)
nuclear weapons capabilities and technologies, 2) development and
acquisition plans and programs, and 3) statements on strategy and goals,
for the following eight countries: Pakistan, Iraq, Iran,
Libya, Syria, Egypt, Saudi Arabia
and Algeria.
For each country, we will present information based
on a detailed study of the sources, including US government and other
official reports, the academic literature, and press reports. The country
assessments will also include analysis of technological acquisitions
(including dual-use systems, materials, and facilities), delivery systems
such as ballistic missiles, and cooperation with third countries,
including Russia, China, and North Korea.
On this basis, the implications of the proliferation
of nuclear weapons and technology in the Arab and Islamic world will be
analyzed. In the case of Pakistan, this section will focus on the impact
of the nuclear weapons capability on the balance of power in the region
(including the Persian Gulf), on the nuclear ambitions and programs of the
other states in the region, and the potential for transfer of technology
and experienced personnel. Regarding the Iraqi and Iranian nuclear
acquisition programs, we will examine the security implications for the
region (including Israel), and for future deployment of US and NATO forces
and interests in the region. We will also consider the implications of the
accelerating nuclear proliferation process in this region for European
security interests.
back to
top
How Islam Plays the
Press
Joseph Farah
The world often views Islam as a seventh century
anachronism. But the truth is the Islamic world is playing and winning a
sophisticated game of media manipulation in which powerful and wealthy
police states and anti-democratic political movements are more often
portrayed and perceived – at least in the context of the Arab-Jewish
conflict – as victims rather than threatening oppressors. This paper will
contrast what Islamic leaders say about their intentions for the state of
Israel in English while western television cameras are rolling and what
they say to their own constituents in Arabic.
back to
top
The Politics of Oblivion and Brain Permeability: The Israeli Left
David Bukay
The article deals with the very odd and peculiar
phenomenon of the Israeli Left, who behave as if they see nothing but
peace and harmony between Israelis and Palestinians, provided that Israel
retreats to the 1967 borders. They believe that redemption lies behind the
door, and ignore the cruel and harsh reality, the killings, violence, and
the uprising. They do not pay the least attention to the Palestinians’
declarations and especially the Palestinians’ actions. They believe,
wholeheartedly, that peace now is not the only available alternative, but
it can be reached. This is a pure and classic example of the “mirror
image”: You look at your rival, and imagine you see yourself through the
mirror.
There are three types of Israeli Left: the
opportunistic hedonists who trade peace as a business. In this type we
specifically find politicians. The second type is peace as a religion, as
an intoxicating belief. In this we find intellectuals combined with the
“Peace Now” group. The third type is peace as a total ideology. In this we
find the “Post-Zionist” group combined with other radical Leftists.
The common denominator of the three types is that
they are only a salon Left and fashion derived, part of the social
“bon-ton”. They have nothing to do with the socialist Left of Europe, east
and west, and of course nothing t do with the radical Left revolutionary
ideology. They belong to the middle and upper class in Israel, to the
“North Tel Aviv State”.
The problem is they have almost total dominance of
the media, both the electronic and the press, and these determine the
public agenda in Israel. They “breed” themselves into these positions, and
almost block out other opinions.
This is the reason why their failure was revealed
significantly through the demise and collapse of the Oslo accords. The
Palestinians demand not only the retreat to the 1967 borders, according to
the United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 (of which they
were not a part!), but the fulfillment of the United Nations Assembly
decision 194 (“the Right of Return”). And from 1998, they have raised up
the demand that Israel’s borders, after the implementation of United
Nations Assembly decision 194, should be within the Partition Plan, of
November 29, 1947 (United Nations Assembly decision 181).
back to
top
In the Eye of the Storm:
Israel, the Palestinians and Some Hard Truths
Robert Wistrich
The Oslo “peace process” is dead but the lessons of its unraveling need to
be analyzed carefully and absorbed. The article explores the various
steps, tactics and incitement adopted by the Palestinians during the
months between October 2000 and February 2001 and the disastrously flawed
response of Mr. Barak’s government. The author focuses on the
capitulationist policy over Jerusalem, (especially the Temple Mount),
refugees and the readiness to give up territory without any serious
Palestinian compromise, renunciation of violence or abandonment of the
central aim – to destroy Israel. The article provides examples both of the
relentless hatred deliberately stoked up by the Palestinian Authority and
its cynical manipulation of the Western media and public opinion, which
has been relatively successful for the moment. Now that the mirage of a
counterfeit peace has dissipated, Israel needs to take stock of some hard
truths and gird its loins for the long haul until the Palestinians
understand that it cannot successfully be pressured or squeezed.
back to
top
Judaism's Encounter with European Culture and Totalitarianism – (II)
Raya Epstein
The roots of the totalitarian elements in Israeli
politics and culture lie not only in a historical genealogy that is
familiar to every member of the Israeli radical Left, but also in modern
Western culture. Thinkers and scholars have addressed in one way or
another the existence of a totalitarian potential in Western thought. Some
of them propound an alternative of embracing the Christian tradition,
viewing the dissociation from this tradition, and the struggle waged
against it by the followers of the different totalitarian trends, as the
source of Western totalitarianism.
This outlook is also manifested in classical
conservatism and in the neoconservative ideology of today, and though it
certainly has strong positive features, a Christian alternative will not
withstand the test. When Christianity and totalitarianism are compared,
not in terms of their explicit ideas but in terms of their modes of
thought, it emerges that the roots of totalitarianism lie precisely in
Christianity itself. On the other hand, it is precisely in authentic
Jewish modes of thought that there lies a real alternative to Western
totalitarianism. Therefore, the definition of Western civilization as
"Judeo-Christian" is fundamentally erroneous.
However, how can the well-known fact of the
disproportionate participation of assimilated Jews in the totalitarian
experiments be explained? The article tries to prove that this
resulted from the phenomenon of the Jews' flight from their Jewishness,
in the course of which the fleeing Jews bring about the realization of the
latent totalitarian potential in Western culture.
It should be noted that the very intellectual codes
that, in their authentic form, constitute a Jewish alternative to Western
totalitarianism, become in themselves a destructive factor that brings out
the totalitarian potential once they are entered into a foreign cultural
context¾that is, the context of a
Western culture that is based on Christian tenets. Thus, the Jews' flight
from their Jewishness becomes a threat both to Jewry itself and to the
non-Jewish world. And perhaps, here, an inverse conclusion may be drawn:
namely, that it is precisely the Jews' return to themselves that
can free both the Jews and the non-Jews of the totalitarian threat.
Nevertheless, providing a Jewish answer to
totalitarianism is not a simple matter. Such an answer is rooted in
Judaism as it was for generations, but the problematic aspect involves
the Jewish encounter with Western culture. There have been, of course,
encounters between Judaism and a foreign cultural environment in every
period of the thousands of years of the Jewish people's existence,
fluctuating between high and low points. To be sure, in the modern era the
encounter engendered not a few positive results. But we are also forbidden
to ignore the tragic encounter that was manifested in the Holocaust
and in the spiritual apostatization of Communism. Although the factual
results have perhaps been well learned, we are still evading the difficult
and painful question of the Jews' participation. We need to cope with it
and begin to rebuild the encounter, from a standpoint of awareness
of the risks entailed, together with full consciousness of
the Jews' responsibility.
It is commonly believed among us that the
conservative ideology, like the liberal ideology as well as the
intellectual underpinnings of the Israeli judicial system, can be sought
only outside of the Jewish framework, and in this regard "left-wingers"
and "right-wingers" are no different from each other. Indeed, how many are
even capable of conceiving that it is precisely in our "primitive" Judaism
that a real and perhaps sole alternative to totalitarianism can be found?
(Part I was published
in the January 2001 edition of Nativ.)
back to
top
|
