Click Here To Return to The Index Page
 
Viewpoint Archives

Editor's Note:
In the US, we live in a country with an amazing ability to create a version of history that makes us feel good.
Remember the notion of "Manifest Destiny"? This was a nice phrase to justify conquering the Wild West...and of course the inhabitants, Native Americans, could be rounded up and thrown onto reservations. It was "destiny"...

The creation of Israel has similar fictions and niceties to cover the facts that it was a colonial implant. Today we revisit the record and try to dispel some of the myths.
-----------------------------------------------------------


The Rise and Fall of the Zionist- By Hasan Abu Nimah


The creation of Israel in 1948 was a source of great relief For the Western world. Palestine was presented by Zionist propaganda to a sympathetic West, at the time, as "a country without people": a perfect place for "a people without a country". Many people in the West also believed that Palestine was a desert and "Israel" would, and in fact did, make it bloom.

The Palestinians who had to leave their historic land to make room for the incoming Jews had alternatives. The vast Arab world was large enough to accommodate them. The Jews, on the other hand, had only that narrow strip of land, Palestine, to settle in.

There was no Arab presence in the West to correct a Distorted view of the state and the history of the region, and the Arabs had few means of making their voices heard in the West. Their reliance on the justice of their cause was an additional factor contributing to their passiveness.

They were then, as they are still now, neither united behind their cause nor able to plan their future. They always waited for others to rescue them from the "catastrophe"
which visited them.

Their failure to stand up for their rights, as well as their inability to defend their land, strengthened the view that prevailed in many parts of the West that the Arabs were no more than backward nomads and probably did not deserve the same consideration as their adversaries.

While the creation of Israel as a national home for the Jews was seen in the West as a great historic achievement, a fulfillment, an expansion of civilization into a culturally barren land and, most importantly, an absolution, for the West, of the guilt complex of the Holocaust, the plight of the Palestinians was seen merely as a humanitarian problem.

The UN was mobilized to provide the needed charity. All measures by the UN were no more than soothing words, with no effort to enforce international law. Indeed, the only parts of UN resolutions that were implemented were the ones that helped solidify and legitimize the Zionist project in the region. The rest remained dead letters.

Israeli leaders realized right from the beginning that the convenient circumstances that existed in the late 1940s might not last forever. Specifically, the Arab states could not remain endlessly weak and divided.

The answer was to build in Israel enough military power to cope with any eventuality. Israel's only guarantee for survival amidst an ocean of "Arab hostility", its leaders believed, was military superiority, and this superiority was further enhanced, at a very early stage in Israel's life, by acquiring nuclear capability with the help of Western powers.

Consequently, Israel won all its military wars with the Arabs. Even before Israel was formally created, and before it had its "defense forces", Jewish fighters managed to occupy 78 per cent of the historic land of Palestine and to ethnically cleanse most of it.

Most of the armies of the Arab League member states, except The Jordanian Arab legion, which was able to defend its portion in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, were defeated.
That was the first Israeli military victory against the Palestinian and other Arab irregular defenders and the Arab states armies.

In 1956, France and the UK conspired with Israel to seize The Sinai Peninsula and retake the Suez Canal. Israel served this purpose faithfully, marking the second major Israeli military victory against the largest Arab state.

In June 1967, Israel, in response to minor provocations and border incidents but much political rhetoric from "revolutionary" Arab regimes, attacked again, on three fronts -- Egypt, Syria and Jordan.

The victory of the Israeli army was even more spectacular this time, with the occupation of Sinai up to the shores of the Suez Canal for the second time. (Israel had to evacuate Sinai, except for the Tiran straights, under American and Soviet pressure, following the 1956 invasion). The Israeli invaders also occupied all that was left of Palestine (the West Bank, including East Jerusalem and Gaza) and the Syrian Golan Heights.

The 1973 war, although it was an Egyptian-Syrian initiative to liberate occupied Arab lands, turned from a near Arab victory into defeat when Israel managed once more to overcome the initial surprise and overrun the attackers on both fronts.

Up to that point, Israel had successfully used its military superiority as a tool for political achievement. Easy Israeli military victories prepared the ground for easy Israeli political gains.

The Israeli invasion of Lebanon in June 1982, marked the end of the era of political advantage through military conquest. From another stunning military victory against the Palestinian guerrillas who dominated the south and a non-belligerent Lebanon, Israel failed to extract any political advantage. On the contrary, the invasion was actually counter-productive from Israel's perspective.

Although initially welcomed by some Lebanese factions, the invasion killed tens of thousands of Lebanese and Palestinians and destroyed much of the country.

With the occupation of the capital, Beirut, with mounting atrocities culminating in the massacres of Sabra and Shatilla, and with the humiliating imposition on the Lebanese government of the May 17, 1983, "Peace treaty", the Lebanese resistance turned against the enemy, forcing them to cut their losses and run. The May agreement was abrogated and Israel retreated to its so-called "Security Zone" in the south, from which it was eventually driven in 2000 by relentless resistance.

Many factors contributed to the failure of the Israeli adventure in Lebanon. The most relevant here is that while strong armies are good for formal wars, they are more often totally ineffective against popular resistance, as the case was in Lebanon. The fragmented Lebanese army was neither the target of the invaders nor was it the force which forced their departure.

This, precisely, was the problem of the powerful Israeli army against the first Intifada (1987-1993), which was only ended by the failed Oslo accords, and the second Intifada, which is still active.

When powerful armies fight civilian populations, their strength becomes instantly their weakness. They lose legitimacy as their actions -- firing missiles at residential quarters and killing innocent people - become war crimes and atrocities.

That is what an occupation army is doing in Iraq and an occupation army is doing in Palestine. The more crimes they commit the more moral power they lose, and that gradually blunts their military strength as well.

Both processes are evident in Iraq and Palestine, though the situation in Palestine demonstrates that an occupier can remain in place for decades, causing untold suffering and misery in the meantime. But eventually the crimes catch up with the wrongdoer.

The Israeli dilemma nowadays is that there is no Palestinian army to defeat. Israel is fighting millions of civilians, whose crimes, it seems, is, first, that they exist, and, second, that they unanimously reject being dispossessed or subjugated, a fate that Zionism envisages for them.

All that this can achieve is more murder, further deepening the wounds and further widening the gulf of hatred.

Obviously, Israel wants the land without the people. Neither with its conventional military power nor with its nuclear can Israel defeat the Palestinians. The options, therefore, are either to eliminate five million Palestinians, as some Israelis still fantasize, or make them Israeli citizens.

Either way means the end of the Zionist project for Palestine, and each passing day brings that end palpably closer.

***********************************************************
The writer is former ambassador and permanent representative Of Jordan at the UN.
***********************************************************


Additional Selected Readings on the Middle East

Iraq War-Hawks Turn On Each Other
http://www.iht.com/articles/535483.htm

A Pretext For War- Interview With James Bamford http://www.antiwar.com/av/?articleid=3440

Neo-Cons Seek Vindication In Escalation- Pat Buchanan http://antiwar.com/pat/

Poland Joins List of Countries Wanting To Pull Out of Iraq
http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=38359

Nader Decries 'Anybody But Bush' Mindset http://news.independent.co.uk/people/profiles/story.jsp?story=554080


Click Here To Return to The Index Page