Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has done extensive
doctoral studies in Middle Eastern Affairs. He has created and
conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has
lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly
debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been
published in dozens of newspapers, magazines, academic journals and
websites all around the world.
Read more by the Author
March
15, 2012
Consider the following scenario…
You're out for a leisurely ride on a bus minding
your own business and then, from out of nowhere,
your bus is attacked and people are maimed and
murdered. Enemies sworn to destroy you and your
state have crossed the border; all together, eight
of your countrymen are now dead.
After the dust settles, what do you (or any citizen
of any country) expect your government to do about
this?
A no brainer--correct ?
Okay, now here's the reality…
Israel has recently been hit by hundreds of rockets,
missiles, and mortars deliberately aimed at its
civilian population.
Arabs from Gaza launched them (they have
continuously launched others as well prior to this)
in response to Israel's pinpoint assassination of
the mastermind of those actual attacks mentioned
above, Zuhair al-Qaissi, of the Popular Resistance
Committee--along with some of his chief lieutenants.
Israeli intelligence claimed that al-Qaissi was
plotting to carry out a similar attack in the near
future.
Of about 25 Arabs who have died so far in this
current flare-up, about 22 are confirmed
"militants." Considering that the latter
deliberately operate from amidst their civilian
human shields, this is, beyond doubt, quite an
example of that maximum restraint the United
Nations' Mr. Ban Ki-moon and others pontificate to
Israel about. For him to even mention this while
thousands of civilian Arabs have been deliberately
massacred by Syria is a sick joke. With all of its
imperfections, Israel deserves lectures from no one
on such matters. Indeed, via any objective measuring
stick, it shines above most others--and above all in
its own neighborhood, for sure.
As some of us have pondered for quite some time, how
many nations would simply put up with hundreds--or
thousands--of such murderous, destructive, and
terrorizing attacks before soon acting decisively to
stop them? And how many--especially some of Israel's
harshest critics--would try, as carefully as
Israel has, to limit
"collateral damage" to the point of endangering
their own soldiers' lives--despite the difficulty of
the urban arena in which the Jews are frequently
forced to operate in, the duplicity of the UN and
its assorted Goldstone Reports, and so forth.
Coming as no surprise, when Israel was finally
forced to act by itself (since the UN and other
powers that be did nothing) after over 10,000 such
missiles hit it from Arab Gaza several years ago,
the world was quick to blame the victim instead. And
this despite Israel displaying "maximum restraint"
for years prior to its 2008 showdown with Hamas.
As hard as you try--including giving up the
important element of surprise by dropping leaflets
and even making cell phone calls to the civilian
enemy population to limit casualties--some will die
when their "militant" brethren use them as human
shields.
And recently, as Israel was again repeatedly
attacked, with over a half million of its citizens
in bomb shelters, the United Nations Secretary
General, Ban Ki-moon, could only lecture it to
exercise "maximum restraint." I wonder what his
native South Korea would do if North Korea was
firing hundreds of missiles at its own country. We'd
all probably be at war by now…
Note, please, that this is the same United Nations
(and cohorts) which has been watching the daily
massacre of people in Syria for a year now and has
basically been able to nothing more than blow hot
air.
With the exception of the ouster of Qaddafi in
Libya--which came with some unique circumstances
(namely, most other Arab leaders hated him and
wanted him out for their own reasons, so gave the
green light), for now just consider one of many more
examples of the UN's virtual uselessness on real
issues involving human rights…
Despite the South's gaining independence from the
Arab/Arabized north of the country last year,
millions of other black Africans in Darfur and other
parts of the Sudan, like the South Kordofan and Blue
Nile states, are still being murdered, starved,
subjugated, and terrorized by the north as well.
When is the last time you heard Ban Ki-moon, the
American State Department, the Quartet, The New York
Times, or anyone else mention anything about this?
Up until a few months ago, the Obama Administration
and the State Department were still singing praises
to Syria's Assad's name.
All over the region, the list of Arab and Arabized
atrocities goes on--but Israel gets the lectures.
Indeed, the vast majority of condemnations issued by
the U.N. have been aimed at the Jews.
Since this, unfortunately, is the case, it's worth
exploring the relationship between the U.N. and
Israel in greater depth and detail. So, hold onto
your seats…
No sooner was Israel reborn in the wake of the
Holocaust in May 1948 as a result (on the human part
of the deal, at least) of a United Nations’ vote, it
was attacked by a half dozen Arab nations--most of
which had gained their own independence only
recently as well. From that moment on, with a few
(but important) rare exceptions, the U.N. would work
to try to undo its "mistake" of permitting the
resurrection of the Jew of the Nations.
Since Arabs constantly bring up their tale of how
Jews allegedly stole all of the land, I'm repeatedly
forced to remind readers of the truth regarding this
claim.
One of those above 1948 Arab attackers, Transjordan,
became independent two years earlier. Its army was
led by British officers and, like Egypt’s, was well
equipped with Allied armaments left in the region
after World War II.
Since the Emirate of Tranjordan’s own story is
crucial for understanding attempts made to try to
balance conflicting Arab and Jewish claims over that
small part of the Turks’ previous empire which
emerged as the Mandate of Palestine after World War
I, I frequently reference this in my work. It is a
much ignored and frequently misunderstood set of
facts that can't be repeated too often. Most folks
simply are startled when they find out what comes
next…
Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill convened the
Cairo Conference in 1921. As a result of this and
other machinations of the latest empire (the Brits’)
to acquire the land of the Jews--Judaea--since the
fall of the latter to Hadrian’s Roman armies in 135
C.E., Britain’s Hashemite Arab allies were awarded
all of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine east
of the Jordan River--almost 80% of the total area–in
1922.
Read that above last line again…
Thus, despite all of the clamoring, there has been a
state for Arabs in most of "Palestine" for almost a
hundred years now.
Transjordan's King Abdullah attributed this gift to
an act of Allah in his memoirs. Along with other
observers, Sir Alec Kirkbride, the Brits’ East Bank
(of the Jordan River) representative, had much to
say about this as well in A Crackle Of Thorns.
Not long afterwards, Abdullah’s brother, Emir
Faisal, was gifted with all of the Mandate of
Mesopotamia--renamed Iraq. Millions of Kurds thus
saw their own one best chance at modern independence
shattered by a collusion of Arab nationalism and
British Petroleum politics.
The Ottoman Turkish Empire had ruled most of the
region for the previous four centuries.
Most of those "Arab" states which attacked Israel in
1948 had, in turn, become Arab by the conquest,
subjugation, and forced Arabization of millions of
native non-Arab peoples who survived earlier jihads
in the wars of the Dar ul-Islam against the Dar al-Harb,
another point that needs to be constantly
reinforced. The region was not--despite their
claims--simply "purely Arab patrimony."
Similar stories could be told all over the Middle
East and its adjacent areas...millions of native,
non-Arab peoples, within the power vacuum created by
the collapse of empire, seeing their own hopes for
freedom and independence in the new nationalist age
swept away solely on behalf of the Arab Nation.
While some later fought alongside Arabs against the
post-World War I Mandatory Powers, this did them
little good after the French and the British left
the scene (one way or the other). In Arab eyes,
there was to be no justice other than Arab justice
in the region--the Arab-Israeli conflict in a
nutshell.
From Egypt, through North Africa into the Sudan, to
Lebanon, Iraqi and Syrian Kurdistan, and elsewhere,
scores of millions have all been forced to consent
to this forced Arabization process.
As Egypt’s most famous native "Uncle Tom" non-Arab
Copt, the late President Sadat’s Foreign Minister,
Dr. Boutros Boutros Ghali, basically summed it up
for Israel (as well as all others) in an interview
with Israeli author Amos Elon: if you want to be
accepted in the neighborhood, you have to consent to
Arabization…there is no room for anyone else but
Arabs in this region.
Since 1922, therefore, the debate has really been
about creating a second state for Arabs in what was
left of "Palestine" after the creation of
Transjordan--
not a first...the Arabs’
22nd in total spread out across over six million
square miles of territory. And that second Arab
state in Palestine state is expected, by "moderates"
willing to tell the West what it wants to hear as
well as the more honest Hamas types, to replace the
sole state of the Jews–not live peacefully along
side of it.
Back to the United Nations...
In 1947, another partition plan was presented which
would have divided the roughly 20% of the Mandate of
Palestine left after the creation of Transjordan in
half between Jews and Arabs.
Had Arabs accepted this, they would have thus wound
up with some 90% of the total original area. They
rejected the offer on the grounds that all of the
region was simply their own, part of the Dar ul-Islam
and their "purely Arab patrimony." The rest is
history.
Some things change, others never do. Israel’s fight
today is the same as it was back then.
Back to May, 1948...
The U.N. watched its newest child brutally attacked
upon birth. It did nothing to stop the onslaught and
only finally stepped in after, at great human cost,
the Jews turned the tide of the battle. As a
footnote, I was born within just a few days of these
events.
Afraid that they would push the Arabs back even
further and take more of the non-apportioned
territory of the Mandate, the U.N. finally acted.
Keep in mind that, unlike Arab claims, these were
not "purely Arab" territories.
The armistice lines drawn up by the U.N. in 1949
simply marked the point where hostilities were
stopped.
Amongst other things, they left Israel a mere
9-miles wide in some places, and not much more in
the rest of its strategic waist--where most of its
population and industry are located. Many people
travel farther than that just to go to work. It
should not be a surprise, therefore, that these
became known as the Auschwitz Lines--a constant
invitation to Arabs to attack. The lines were never
expected to be Israel’s real borders, as America’s
own U.N. rep, Dr. Ralph Bunche, wrote about himself.
Recall that as a result of the 1948 Arab assault,
Transjordan grabbed the non-apportioned west bank of
the Jordan River (where both Jews and Arabs had
roots, owned land, and were allowed to live). Now
holding both banks, it changed its name to Jordan
(since it subsequently held territory from other
parts of the Mandate besides those
across--trans--the river)--and made all the land it
now held Judenrein (Jew free)--including east
Jerusalem. Numerous age-old synagogues were
destroyed, ancient Jewish tombstones were used to
pave roads, build latrines, and so forth. Only two
other nations recognized that illegal seizure,
Pakistan and Great Britain.
While Jordan thus emerged above, Pharaoh--who had
used Gaza to invade the land of the Jews for
thousands of years--once again grabbed that same
coastal strip…the one where the original Sea Peoples
settled after arriving from the islands near Crete.
The latter were the non-Semitic Philistines for whom
Judea, after its second revolt for freedom against
Rome, would later be renamed Syria Palaestina
(Palestine) by the emperor, Hadrian..
Note that during the time that Jordan and Egypt held
Gaza and the West Bank (aka, Judea and Samaria, its
real names)--almost two decades--no one demanded the
birth of the Arabs’ second state in Palestine in
those areas. Not a peep from the United Nations
either...
Furthermore, as another result of the Arab attempt
to nip a microscopic, resurrected Israel in the bud,
two refugee situations were created...another point
that needs to constantly be reiterated.
The Arabs have continued to this day to thrust the
plight of their own refugees--created primarily as a
result of their own actions--into everyone else’s
faces--people who were pawns (willingly or
unwillingly) of the Arabs’ own murderous schemes
that backfired. Scores of millions of non-Arab
peoples also became refugees as a result of wars
over the last century. Yet the folks who have
received the most aid have been the biggest whiners
(the Arabs)--and the U.N. shares much of the blame
here as well.
Arab refugees, right from the start, were made
virtual wards of the world--unlike all the others
above. The United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA)--whose
spokesmen vilify Israel over Gaza--was created just
to cater to these folks. And despite the fairy
tales, most Arabs were newcomers themselves into the
land because of its economic development by the
Jews.
The U.N.’s predecessor, the League Of Nations
Permanent Mandates Commission, recorded numerous
Arabs crossing into the Mandate from the surrounding
Arab states. Many more slipped in through very
porous borders under cover of darkness and were
never recorded. And still many others arrived with
Muhammad Ali and son Ibrahim Pasha’s armies from
Egypt about fifty years or so earlier and never
left...all alleged "native Palestinians." Hamas's
virtual patron saint (for whom those rockets Gaza
has been blasting Israel with are named as well as
Hamas's "military wing), Sheikh Izzedin al-Qassam,
was from Latakia, Syria. Arafat was born in
Cairo…etc., etc., etc.
Indeed, so many Arabs were recent arrivals
themselves into the Palestinian Mandate that UNRWA
had to adjust the very definition of "refugee" from
its prior meaning of persons normally and
traditionally resident to those who lived in the
Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to
1948. Please understand what that is saying…
Now, keep in mind that for every Arab who was forced
to flee the fighting that Arabs started (after all,
how dare Jews want in one tiny, resurrected state
what Arabs demand for themselves in some two dozen
others), a Jewish refugee was forced to flee "Arab"/
Muslim lands into Israel and elsewhere--but with no
UNRWA set up to assist them. This begs the question:
Why not?
UNRWA has been openly hostile to Israel from the
get-go. It has long allowed the promotion of
anti-Western and anti-Semitic attitudes among the
Arabs it serves, and has done little to help solve
the problem of their refugee status--unless giving
shelter and employment to those who would terrorize
and destroy their Jewish neighbor counts in his
regard.
Back in 2004, UNRWA Commissioner, General Peter
Hansen, told the Canadian Broadcasting Company "I am
sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA
payroll and I don't see that as a crime." Hamas is
dedicated to Israel's destruction and is nonetheless
supported by the United Nations.
Solid evidence and documentation obtained from Arabs
on the spot have revealed that UNRWA has frequently
turned a blind eye to Arabs setting up mortar and
rocket firing positions adjacent to U.N. schools,www.ekurd.net
hospitals, private homes, and so forth.
Additionally, back in the major 2008 fighting,
Israel had solid intelligence that Hamas leaders
were hiding in the basement of such a hospital.
Similarly, when Israel was forced to go after
Hizbullah in Lebanon in 2006, it turned out that the
U.N force there, UNIFIL, not only did not prevent
attacks on Israel but allowed Hizbullah to set up
its positions right next to UNIFIL units. After a
U.N. position got hit as a result, pictures made the
rounds showing just such a Hizbullah position right
next to a U.N. building. Furthermore, solid evidence
surfaced that UNIFIL members collaborated with
Hizbullah to enable the kidnapping of Israeli troops
from inside Israel proper-the move which started the
war in the first place.
Ahhh, the United Nations...
Nice to know where many millions of American tax
dollars are going to, isn’t it?!?!
Turning the clock back again, from 1948 to1956,
Israel was attacked repeatedly by Arabs using
Egyptian and Jordanian territories as their bases.
In 1956, when Egypt blockaded it at the Strait of
Tiran, Israel struck back hard. France and Great
Britain were peeved at Egypt’s Nasser as well for
nationalizing the Suez Canal, so the time was ripe.
In a lightning assault, Israel soon found itself on
the banks of the Suez Canal.
Before Western pressure forced it to withdraw--note
the inaction of the U.N. to stop Arab attacks on
Israel and so forth which provoked the Sinai
Campaign (sound familiar?)--Israel’s David
Ben-Gurion received assurances that if Egypt ever
played the same blockade game again, it would be
recognized as a casus belli. This would become very
important in the not-too-distant future. A United
Nations Emergency Force was also set up in Gaza and
at the Strait of Tiran to supposedly prevent such
happenings again.
So, tell me please...what good is a fireman who, at
the first smell of smoke, disappears from sight?
In Spring 1967, Egypt’s Nasser must have been all
sugared up once again.
Pharaoh amassed 100,000 troops, but instead of
chariots, he positioned planes, tanks, artillery,
and so forth on Israel’s border, reinstated the
blockade, and ordered the U.N. force out of Gaza so
his tank divisions would have an open door.
Without a wink, the U.N. turned tail and
ran--leaving Israel, once again, all on its own.
Nasser, meanwhile, got other Arab nations to jump
aboard his own latter-day Final Solution bandwagon
as well. While Syria was up to its eyeballs in this
right from the start, others--like Jordan’s young
King Hussein--had to be lured into this a bit later.
Big mistake...
Well, as you probably know, things didn’t quite turn
out as Arabs planned...
In six days in June 1967, Israel destroyed several
Arab air forces, left hundreds of their tanks
smoldering, took thousands of prisoners, and so
forth...Remember Ben-Gurion’s casus belli deal in
1956 regarding a renewal of blockade?
Oh yes--I almost forgot...
Israel also now found itself holding all of the
Sinai Peninsula (in which it developed oil fields,
established important air bases, and at last gained
a little strategic depth) up to the Suez Canal; in
control of the Strait from which it had been
repeatedly blockaded; on top of the Golan Heights,
from which its farm
villages and fishermen
on the Sea of Galilee had been repeatedly attacked;
in Gaza; and back in Judea and Samaria--the "West
Bank," from which all Jews were either previously
slaughtered or later excluded from as a result of
Transjordan’s land grab in 1948. Places like
Hebron--where the Hebrew Patriarchs and some of the
matriarchs are buried--and elsewhere once again saw
Jews.
And in a rare moment (Divine guidance?), something
else next happened which proved to be not par for
the U.N.’s usual course regarding Israel...
After much argument, and thanks to America and Great
Britain (folks who had opposed Israel in the past
and would also do so in the future), the final draft
of the U.N. document, UNSC Resolution 242, which
dealt with any future Israeli withdrawal, was worded
in a precise way which called for the creation of
secure, real borders to replace Israel’s absurd ‘49
armistice lines.
242 allowed/allows for necessary revisions in order
to undo–somewhat at least–the travesty of the ‘49
U.N.-imposed lines. It expected, therefore, a
territorial compromise over the disputed lands still
in question…what the settlement and building freeze
issues are all about.
Here’s Britain’s Lord Caradon, the chief architect
of the Resolution, on 242...
It would have been wrong to demand that Israel
return to its positions of June 4, 1967, because
those positions were undesirable and artificial.
After all, they were just the places where the
soldiers of each side happened to be on the day the
fighting stopped in 1948. They were just armistice
lines. That's why we didn't demand that the Israelis
return to them.
President Ronald Reagan commented on this same
subject on September 1, 1982...
In the pre-1967 borders, Israel was barely 10-miles
wide... the bulk of Israel's population within
artillery range of hostile armies. I am not about to
ask Israel to live that way again.
Regardless of the relentless pressure that it is
under to cave in on this, Israel must insist upon
those territorial adjustments that it was promised,
in a rare moment of fairness towards itself, by the
United Nations Security Council in order to right an
historical wrong. Regardless of whose feathers get
ruffled, an effective and fair territorial
compromise, a la 242, must be demanded by Israel's
own leaders.
The State Department opposed Israel’s creation from
the start and has been usually hostile ever since.
Given the current occupant in the White House's
similar attitudes (especially regarding the demand
for Israel to forsake 242's promise), Israel must be
ready for all possibilities--including a cut-off in
American aid and support. It must be willing to
accept this rather than forsake its basic,
existential needs.
Any support Israel may get later on from the Obama
White House regarding Iran will very likely be
expected to be repaid on the territorial compromise
front. Regardless, Israel must hold its ground
anyway on this crucial issue.
If aid is indeed cut, there will be such an uproar
in America if Israel is penalized for not wanting to
expose the necks of its children on this issue, that
it will backfire on any American leader who plays
that card.
If President Obama is reelected in 2012, which may
very well happen, one might say he has nothing to
lose by unleashing retribution on Israel since he
can't run again…
Well, he may not--but others in his party certainly
will feel the impact. And hopefully this will have
some influence as well.
Regarding the U.N., Israel must ignore it and act as
it must to thrive, not just survive.
Despite its imperfections and all who vilify and
condemn it, Israel is truly light years ahead, on
the moral playing field, from all that surround
it--and many if not most others elsewhere who would
also judge it.
Given the next round of abuse (over Iran,
"Palestine," etc.), perhaps it will be time for
Israel to seriously consider withdrawing from the
U.N.N--the United Nauseating Nations--or, at the
very least, make sure that it quickly gets itself
leaders who will know how to stand their ground
regardless of who is tightening the screws.
Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has
done extensive doctoral studies in Middle Eastern
Affairs. He has created and conducted counter-Arab
propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured
on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has
publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles
and op-eds have been published in dozens of
newspapers, magazines, academic journals and
websites all around the world. Visit his
website at
http://www.geraldahonigman.com/
Gerald A. Honigman, a longtime contributing writer
and columnist
for ekurd.net. Honigman has published a major book,
"The
Quest For Justice In The Middle East--The
Arab-Israeli Conflict In Greater Perspective."
By Gerald A. Honigman for eKurd.net, March 15, 2012. You may reach the
author via email at: honigman6 (at) msn.com.
Copyright © 2012 ekurd.net.
All rights reserved
Top |
®
