Facebook Feed

5 days ago

Yoram Ettinger
2023 Jewish demographic momentum in Israel: bit.ly/40qV0aV ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2023: bit.ly/3ZdlxHY ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

4 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
אתגר מרכזי לביטחון לאומי: bit.ly/3xkSwh1 ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

The Palestinian Issue – Not a Top Arab Priority

The Palestinian issue has benefitted from the Arab/Muslim talk, but – due to the Palestinian record of intra Arab subversion – has never been supported by the Arab/Muslim walk.  Arab/Muslim policy-makers have never considered the Palestinian issue a strategic interest, but rather a tactical instrument to advance intra-Arab/Muslim interests and to annihilate the Jewish state.

Irrespective of the Arab talk, Palestine has been a geographic – not a national – term/area, as evidenced by the lack of distinct, cohesive national character of its Arab inhabitants.  This lack of cohesion has been intensified by the violent internal fragmentation along cultural (e.g., Bedouins vs. rural vs. urban sectors), geographic (e.g., mountain vs coastal Arabs, southern vs. northern, Hebron vs. Bethlehem, Nablus vs. Ramallah, Nablus vs. Hebron), ethnic, ideological, political (e.g., pro and anti Jordan), historical, tribal/clannish identity. Such turbulent fragmentation was fueled by the multitude of Arab/Muslim migration waves from Bosnia, Algeria, Libya, Sudan, Egypt, Jordan, the Arabian Peninsula, Syria and Lebanon. 

Thus, the establishment of a Palestinian state/autonomy was not on the agenda of the non-Arab Muslim Ottoman Empire, which ruled the area from 1517 through 1917.  The Ottomans linked the area – defined by most Arabs as a region within Southern Syria or the Levant – to the Damascus and Beirut provinces.

The British Empire, which dominated the Middle East from 1917 until the end of the Second World War, did not contemplate a Palestinian Arab state, while establishing a series of Arab countries throughout the Middle East. Moreover, the November 2, 1917 Balfour Declaration dedicated Palestine, including Jordan, to the Jewish Homeland. The April 25, 1920 San Remo Resolution, formulated by the principal Allied Powers, formalized the Balfour Declaration-based British Mandate for Palestine, which was ratified on August 12, 1922 by the League of Nations, eventually transferring 77% of Palestine (Jordan) to the Arabs.  The US House and Senate approved it unanimously on June 30, 1922.  In 1945, the Mandate for Palestine was integrated into the UN Charter via Article 80, which precludes alterations, and is still legally binding.

Jordan and Egypt occupied Judea & Samaria (the West Bank) and Gaza from 1949 through 1967, but did not ponder the establishment of a Palestinian state; nor did the Arab League

According to Dr. Yuval Arnon-Ohanna of Ariel University, who headed the Palestinian Desk at the Mossad Research Division, the Secretary General of the Arab League, Azzam Pasha, stated in September 1947 that the core problem was not a Palestinian state or Jewish expansionism, but the duty to uproot the Jewish presence in Palestine, which was defined by Muslims as Waqf – an area divinely endowed to Islam and not to the “infidel.” The elimination of Jews was the top priority of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, the founder, the President of the (Palestinian) Arab Higher Committee; a collaborator with Nazi Germany. In September 1941, he submitted to Hitler a memo on “the resolution of the Jewish Problem in the Middle East in the same manner it is resolved in Europe,” planning the construction of Auschwitz-like crematoriums, in the Dothan Valley, adjacent to Nablus in Samaria.  In fact, Mahmoud Abbas recently expressed his admiration for Al Husseini as a hero-martyr.  Abbas appointed the current Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who continues Al Husseini’s anti-Jewish hate-education.

The limited role of the Palestinian issue was highlighted during the 1948/49 Arab-Israel War.  Jordan launched the war in order to eliminate the Jewish state, expand to the Mediterranean and advance the goal to dominate Greater Syria. Egypt and Saudi Arabia entered the war despite their inadequate military infrastructure, in order to abort Jordan’s imperialistic strategy. Iraq joined the war, aiming to control the oil pipeline from Iraq to Haifa. Syria assumed that the destruction of the Jewish state would facilitate the reassertion of Greater Syria.  On September 20, 1948, the Arab League recognized the Arab government of the whole of Palestine, but ignored it, declaring it null and void in 1951/52, causing the UN to refuse Palestinian participation in the General Assembly proceedings.

None of the Arab countries fought on behalf of – or due to – Palestinian Arab aspirations.  Therefore, they did not share with the Palestinian Arabs the spoils of war.  Iraq occupied Samaria and transferred it to Jordan, which occupied Judea.  In April 1950, Jordan annexed Judea & Samaria to the east bank of the Jordan River, naming it the West Bank. Egypt occupied Gaza and – just like Jordan – did not allow Palestinian nationalistic activities. Syria occupied and annexed Al-Hama. None of the ensuing Arab-Israeli wars (1956, 1967, 1969/70 and 1973) were Palestinian-driven.  Furthermore, the Israel-Palestinian/PLO wars of 1982 (in Lebanon), 1987-1991 (the first Intifada) and 2000-2004 (the second Intifada) and the Israel Palestinian/Hamas wars of 2009 and 2012 (in Gaza) did not engage the Arab states militarily or financially.

During the October 1994 Israel-Jordan peace signing ceremony, top Jordanian military leaders told their Israeli counterparts that “a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the Hashemite Kingdom east of the river.”

The Arab League and the UN went along and did not raise the issue of a Palestinian state in Judea, Samaria and Gaza until 1967, when it was employed as a means to undermine the survival of the Jewish state.

In fact, the Palestinian issue has never been a chief axis of US-Israel relations. Therefore, while the two Administrations have never agreed on the Palestinian issue, their strategic cooperation has surged dramatically due to joint interests, mutual threats and shared values, which significantly transcend the Palestinian issue and the Arab-Israeli conflict.




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb

Open letter to Prime Minister Bennett ahead of visit to USA

(Hebrew edition in “Israel Hayom,” Israel’s largest circulation daily)

During your first official visit to Washington, DC, you’ll have to choose between two options:

*Blurring your deeply-rooted, assertive Israeli positions on the future of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), which would be welcome by the Biden Administration, yielding to short-term political convenience and popularity inside the beltway;

or

*Tenaciously advocating your deeply-rooted, principle-driven positions, which would underscore a profound disagreement with the Biden Administration and the “elite” US media, while granting you and Israel long-term strategic respect, as demonstrated by some of your predecessors.

For example, the late Prime Minister Shamir honed the second option, bluntly introduced his assertive Israeli positions on Judea and Samaria, rebuffed heavy US pressure – including a mudslinging campaign by President Bush and Secretary of State Baker – suffered a popularity setback, but produced unprecedented expansion of US-Israel strategic cooperation. When it comes to facing the intensified threats of rogue regimes and Islamic terrorism, the US prefers principle-driven, reliable, patriotic, pressure-defying partners, irrespective of disagreements on the Palestinian issue.

Assuming that you shall not budge on the historical and national security centrality of Judea and Samaria, it behooves you to highlight the following matters during your meetings with President Biden, Secretary of State Blinken, National Security Advisor Sullivan, Secretary of Defense Austin and Congressional leaders (especially the members of the Appropriations Committees):

  1. The 1,400-year-old track record of the stormy, unpredictable, violent and anti-“infidel” Middle East, which has yet to experience intra-Arab peaceful-coexistence, along with the 100-year-old Palestinian track record (including the systematic collaboration with anti-US entities, hate-education and anti-Arab and anti-Jewish terrorism) demonstrates that the proposed Palestinian state would be a Mini-Afghanistan or a Mega-Gaza on the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria.

It would dominate 80% of Israel’s population and infrastructures in the 9-15-mile sliver between Judea and Samaria and the Mediterranean, which is shorter than the distance between RFK Stadium and the Kennedy Center.

Thus, a Palestinian state would pose a clear and present existential threat to Israel; and therefore, Israel’s control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria is a prerequisite for its survival.

  1. The proposed Palestinian state would undermine US interests, as concluded from the Palestinian intra-Arab track record, which has transformed the Palestinians into a role-model of intra-Arab subversion, terrorism and ingratitude. Arabs are aware that a Palestinian state would add fuel to the Middle East fire, teaming up with their enemies (e.g., Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood and Turkey’s Erdogan) and providing a strategic foothold to Russia and China. Consequently, Arabs shower Palestinians with favorable talk, but with cold and negative walk.

Hence, during the October, 1994 Israel-Jordan peace treaty ceremony, Jordan’s military leaders asserted to their Israeli colleagues that a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River would doom the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River, and lead, subsequently, to the toppling of all pro-US Arab Peninsula regimes.

  1. There is no foundation for the contention that Israel’s retreat from the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria – which are the cradle of Jewish history, religion and culture – is required in order to sustain Israel’s Jewish majority. In reality, there is unprecedented Jewish demographic momentum, while Arab demography – throughout the Middle East – has Westernized dramatically. The Jewish majority in the combined area of Judea, Samaria and pre-1967 Israel benefits from a robust tailwind of fertility and migration.
  2. Israel’s control of the mountain ridges of Judea and Samaria and the Golan Heights, bolsters its posture of deterrence, which has daunted rogue regimes, reduced regional instability, enhanced the national security of all pro-US Arab regimes, and has advanced Israel’s role as a unique force-multiplier for the US. An Israeli retreat from Judea and Samaria would transform Israel from a strategic asset – to a strategic liability – for the US.
  3. As the US reduces its military presence in the Middle East – which is a global epicenter of oil production, global trade (Asia-Africa), international Islamic terrorism and proliferation of non-conventional military technologies – Israel’s posture of deterrence becomes increasingly critical for the pro-US Arab countries (e.g., Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Oman, Jordan), who consider Israel to be the most reliable “life insurance agent” in the region.

Contrary to NATO, South Korea and Japan, Israel’s defense does not require the presence of US troops on its soil.

  1. Sustaining Israel’s Qualitative Military Edge is a mutual interest for the US and Israel, which serves as the most cost-effective battle-tested laboratory for the US defense industries and armed forces. Thus, Israel’s use of hundreds of US military systems has yielded thousands of lessons (operation, maintenance and repairs), which have been integrated, by the US manufacturers, into the next generation of the military systems, saving the US many years of research and development, increasing US exports and expanding the US employment base – a mega billion dollar bonanza for the US. At the same time, the US armed forces have benefitted from Israel’s military intelligence and battle experience, as well as joint training maneuvers with Israel’s defense forces, which has improved the US formulation of battle tactics.

Prime Minister Bennett, your visit to Washington, is an opportunity to demonstrate your adherence to your deeply-rooted strong Israeli positions, rejecting the ill-advised appeals and temptations to sacrifice Israel’s national security on the altar of convenience and popularity.

Yours truly,

Yoram Ettinger, expert on US-Israel relations and Middle East affairs

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 

 




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb