Blog No. 89.
As a long time student of international relations, I am familiar with the long list of the American Empire’s foreign policy disasters, past, present and impending. These range from Vietnam to Afghanistan, through the Ukraine and onto the current, apparently eagerly sought after, confrontations with Russia and China. Of all these, I would judge the ones that will prove to have had the most deleterious effects on the cohesion of the global community, were the roles played by the USA in the enabling and development of both ISrael and IS-Daesh. In both these instances, it would be premature to assume that the worst is not yet to come.
In the final analysis, it is more likely to be ISrael that proves to have been the most pernicious. This is because, in contrast to the Sunni zealots, the Zionist zealots, are nuclear-armed, have a hot-line to the White House and a proxy veto on the UN Security Council.
Even after foolish and short-sighted British and American politicians had allowed Israel to become established, it was still not too late for the Zionists to adopt a policy of tolerance and cooperation towards the natives inhabiting that small piece of real-estate that they had convinced themselves Yahweh had signed off to them. Had the advocates of ‘binationalism’ such as Martin Buber or Hannah Arendt among the early Zionist settlers in Palestine, triumphed over the ideas of Theodore Herzl, the day might yet have been saved.
Instead, Israel has increasingly moved away from the secular Utopia that many of its early supporters had thought they were working towards. Now, they have a state that lives entirely by the sword and which is increasingly based on a fascist divide between a God-chosen Master Race and the Arab Untermenschen (for whom, as Hart fears, a final solution will be sought and ultimately found.)
Being of Jewish descent, I have, since adolescence, followed Israeli and Middle Eastern affairs with interest. That interest increased exponentially at the time of the invasion of Iraq. This was an event which so defied logic that I went to much trouble to discover who were the movers behind it. Whether rightly or wrongly, I came to the conclusion that it was a project fully embraced by the Israeli leadership, which would never have happened but for a decisive and sinister input from Tel Aviv and the well-established, Zionist fifth column in America. That fifth column has so penetrated the western media that Israel has been able to re-write history and, until very recently, blind western public opinion to the historical reality and in its place, implant its own warped version of history as the almost universally accepted reality. Six Jewish Companies control 96 of the worlds media.
Of the thousands of works on the subject, the one I most admired for its simplicity and obvious insight, was a trilogy by Alan Hart. “Zionism: the real enemy of the Jews.” each volume is relatively short and easy to read. https://www.claritypress.com/Hart-I.html I would regard it as essential reading for anyone who wished to understand the serious threats this rogue state now poses. Since Hart wrote his trilogy, the prevalence of paranoid, ideological extremism within Israel has taken an even firmer hold and the threat Israel poses to other nations has increased accordingly. As Hart would argue in this address, which I reproduce in its entirety, the threat Israel poses is also to itself and most particularly, to Jews, who are not Zionists and do not condone the criminality practiced, since its inception, by the state of Israel.
By Alan Hart | 24 April 2016
The following is the text of a presentation I made last week to audiences in
Sardinia on the occasion of the publication of Volume One of the Italian edition of
my book ZIONISM: THE REAL ENEMY OF THE JEWS. (It and the German edition
are being published by Zambon, a publishing house owned and led by a very
brave and courageous German Jewish gentlemen. Giuseppe Zambon).
Brainwashed and idiotic Zionists in Sardinia tried and failed to have some of my
lectures and debates cancelled by accusing me of being an anti-Semite who is
inciting anti-Semitism. They knew nothing about my book and its contents and
were reading from Zionism’s script. Their efforts resulted in increased sales of my
In response to the leading brainwashed Zionist idiot (he was not present) I pointed
out that the first picture in Volume One of my book is of Prime Minister Golda Meir
inscribed in her own hand “To a good friend, Alan Hart.” And I asked if all Zionists
who accuse me of anti-Semitism believed she was so stupid that she could not
have seen through me if I was anti-Jew.
Some and perhaps very many of you have had the pleasure of listening to my very dear
friend Ilan Pappe, the “revisionist” (which means honest) Israeli historian and author
of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. It was Ilan who explained to me why the Zionist
lobby puts so much effort into causing my book and discussion of what it reveals to be
suppressed to the maximum possible extent throughout the entire Western world. Ilan said
to me ”Zionism is more frightened of your book than any other because of its title.
‘Zionism:The Real Enemy of the Jews’ is THE truth in seven words.”
In Italian the title is ‘THE truth in six words!’
In my presentation to you today I will explain in summary why Zionism and NOT
the Arabs IS the real enemy of the Jews; but first I want to offer you my take on
what I regard as Zionism’s THREE BIGGEST PROPAGANDA LIES.
The FIRST is the assertion that all the Jews of the world have a right to Palestine.
That is complete nonsense. The truth is that very, very few Jews have any
biological/ancestral connection to the ancient Hebrews. The Jews are peoples (not a
people) from many different homelands; and back in time many converted to
Judaism long after the relatively brief rule of the ancient Hebrews, the Israelites.
What I am saying boils down to this. The notion that there are two peoples with a
valid claim to Palestine is rubbish. (There is even a case for believing that more
Arabs than Jews may be descendants of the ancient Hebrews).
Zionism’s SECOND biggest propaganda lie is in its assertion that poor little Israel
has lived in a danger of annihilation, the “driving into the sea of its Jews”. As I
document in detail through the three volumes of my book, the truth is that Israel’s
existence has never, ever, been in danger from any combination of Arab force. Not
in 1948. Not in 1967. And not even in 1973. In 1948 when elements of five Arab
armies crossed into Palestine, their intention was not to destroy the unilaterally
declared state of Israel. It was to prevent Israel taking the territory that had been
assigned to the Palestinians for a state of their own by the Partition Plan.
The Partition Plan
There are incidentally three things about the Partition Plan that many Westerners
are not aware of. The first is that UN had no right to assign any part of Palestine to
incoming alien Jewish immigrants without the consent of the Palestinian people.
The second is that the Partition Plan would never have been approved if Zionism,
assisted by 26 American senators and White House insiders, had not bullied and
bribed a number of nations to change their “No” votes to “Yes” and/or abstain.
When President Truman learned of Zionism’s campaign of intimidation and threats
to bend the UN to its will, he wrote in a memorandum that it was perfectly clear that
“pressure groups will succeed in putting the United Nations out of business if this
sort of thing is continued.”
The third is that the Partition Plan was vitiated, became invalid, because Truman
was not prepared to use force to impose it. When he decided against the use of
force he ordered his diplomats to return to the UN and continue discussions about
how to solve the Palestine problem. It was while those discussions were continuing
in the General Assembly that Israel unilaterally declared itself to be in existence, in
defiance of the will of the organised international community as it then was.
The fighting in 1948
As to the actual fighting in 1948 here is the key to complete understanding.
Early on there was a month long truce. When the fighting resumed it was 20,000 Arab
soldiers, poorly trained and equipped, lacking motivation and badly led, against
80,000 Israeli forces, well trained and equipped, highly motivated and well led. As
David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first prime minister knew, there was always only going to
be one winner on the battlefield.
When Israel closed the Palestine file with its victory in 1948 the Arab regimes secretly
shared the same hope as Zionism and all the major powers. It was that the Palestinians
would accept their lot as the sacrificial victims on the altar of political expediency
and that the Palestine file would remain closed for ever.
To give you a real indication of how little things have changed over the years I’ll tell
you now about an amazing conversation I had some years ago with a major Saudi
royal. In an hour long exchange of views I had with him alone in London I made
what I thought he would regard as two very contentious points.
The first was this. “Nothing is going to change in the Arab world until your bloody
regimes are more frightened of their own people than they are of Israel and
He replied: “You’re right.”
My second point was this. “If tomorrow the Israelis exterminated the Palestinians,
your bloody regimes would raise a glass of whisky behind closed doors and say
He replied: “You’re right.”
The essence of the truth about the Six Days War of June 1967 can be simply
stated. For Israel’s leaders it was the unfinished business of 1948. They set a trap
(fully explained in my book) for Egypt’s President Nasser. He was naive enough to
walk right into it and give Israel’s leaders the pretext they wanted for war. As it
happened I was the first Western correspondent to the banks of the Suez Canal
with the advancing Israelis. Just before I left Tel Aviv for the Sinai I had another
amazing conversation, this one with, then retired, Major General Chaim Herzog, one
of the founding fathers of Israel’s Directorate of Military Intelligence, who went on to
become Israel’s ambassador to the UN and eventually its President. During the
course of this conversation on day one of the war, Herzog said the following.
”If Nasser had not been stupid enough to give us a pretext for war we would have
invented one in a year to 18 months.”
In summary, what happened in June 1967 was a war of Israeli aggression, not as
Zionism asserted a war of self-defence. Years later some Israeli leaders
acknowledged this truth. In the first chapter of Volume Three of my book which is
subtitled Conflict Without End?, I quote a number of them. Here are just four
* In an interview published in Le Monde on 28 February 1968, Israeli Chief of Staff
Rabin said this.
”I do not believe Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent into Sinai on 14 May
would not have been enough to launch an offensive against Israel. He knew it and
we knew it.”
* On 14 April 1971, a report in the Israeli newspaper Al-Hamishmar contained the
following statement by Mordecai Bentov, a member of Israel’s wartime national
”The entire story of extermination was invented in every detail and exaggerated a
posteriori to justify the annexation of new Arab territory,”
* On 4 April 1972, General Ezer Weizman, Chief of Operations during the 1967
war, said the following in an article in Ma-ariv.
”There was never any danger of annihilation. This hypothesis has never been
considered in any serious meeting.”
* And in an unguarded public moment in 1982, Prime Minister Menachem Begin
”In June 1967 we had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai
approaches did not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be
honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.”
In the light of the mountains of evidence to the contrary, including the on-the-record
statements of some of Israel’s own former leaders, it is truly astonishing that still
today, when they make reference to the 1967 war, almost all Western politicians and
mainstream media people continue to peddle the nonsense that Israel’s existence
was in danger.
The short, true story of the 1973 war can be simply stated.
It was the consequence of a degree of collusion between Egypt’s President Sadat
and Henry Kissinger who had just became President Nixon’s Secretary of State.
Kissinger was frustrated because the Israeli government of Prime Minister Golda
Meir would not make even the smallest concession to allow him to push Sadat into
making a separate peace with Israel. So he, Kissinger, sent word to Sadat that “a
little heating up would be in order.” Sadat’s battle plan, of which Kissinger was fully
aware, was to cross the Suez Canal and stop. Which is exactly what Egypt’s forces
Sadat had absolutely no intention of advancing further; and he was confident
that Syria’s forces would stop their attempt to recapture some, if not all, of the Israeli
occupied Golan Heights, when Kissinger blew the whistle and convened a session
of the Security Council to get a peace process going. In Kissinger’s pre-war vision
Sadat would be hailed by his own masses as a conquering hero for taking back the
Suez Canal and he, Kissinger, would then give the Israelis a couple days to strike
back at Egyptian and Syrian forces before blowing the whistle.
It all went badly wrong for Sadat and Kissinger (and the Syrians) for two main
reasons. One was that Israel’s armed forces were not war ready. And that was
because Defence Minister Moshe Dayan believed there would never be war unless
Israel started it. Because of this lack of war readiness, Israel suffered heavy losses,
of tanks especially, when Sadat launched his attack to cross the Suez Canal. And
that led to a real crisis in Israel’s relationship with the Nixon administration and
Kissinger in particular.
I became aware of this crisis in a telephone conversation with Prime Minister Golda.
As some of you may know, I enjoyed on the human level, a very special relationship with
Golda. That was because whenever I went to Israel I always sent her three dozen red
roses. From the moment she became Prime Minister, that guaranteed me the first interview
with her at moments of crisis.
To cut a long story short…
I arrived in Israel on the second day of the 1973 war. I discovered that Golda was
holding a war cabinet in the kitchen of her Tel Aviv home and I sent the roses there.
Two hours later I had a telephone call from Lou Kiddar, Golda’s personal assistant
and lifelong best friend. She said, “Golda thanks you for the flowers and will try to
call you this evening.” When Golda did call me, it was to say that on this occasion
she could not give me the first interview. There was, she said, a compelling reason
why she had to give the first interview to the American networks. I asked her what
the reason was. She said
”We are in desperate need of a resupply of weapons from America, tanks
especially. Kissinger is sitting at Nixon’s elbow telling him to delay the re-supply
and make us sweat until we are ready to make concessions.”
Golda went on to tell me that she was ready to fly to Washington for one hour with
President Nixon to clear the blockage. As it happened it was Dayan who cleared
the blockage and got the re-supply going. He did it by ordering the arming of two
nuclear missiles, one targeted on Cairo, the other on Damascus. That was enough
to terrify Nixon and he ordered a massive re-supply of weapons to Israel without
further delay. Years later I told the story of Dayan’s nuclear blackmail to an
audience in America. After my presentation I was approached by a Jewish
gentleman who had abandoned Israel and was making a new life in America. He
said to me the following.
”Alan, what you said about Dayan’s nuclear blackmail is true. I know because I was
the officer responsible for overseeing the arming and the targeting of the two
The second main reason why it all went badly wrong for Sadat, Kissinger (and the
Syrians) is that Ariel Sharon and other Israeli generals decided that, when they
were re-supplied, they would have to teach Kissinger (as well as Sadat and the
Syrians) a lesson. Sharon and other Israeli generals were convinced that in the
immediate countdown to the war, Kissinger had ordered American intelligence,
indicating that Sadat was about to attack, to be denied to Israel.
When Kissinger realised that Israel’s generals were going to pursue the war to
the point of totally humiliating Sadat and himself, he went to Moscow. The outcome
of that visit was a statement that American forces around the world had been
placed on a Red (Nuclear) Alert because of the danger that the Soviet Union would
become engaged in the war to prevent Sadat being totally defeated and humiliated.
Prime Minister Golda Meir then received urgent appeals from Kissinger and Nixon. They
told her she had to bring Sharon under control (he was intending to wipe out the
trapped Third Egyptian Army) in order to prevent World War III and a nuclear
holocaust. And that was enough to cause her to act. In her last conversation with
me a few months before she died, Golda put it this way.
”Still in my slippers, I climbed into a helicopter. I flew to Egypt – imagine that,
Golda Meir in Egypt – and there I confronted Sharon. I stood in front of him and I said,
“I am your Prime Minister and I order you not to move against the Third Army.”
And that, more or less, was how the 1973 war ended. The trapped Third Egyptian
Army was saved and with it Sadat’s face. And that left Kissinger with enough, just
about enough, to begin the process that would lead to Egypt’s separate peace with
Israel. Kissinger knew that if Egypt could be taken out of the war equation the
Arabs would never be able to confront Israel militarily.
As a verbal footnote I’ll add this. In that last conversation with Golda I asked her if
she had believed that the threat of Soviet intervention and a superpower confrontation
was real. She said that at the time she did believe it was.. “Do you still think so?”
I asked. The length of her pause for thought suggested it was not a question she had
previously considered. Eventually she said, “I’m not sure.” I took that to mean
that she was open to the idea that Kissinger and the Soviets had put on a warning show to
frighten her into confronting Sharon.
In that same conversation I asked Golda how much she had trusted Kissinger. She gave me
two answers. One was a gesture. She opened the index finger and thumb of her left hand
to the widest possible extent, forming a complete right angle. Then, slowly, she lowered
the index finger until it was just about touching her thumb. Then she said, “That much!”
Her second answer was this.
”Whenever Kissinger was here in Israel he always called my cabinet ministers by
their first names. And they called him Henry. Not me. I always called him Mr.
Secretary of State or Dr. Kissinger; and I insisted that he called me Madame Prime
Minister or Mrs. Meir. If you’re on first name terms with such a man you’ll get
In summary of what I’ve said about the wars of 1948, 1967 and 1973, I’ll repeat that
Israel’s existence has never, ever, been in danger from any combination of Arab
force. I’ll add here a comment made to me in 1980 by then retired Major General
Shlomo Gazit, the best and the brightest of Israel’s Directors of Military
Intelligence. At the time I was acting as the linkman in a secret, exploratory
dialogue between Arafat and Shimon Peres who was hoping to win Israel’s next election
and deny Begin a second term in office.
Gazit was one of two who were advising Peres for this initiative. Over coffee one morning
I said to him, “I’ve come to the conclusion that it’s all a myth. Israel’s existence
has never, ever, been in danger.” Through a sad smile he replied: “Alan, the
trouble with us Israelis is that we’ve become the victims of our own propaganda.”
The THIRD of Zionism’s biggest propaganda lies is its assertion that it has never
had a Palestinian partner for peace. The truth is that nobody, repeat nobody, did
more than PLO leader Yasser Arafat to prepare the ground for peace on terms
which any rational government in Israel would have accepted with relief. As I
documented in detail in my book ‘Arafat: Terrorist or Peacemaker?’ (I spent a year
living with him and his most senior leadership colleagues to talk their story out of
them), Arafat became a pragmatist as the result of a conversation he had with
Egypt’s President Nasser in 1969.
Nasser told him that if the PLO wanted to be taken seriously by the major powers it
would have to come up with a policy politics and compromise. The compromise required,
Nasser added, was a commitment to peace with an Israel inside its 1967 borders. Arafat
knew that for most Palestinians everywhere at the time that was an UNTHINKABLE compromise
because it required them to make peace with Israel in return for only 22% of their land.
But from then on, 1969, Arafat himself was committed to the two-state solution.
It then took him 10 long years to sell his policy of politics and compromise to first the
majority of his Fatah leadership colleagues and then, eventually, to the PNC, the
Palestine National Council, which was more or less a Palestinian parliament-in-exile
and the highest decision-making body on the Palestinian side. It was a selling
process that required Arafat to put his reputation with his own people and his life on
the line. In one of my conversations with Abu Iyad, Fatah’s intelligence and security
chief, he told me that if at an early point he had believed Arafat would succeed in
getting PNC support for unthinkable compromise with Israel, he would have
assassinated him with his own gun.
When subsequently I told Arafat what Abu Iyad had said, his only comment was
“Yes, I knew that.” It was after the 1973 war that Arafat stepped up his efforts
to sell his policy of politics and compromise to the PNC. His reasoning in the immediate
aftermath of that war was that Egypt would make a separate peace with Israel, that Jordan
would no doubt do the same at some point, and that if PLO was not committed to peace with
an Israel inside its pre-1967 borders, it would be abandoned by those two front-line Arab
When he went for broke in his efforts to sell his policy of politics and compromise to
the PNC, Arafat summoned each and every one of the PNC’s 300 delegates from
all over the world to Beirut for one-on-one conversations with him. The initial
response of very many of them was to accuse him of being a traitor. Arafat kept his
cool and told the rejectors to return to their places in the diaspora and think over
what he had said about the need for compromise with Israel. When they had done
that, he told them, he would call them back for another conversation with him.
Arafat was not a great public speaker but in one-on-one conversations he had the
persuasive power of a magician. That was proved when towards the end of 1979
the PNC meeting in Algiers voted in favour of Arafat’s policy of politics and
compromise by 296 votes to 4. The day after the vote I met with Arafat. He said
”It is a miracle. We are now prepared to live in peace with Israel in a
mini-state of our own. No more this silly talk of driving the Jews into the sea!”
Arafat was then at the height of his powers and if Israel’s leaders had been
remotely interested in peace on the basis of a genuine two-state solution the door
to it was open. Israel’s response to Arafat the peacemaker came in 1982, when
Defence Minister Sharon ordered an invasion of Lebanon all the way to Beirut. Its
purpose was to eliminate the entire PLO leadership and destroy its infrastructure.
But that was intended to be only Phase One of Sharon’s master plan. His intention
if he succeeded in eliminating the PLO leadership and destroying its infrastructure
was to overthrow the Hashemite regime in Jordan and then say to the occupied
and oppressed Palestinians: “Of course you must have a state of your own. There
it is on the other side of the Jordan River. Go take it.”
A year later I asked King Hussein if he had been aware of Sharon’s intention to
overthrow him. He said yes, he was fully aware of it. But King Hussein was not the
only Arab leader who was fully aware of Sharon’s game plan. When Sharon was
well into planning his invasion of Lebanon, all the way to Beirut, the Gulf Arab
leaders met in secret. Their purpose was to agree a message to be sent to
President Reagan. The message they sent was to the effect that when Sharon
went for the PLO in Beirut they would not intervene or make any trouble. How do
we know that?
One of the Gulf leaders present was Oman’s Sultan Qaboos. And he warned Arafat.
According to what Arafat told me, Sultan Qaboos said to him:
“Be very careful. The time is coming when you will call for our help and it will
not be provided.” Did the Gulf Arab leaders want Sharon to destroy the PLO?
The answer seems to me to be YES. Another question. By being prepared to make peace
with Israel in return for a Palestinian mini state was Arafat effectively renouncing
the Palestinian right of return?
The complete answer is No. Arafat and most of his leadership colleagues
understood, but could not say in public, that a Palestinian mini-state would be able to
accommodate only about 100,000 of those refugees wishing to return. But they
invested their hope, perhaps naively, in the idea that one or two generations of
peace would create enough mutual trust and confidence for Israel to allow more
and more Palestinians to return. But even if that hope was the product of wishful
thinking it did not amount to renouncing the right of return.
Now to the question why Zionism IS the real enemy of the Jews? What we are witnessing
in the world today is a rising, global tide of anti-Israelism which, generally speaking,
is NOT anti-Semitism (not a loathing, or even hatred of Jews, just because they are Jews).
Anti-Israelism is the understandable human response to Israel’s contempt for
international law, its denial of justice for the Palestinians and, more generally
speaking, its on-going colonisation – the theft of more and more Arab land and
water and the demolition of more and more Arab homes, a process that in my view
could and should be described as ethnic cleansing slowly and by stealth.
The danger for the Jews of the world is that anti-Israelism could be transformed into
anti-Semitism, leading at some point to Holocaust II, my shorthand for another
great turning against the Jews. An explicit waning about this danger was put into
words by Yehoshafat Harkabi, Israel’s longest serving Director of Military
Intelligence, in his 1986 book ‘Israel’s Fateful Hour.’ Here is what he wrote.
”Israel is the criterion according to which all Jews will tend to be judged. Israel
as a Jewish state is an example of the Jewish character, which finds free and
concentrated expression within it. Anti-Semitism has deep and historical roots.
Nevertheless, any flaw in Israeli conduct, which initially is cited as anti-Israelism, is
likely to be transformed into empirical proof of the validity of anti-Semitism. It would
be a tragic irony if the Jewish state, which was intended to solve the problem of
anti-Semitism, was to become a factor in the rise of anti-Semitism. Israelis must be
aware that the price of their misconduct is paid not only by them but also Jews
throughout the world.”
If Harkabi was alive today I think he would probably agree with me that the
transformation about which he warned, is now underway. It’s worth noting that
Harkabi was not the first to warn that Zionism could be the promoter of anti-
Semitism. Prior to the Nazi holocaust most Jews of the world were opposed to
Zionism’s Palestine project. Those who spoke out publicly against it believed it was
immoral and would lead to unending conflict. But most of all they feared that if
Zionism was allowed by the major powers to have its way, it would one day
provoke anti-Semitism. Perhaps the most tragic of all ironies is that Zionism needs
anti-Semitism in order to justify its criminal policies and actions. Because of a
particular belief I have, I would like to be able to draw my presentation to a close
on a positive note. My belief is this.
Generally speaking the Jews are the intellectual elite of the Western world and the
Palestinians are the intellectual elite of the Arab world. What this suggests to me is
that together in peace and partnership they could change the region for the better
and, by doing so, give new hope and inspiration to the whole world. But it isn’t
going to happen, so I can’t draw to a conclusion on a positive note. Israel’s leaders
are not remotely interested in peace on any terms the Palestinians could accept,
and that’s in part because most Israeli Jews have been brainwashed by Zionist
propaganda to the point where they are beyond reason on the matter of justice for
The game plan of those Israeli leaders who call the shots is to make life hell for
the Palestinians in the hope that they will either abandon their struggle and accept
crumbs from Zionism’s table in the form of a few isolated Bantustans on 30 to 40% of
the West Bank which they could call a state if they wished; or, better still, pack
their bags and leave to start new lives elsewhere.
What is most likely to happen when Israel’s leaders conclude that they can’t force
the Palestinians to surrender on Zionism’s terms? My speculation is that they will
create a pretext to go for a final round of ethnic cleansing – to drive the
Palestinians off the West Bank and into Jordan, Syria, Lebanon or wherever. And
those who don’t flee will be slaughtered.My further speculation is that if that
happened the outrage of concerned and caring citizens around the world would speed
up the transformation of anti-Israelism into anti-Semitism, making another great
turning against Jews inevitable at some point.
Last question for the moment.
Am I without any hope for a resolution of the conflict that will provide the
Palestinians with an acceptable amount of justice? In my analysis, and given the
complicity by default of all the governments which matter in Israel’s on-going
colonisation, I can see only one way in which the dynamics of the conflict could be
changed. And that is for the occupied and oppressed Palestinians to insist on the
dissolution of the corrupt and impotent Palestinian Authority and handing back to
Israel complete responsibility and full accountability for occupation.
That would impose significant security, financial and other burdens on Israel, and it
would respond with more and more brutality and oppression. But that could trigger an
avalanche of public protest and pressure throughout the Western world, and beyond, to
push governments to use the leverage they have to try to cause Israel to end its
defiance of international law and denial of justice for the Palestinians. But I have
Even if the day comes when the governments of the major powers are prepared to
confront Zionism, it could not be taken for granted that Israel’s leaders would say:
“Okay. We’ll do what you want.” My reason for saying that is a
statement Prime Minister Golda Meir made to me in one of my interviews with her
for the BBC’s Panorama programme in 1972. At a point I said to her, “Prime
Minister, I want to be sure I understand what you have just said… You did mean
that in a doomsday situation Israel would be prepared to take the region and the
world down with it?” Without a pause for reflection Golda replied: “Yes.
That’s exactly what I’m saying.”
That interview was broadcast on BBC 1 at eight o’clock on a Monday evening. An
hour later The Times of London, then a seriously good newspaper, changed its
lead editorial to quote what Golda said to me. It then added its own opinion –
“We had better believe her.” I did then and I still do.
…… Thank you very much for listening and thank you dear Alfred for your
translation. I now look forward to taking your questions and I hope that one of
them will be about the role the Palestinian diaspora could play in helping to
keep the Palestinian cause alive if it summoned up the will and the courage
to become united and politically engaged.
For those of you who have got this far and might still harbour doubts about the reality of the Israeli story, it might be instructive to note the actual words uttered by the advocates of the Zionist enterprise. What follow is a selection of such quotes, the earliest being from Theodore Herzl, the founder of the movement for a Jewish colonisation of the Holy Land. I got bored with the project towards the end and recently I have allowed the collection to lapse, but not for want of suitable material.
“We will have to face the reality that Israel is neither innocent, nor redemptive. And that in its creation, and expansion; we as Jews, have caused what we historically have suffered; a refugee population in Diaspora.” Martin Buber, Jewish Philosopher, addressing Prime Minister Ben Gurion in March 1949 on the moral character of the State of Israel with reference to the Arab refugees.
“We’ll make a pastrami sandwich of them. We’ll insert a strip of Jewish settlements in between the Palestinians, and then another strip of Jewish settlements right across the West Bank, so that in 25 years, neither the United Nations, nor the U.S.A, nobody, will be able to tear it apart.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariel_Sharon Ariel Sharon to Winston S. Churchill in 1973.
“There is no such thing as a Palestinian people ..it is not as though we threw them out and took their country. They didn’t exist.” Golda Meir Interview with UK Times 1969
“Between ourselves it must be clear that there is no room for both peoples together in this country. We shall not achieve our goal if the Arabs are in this small country. There is no other way than to transfer the Arabs from here to neighbouring countries – all of them. Not one village, not one tribe should be left.” Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency’s Colonisation Department in 1940. From A Solution to the Refugee Problem Joseph Weitz, Davar, September 29, 1967, cited in Uri Davis and Norton Mevinsky, eds. Documents from Israel, 1967-1973, p.21
“A voluntary reconciliation with the Arabs is out of the question either now or in the future. If you wish to colonise a land in which people are already living, you must provide a garrison for the land, or find some rich man or benefactor who will provide a garrison on your behalf. Or else – or else, give up your colonisation, for without an armed force which will render physically impossible any attempt to destroy or prevent this colonisation, colonisation is impossible, not difficult, not dangerous, but IMPOSSIBLE! . . . Zionism is a colonisation adventure and therefore it stands or falls by the question of armed force. It is important … to speak Hebrew, but, unfortunately, it is even more important to be able to shoot – or else I am through with playing at colonising.” Vladimir Jabotinsky, founder of Revisionist Zionism (precursor of Likud), The Iron Wall, 1923.
“We must expel Arabs and take their places.” David Ben Gurion, future Prime Minister of Israel, 1937, Ben Gurion and the Palestine Arabs, Oxford University Press, 1985.
“How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to.” Golda Meir, March 8, 1969.
“When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.” Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs.” Menachem Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, “Begin and the ‘Beasts’,” New Statesman, 25 June 1982.
“Zionist colonisation must be either terminated or carried out against the wishes of the native population. This colonisation can, therefore, be continued and make progress only under the protection of a power independent of the native population – an iron wall, which will be in a position to resist the pressure to the native population. This is, in toto, our policy towards the Arabs…” Vladimir Jabotinsky, The Iron Wall, 1923
“A Christian state should be established [in Lebanon], with its southern border on the Litani river. We will make an alliance with it. When we smash the Arab Legion’s strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Transjordan too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we shall bomb Port Said, Alexandria and Cairo… And in this fashion, we will end the war and settle our forefathers’ account with Egypt, Assyria, and Aram.” David Ben- Gurion
“The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us in June 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war.” Israeli General Matityahu Peled, Ha’aretz, 19 March 1972.
“We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters” Uri Lubrani, Israeli Prime Minister Ben-Gurion’s special adviser on Arab Affairs, 1960.
“The disengagement is actually formaldehyde. It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that’s necessary so that there will not be a political process with the Palestinians.” Dov Weisman, Aide to Sharon, in Haaretz Oct 8 2004 interview with Ari shavit on rationale for Gaza withdrawal.
“Abroad we are accustomed to believe that Israel is almost empty; nothing is grown here and that whoever wishes to buy land could come here and buy what his heart desires. In reality, the situation is not like this. Throughout the country it is difficult to find cultivable land which is not already cultivated.” Achad Ha-Am the Hebrew essayist, after paying a visit to Palestine in 1891.
The removal of Arabs bodily from Palestine is part of the Zionist plan to “spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment . . . Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried away discreetly and circumspectly.” Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization – Complete Diaries , June 12, 1895.
“Has any People ever been seen to give up their territory of their own free will? In the same way, the Arabs of Palestine will not renounce their sovereignty without violence.” Vladimir Jabotinsky (the founder and advocate of the Zionist terrorist organisations) Quoted by Maxime Rodinson in Peuple Juif ou Problem Juif. (Jewish People or Jewish Problem).
“If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?” David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister) Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp. 121-122
“We must do everything to insure they (the Palestinians) never do return.” Assuring his fellow Zionists that Palestinians will never come back to their homes, “The old will die and the young will forget.” Ben Gurion in 1948
“The present map of Palestine was drawn by the British Mandate. The Jewish people have another map which our youth and adults should strive to fulfill — From the Nile to the Euphrates.” David Ben Gurion
“Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence in the newly created State of Israel of the Freedom Party (Herut), a political party closely akin in its organisation, method, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties.” [Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir, who were members of Herut, became Israeli Prime Ministers.] Albert Einstein, Hanna Arendt and other prominent Jewish Americans writing in The New York Times, protesting against the visit of Menachem Begin, December 1948.
“If the General Assembly were to vote by 121 votes to 1 in favour of Israel returning to the armistice lines (Israel’s pre-June 1967 borders) Israel would refuse to comply with the decision.” Aba Eban (Israeli Foreign Minister at the time) New York Times June 19, 1967.
“Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I don’t blame you because geography books no longer exist, not only do the books not exist. The Arab villages are not there either. Nahal arose in the place of Mahlul, Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibat, Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis and Kfar Yehushu’a in the place of Tal al Shuman. There is not one single place that did not have a former Arab population.” Moshe Dayan in an address to the Technion, Haifa (Quoted in Ha’aretz, April 4, 1969)
Zionism in principle
“The past leaders of our movement left us a clear message to keep Eretz Israel from the Sea to the River Jordan for future generations, for the mass aliya [immigration], and for the Jewish people, all of whom will be gathered into this country.” Yitzhak Shamir – former Israeli Prime Minister (Speaking at a Tel Aviv memorial service for former Likud leaders) November 1990, Jerusalem Domestic Radio Service
“Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that… I want to tell you something very clear: Don’t worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people control America, and the Americans know it.” Ariel Sharon. October 3rd, 2001 when, during a Cabinet row with Simon Peres, and which were reported (once) on Israeli radio,
“It won’t be possible to reach an agreement with them before the Palestinians are hit hard. If they aren’t badly beaten, there won’t be any negotiations. Only after they are beaten will we be able to conduct talks. I want an agreement, but first they have to be beaten so they get the thought out of their minds that they can impose an agreement on Israel that Israel does not want.” Ariel Sharon March 05 2002.
“The Wall in Jerusalem was built “first and foremost to prevent [terrorism].” …but it… “also makes [Jerusalem] more Jewish. The safer and more Jewish Jerusalem will be, it can serve as a true capital of the state of Israel.” Haim Ramon, Jerusalem cabinet minister, on a Radio interview July 2005.
“I am not certain we may ever be able to reach a peace agreement with the current Palestinian leadership; we will have to wait for the next generation . . . . a Palestinian state? A final agreement? I don’t see this happening in the coming years,” Israeli Defence Minister, Shaul Mofaz, after meeting with Egyptian President, Hosni Mubarak, in an interview with Yeodit Aharnot 28 October 2005.
“I suggest that we don’t take humanitarian aspects into consideration. Even one person killed on our side makes consideration for the Palestinians not worthwhile,” Israeli Chief of Staff Dan Halutz Yeodit Aharnot 28 October 2005.
“I don’t know something called International Principles. I vow that I’ll burn every Palestinian child (that) will be born in this area. The Palestinian woman and child is more dangerous than the man, because the Palestinian child’s existence infers that generations will go on, but the man causes limited danger. I vow that if I was just an Israeli civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him. With one hit I’ve killed 750 Palestinians (in Rafah in 1956). I wanted to encourage my soldiers by raping Arabic girls as the Palestinian women is a slave for Jews, and we do whatever we want to her and nobody tells us what we shall do but we tell others what they shall do.” Ariel Sharon, before becoming Prime Minister, in an interview with General Ouze Merham, 1956
“We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.” David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff.
“Israel should have exploited the repression of the demonstrations in China, when world attention focused on that country, to carry out mass expulsions among the Arabs of the territories.” Benjamin Netanyahu: Speech at Bar-Ilan University, 1989
“We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves.” Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.
“We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population.” Israel Koenig, “The Koenig Memorandum”
“The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more”…. Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time- August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000
“The Palestinians” would be crushed like grasshoppers … heads smashed against the boulders and walls.” Israeli Prime Minister Menahim Begin in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988
“It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization, or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands.” — Ariel Sharon, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.
“Israel and Australia are like sisters in Asia,” Tamir said in an
interview with Haaretz during a visit to Israel this week. “We are in Asia
without the characteristics of Asians. We don’t have yellow skin and
slanted eyes. Asia is basically the yellow race. Australia and Israel are
not – we are basically the white race. We are on the western side of Asia
and they are on the southeastern side.” Israeli ambassador to Australia, Naftali Tamir: Sept 2006.https://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/774471.html
The Deir Yassin massacre, which was led by Begin in 1948, was targeting not only the 750 Arab residents of the village living just beyond the UN-demarcated Israeli border, but was also designed to terrorise the Palestinian and Arab at large. Begin would later say: “The massacre was not only justified, but there would not have been a state of Israel without the victory at Deir Yassin.”