Showing posts with label people - Dayan; Moshe. Show all posts
Showing posts with label people - Dayan; Moshe. Show all posts

Dec 26, 2023

Richard Becker on the myth that the Six-Day War was "preemptive"

Most of the mainstream media, along with Israel’s apologists in the United States, propagated the notion that the war was a rerun of the biblical “David versus Goliath” battle.  Israel was pictured as the heroic underdog, with God once more on its side. 

The misnamed, U.S.-based “Anti-Defamation League,” which has long served as propagandist for the Israeli regime, said that “Israel launched a preemptive strike against Egypt,” suggesting that it only did so to avert annihilation. 

None other than the extreme right-wing Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin later exposed the utter falsity of such claims.  Fifteen years after the war, in an Aug. 2, 1982, speech to the Israeli National Defense College, Begin said: “We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him [Egyptian President Gamal Abdul Nasser].” 

It was not just Begin who exposed the myth.  Ten years earlier, Gen. Mattiyahu Peled, one of the Israeli commanders in the 1967 Six-Day War, told the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz: “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 a bluff, which was born and developed after the war.” 

In 1997, Israel’s minister of defense at the time of the Six-Day War, Moshe Dayan, talked to the New York Times about the events leading up to the war on the Syria-Israel front.  He stated that the Israeli kibbutz (cooperative farm) residents in the area wanted to take over the rich farmland of Syria’s Golan Heights: “They didn’t even try to hide their greed for that land.” 

Describing Israel’s tactics on its border with Syria, Dayan told the Times
We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot.  If they didn’t shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.  And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was. …  The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war [June 9, 1967], were not a threat to us.
By the 1967 war, Israel succeeded in achieving its long-held objective of expansion.  The remaining 22 percent of historic Palestine—the West Bank and Gaza—was conquered by Israel’s surprise attack, along with Syria’s Golan Heights and Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula. 

More than 35,000 Arabs were killed, many of them burned to death by Pentagon-supplied napalm bombs.  Thousands more were wounded. Most of the Egyptian, Syrian and Jordanian air and armor forces were destroyed in the opening days of the surprise attack.  The Israeli army drove more than 90,000 Syrians and Palestinians out of the Golan Heights, an agriculturally rich region north of the Sea of Galilee. 

Many of the Syrian villages and Golan’s main city, Quneitra, were bulldozed by the Israeli military.  Israeli settlers began arriving in Golan in July 1967.  In 1981, the Israeli Knesset (parliament) passed a law annexing the Golan Heights.  The continuing occupation of Golan, as well as the West Bank and Gaza, defies scores of United Nations resolutions.

~ Richard Becker, "Fifty years later: Myths and facts about the Six Day War," Liberation, June 7, 2017

(This article is based on a talk by Richard Becker at a PSL forum in San Francisco on June 3, 2017.)



Dec 18, 2023

Sheldon Richman on the 1956 Suez Crisis

On October 29, 1956, the Israeli army invaded Egypt's Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip.  Soon after, the forces of Great Britain and France launched air attacks against Egypt. 

That crisis had its roots in two factors: friction at the armistice line, established after the 1948 war between Israel and Egypt, and control over the Suez Canal.  Another factor was the withdrawal of the U.S. offer to help finance the High Aswan Dam in upper Egypt, a prized project of the country's new ruler and champion of Arab nationalism, Gamal Abdel Nasser.


Eisenhower and Dulles did not trust Nasser because he tried to steer a neutral course between the United States and the Soviet Union, and they were especially displeased with his recognition of Communist China.  The administration first tried to win Nasser over, but when that failed, it tried obsessively to undermine him and worse.  The wish to undermine Nasser was important in forging a U.S.-Israeli "strategic relationship."  The offer to finance the dam and provide arms (with conditions Nasser could not accept) were the carrots dangled before the charismatic Egyptian. 

When Nasser turned to the Soviets in September 1955 to purchase arms when he could not buy them from the United States without strings attached, his actions were seized on as proof that he was in the Soviet camp and thus an enemy of the United States.  (The events in Iran were not lost on Nasser.)

The United States also had antagonized Nasser in 1955 when it set up the Baghdad Pact (later called the Central Treaty Organization, or CENTO), an alliance of northern tier nations, including Turkey, Pakistan, Iran, and Iraq (the only Arab country in the alliance).  Great Britain was also a member.  The United States was not a formal member but was clearly a guiding force.  Nasser saw the pact as an attempt to split the Arab world and interfere with the "positive neutralism" he sought for it. Iraq at the time was friendly to the West and not disposed to the Arab nationalism that Nasser aspired to create and lead.  The Baghdad Pact was one of the things that had the ironic effect of bringing the Arabs and Soviets closer. 

In mid-1956 the United States abruptly withdrew its offer to help finance the High Aswan Dam, just as the Egyptians had decided to accept the administration's conditions.  The American reversal brought cancellations of aid for the dam from Great Britain and the World Bank as well.  A week after the U.S. decision, Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal Company, which since 1869 had been owned by French nationals and the British government and operated under an Egyptian concession.  The British and French governments reacted angrily; for the French, it was not irrelevant that Nasser was helping the Algerians, who were seeking independence.  The U.S. reaction was calmer, as Eisenhower and Dulles distinguished between ownership and freedom of navigation.  (Nevertheless, the New York Times denounced Nasser as "the Hitler on the Nile.")  The U.S. administration warned Great Britain and France against responding precipitously and pressed for negotiations.  A conference was convened, but Nasser refused to attend or accept its proposals. evertheless, international traffic on the canal continued normally under Egyptian administration.  When Great Britain and France failed to get satisfaction from the United Nations, they began making plans for war. 

Israel was not able to use the canal, but the Jewish state's aims regarding Egypt went beyond that grievance.  Since the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, Palestinian refugees had often crossed into Israel seeking to regain property and possessions expropriated by the government and to reach relatives.  Some engaged in violence.  Israel began responding with massive reprisal raids against entire villages in the Arab countries.  Most significant was the attack on the town of Gaza in February 1955, when children as well as men were killed.  That attack prompted Egypt to end direct peace talks with Israel and to turn to the Soviet Union for arms.  It was only at that point that Egypt sponsored an anti-Israeli guerrilla organization whose members were known as the Fedayeen.  In August Israel attacked the Gaza Strip village of Khan Yunis, killing 39 Egyptians.  The attacks in the Gaza Strip, masterminded by officials loyal to Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, subverted Nasser's efforts to make peace with Israel.  Ben-Gurion's successor, Moshe Sharett, responded positively to Nasser's overtures, but Gen. Moshe Dayan and others undermined Sharett.  During the winter of 1955, for example, Israeli warplanes flew over Cairo repeatedly to demonstrate Egyptian military impotence.

The Israeli government had earlier tried to prevent a warming of U.S.-Egyptian relations by having saboteurs bomb American offices in Cairo in 1954, an episode that became known as the Lavon Affair.  When Egypt uncovered the operation, Israel accused Nasser of fabricating the plot.  Two of the 13 men arrested were hanged, and their hangings were used as a pretext for Israel's February 1955 attack on Gaza. Six years later, the Israeli government's complicity was confirmed.

Israel's bad relations with Egypt were also aggravated by the seizure of an Israeli ship, which was provocatively sent into the Suez Canal in September 1954.  Both sides had seized each other's ships before, and this incident appears to have been provoked by Israel as a way to get Great Britain to compel Egypt to permit Israeli ships to use the waterway as part of a final agreement on the Suez Canal.

Despite repeated provocations, Egypt, according to documents later captured by Israel, had attempted to prevent infiltration by the Fedayeen because of its fear of attack.  Nevertheless, in October 1956 Israel invaded Egypt, ignoring American pleas for forbearance.  The United States took the matter to the UN Security Council, which called for a cease-fire and withdrawal.  It also passed a resolution to create a 6,000-man UN emergency force to help restore the status quo ante. 

Eisenhower's opposition to the conduct of Israel, Great Britain, and France--an anomaly in light of later U.S. policy-- is explained by his opposition to old-style colonialism.  The administration wanted to win the friendship of the newly independent countries of Africa and Asia and to keep them out of the Soviet orbit.  That could not be accomplished if the United States were perceived to be on the side of Great Britain and France in so flagrant an act of imperialism as an attack on Egypt.  Also important to the administration's calculus was its wish that London not challenge Washington's more subtle dominance in the Middle East. British and French irritation with American anti-colonialism was a source of problems among the leaders of the three nations.

When the UN call for a cease-fire failed to contain the conflict, the Soviet Union threatened to intervene, and Premier Nicolai Bulganin even proposed to Eisenhower that their two countries take joint military action to end the war. Eisenhower rejected the proposal and warned the Soviets not to get involved.

The fighting ended on November 7, when Britain and France bowed to the United Nations and agreed to withdraw.  Israel, however, refused to withdraw from the Sinai until its conditions were met.  Israel was especially adamant that Egypt not regain the Gaza Strip, which was to have been part of the Palestinian state under the UN partition.  Eisenhower responded to Israel's position by threatening to cut off aid, although he apparently never did so.  By March 1957 Israel had withdrawn from all the occupied areas, but not before the United States had given assurances that UN troops would be stationed on Egyptian territory to ensure free passage of Israeli and Israel-bound ships through the Strait of Tiran and to prevent Fedayeen activity.  The United States, in an aide-mÇmoire by John Foster Dulles, also acknowledged that the Gulf of Aqaba was international waters and "that no nation has the right to prevent free and innocent passage in the Gulf and through the Straits."  The key to the final settlement was a French proposal that Israel be allowed to act in self-defense under the UN charter if its ships were attacked in the Gulf of Aqaba.

Thus, the United States again became directly involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict and made what would later be construed as guarantees to Israel.  Although Israel chafed under the frank rhetoric and surprising (in light of the U.S. election season) evenhandedness of Eisenhower and Dulles, it got essentially what it wanted from the Suez campaign.