Book on Israeli Militarism Critiqued by T. Mitchell

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Book on Israeli Militarism Critiqued by T. Mitchell Book on Israeli Militarism Critiqued by T. Mitchell Thomas Mitchell, Ph.D., is an independent scholar and creator of The Self- Hating Gentile blog. “Fortress Israel“ by Patrick Tyler; 497 pp.; Farrar, Straus and Giroux; $35. Since former Irish diplomat, politician and journalist Conor Cruise O’Brien penned The Siege in 1986, there has been a flood of histories of Zionism and Israel. Some of these have been written by professional historians, others by diplomats and politicians, and some by journalists. Generally I find those written by historians or political scientists to be better because their authors have been trained in using professional judgment to evaluate sources as well as how to make an argument for a particular thesis. Journalists are more trained in getting the interesting quotes, and now freed from restraints imposed by their news editors, are liable to allow their partisanship to show in ways that would not be permitted in a quality newspaper. Patrick Tyler, a former Washington Post Middle East reporter and New York Times foreign correspondent and writer comes to this task having already written a book on the Mideast policy of American presidents. This history covers Israeli regional policy from 1954 to 2009. In the nearly five hundred pages of text the most attention is devoted to the period between 1954 and 1956 and the Oslo period with each having over a hundred pages devoted to them. Tyler’s two “heroes” in this book are Moshe Sharett and Yitzhak Rabin. Each faces off against a major villain or two: David Ben- Gurion, Moshe Dayan, and Pinhas Lavon for Sharett and Benjamin Netanyahu and Shimon Peres for Rabin. Patrick Tyler argues in a rather round-about fashion that Israeli diplomatic policy is determined by the military-security establishment in Israel. Tyler defines this broadly to include not only the Israel Defense Force and intelligence organizations like the Mossad, Aman, and Shabak/Shin Bet, but also military politicians such as former chiefs of staff and prominent generals who have gone into politics. He quotes one Israeli to the effect that the IDF is a trade union and everyone who belonged to it toes its line. The one election campaign I observed firsthand from inside Israel was the May 1977 election that resulted in the historic change of power from the Alignment to the Likud. In that election there were three separate lists headed by former generals: the Democratic Movement for Change headed by former chief of staff and archaeologist Yigael Yadin, Shlomzion headed by Ariel Sharon, and Shelli headed by Mattityahu Peled. The DMC was a movement devoted to electoral reform. Shlomzion was a rightist vehicle for Sharon to return to the Likud after having quit politics after only a year in the Knesset. Shelli was a leftist peace movement dedicated to a two-state solution and redistribution of income in Israel. Besides being headed by former generals, what did they have in common? Until Rabin became prime minister in June 1974 and for most of the time afterwards, the IDF was controlled by civilian politicians. Although military politicians took over the defense ministry in June 1967, they still had to answer to civilian prime ministers and cabinets. Therefore if Israel had a militaristic policy throughout its history the IDF was not the source of this policy. Ben-Gurion was a civilian who had been in uniform for about two years during World War I—nearly thirty years before he became prime minister. As Tyler points out, Peres never served in the IDF (although Ben-Gurion offered him the rank of general in this war because of his role in manpower mobilization). In fact, military politicians are no more hardline and often more moderate than civilian politicians in their respective parties. Yigal Alon, former head of the Palmakh, created the Alon Plan for peace with Jordan in 1967 whereas the civilian leader of the Ahdut Ha’Avoda party, Yitzhak Tabenkin, joined the Land of Israel Movement that year and eventually made his way into the Likud. Sharon was no more dedicated to settling the West Bank than were Menahem Begin and Yitzhak Shamir. Although Tyler would define Shamir as a member of the security establishment, because of his decade in the Mossad, Shamir had clearly formed his hardline views long before he joined the Mossad. And under Ehud Olmert, another civilian premier, Israel engaged in two wars. A third challenge to Tyler’s thesis is how to explain the mellowing or moderation of these security hawks over time. Alon, Rabin, Peres, Weizman and Sharon all started out as hawks and moved leftwards over time. Alon later regressed on his death bed in 1980, but Dayan was a very creative player in the peace process from 1974 to 1979. Both Dayan and Weizman resigned from the Likud coalition because of differences with Begin over regional policy. Peres the hawk during the negotiations on the Sinai II agreement in 1975 became a dove by the early 1980s and was the major sponsor of the Oslo process. Rabin was the moderate in 1975, and after returning to become a hawk as defense minister from 1984 to 1990 became a sponsor of Oslo as well in cooperation with Peres. Sharon withdrew from Gaza in 2005. Maybe where you sit is where you stand to use an old political science saying. So the source of Israel’s militarism must lay elsewhere than with the IDF. Could it lay in a rational reaction to Israel’s regional environment and the actions of Israel’s Arab neighbors? Because the Arabs are only props in Tyler’s narrative and never actors we would never know. Could it lay in Israel’s Jewish past in Europe and the Middle East? Again we wouldn’t know from Tyler’s narrative. The Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al- Husseini, who spent World War II in Baghdad and Berlin, is nowhere mentioned. Although Tyler occasionally provides political gossip, particularly from the Mapai-Labor Party era, he does not examine Israel’s political party system as a possible source of Israel’s problems. He might want to explain why the French Fourth Republic could not leave Algeria until a former general took power in a military coup. But that again would involve attempted falsification. This book will be worth buying in paperback in a year or two for the quotes and information that Tyler has turned up in his research. But much of this material has already been revealed in histories by Israel’s new historians, Avi Shlaim and Benny Morris. Tyler used Shlaim’s The Iron Wall as a source, but not Morris’s Righteous Victims. Morris’s book concentrates on the interaction between Jews and Arabs. But Tyler, like so many observers, falls for the human tendency to side with one party in the conflict and blame the other for its continuation..
Recommended publications
  • Prospects for Settlement of the Israeli-Arab Conflict
    Denver Journal of International Law & Policy Volume 5 Number 2 Fall Article 5 May 2020 Prospects for Settlement of the Israeli-Arab Conflict Noam Chomsky Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/djilp Recommended Citation Noam Chomsky, Prospects for Settlement of the Israeli-Arab Conflict, 5 Denv. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y 393 (1975). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Denver Sturm College of Law at Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Journal of International Law & Policy by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],dig- [email protected]. Prospects for Settlement of the Israeli-Arab Conflict NOAM CHOMSKY* These remarks will be rather narrowly focussed. I will not con- sider questions of right and justice or the merits of conflicting claims, but will concentrate on the likely consequences of proposed policies and programs. Secondly, I will limit attention to only one of the many problems of the region, the Israeli-Arab conflict. For some time, the United States government has been commit- ted to an "incremental" approach that seeks to reduce the short-run likelihood of conflict between the major military powers: primarily, Israel and Egypt; secondarily, Israel and Syria. Within this frame- work, priority is assigned to separation-of-forces agreements and other measures to reduce tension. The approach has had some limited success and may lead to more far-reaching arrangements, despite the present stalemate, since it conforms to the immediate needs of the belligerent states and the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • JABOTINSKY on CANADA and the Unlted STATES*
    A CASE OFLIMITED VISION: JABOTINSKY ON CANADA AND THE UNlTED STATES* From its inception in 1897, and even earlier in its period of gestation, Zionism has been extremely popular in Canada. Adherence to the movement seemed all but universal among Canada's Jews by the World War I era. Even in the interwar period, as the flush of first achievement wore off and as the Canadian Jewish community became more acclimated, the movement in Canada functioned at a near-fever pitch. During the twenties and thirties funds were raised, acculturatedJews adhered toZionism with some settling in Palestine, and prominent gentile politicians publicly supported the movement. The contrast with the United States was striking. There, Zionism got a very slow start. At the outbreak of World War I only one American Jew in three hundred belonged to the Zionist movement; and, unlike Canada, a very strong undercurrent of anti-Zionism emerged in the Jewish community and among gentiles. The conversion to Zionism of Louis D. Brandeis-prominent lawyer and the first Jew to sit on the United States Supreme Court-the proclamation of the Balfour Declaration, and the conquest of Palestine by the British gave Zionism in the United States a significant boost during the war. Afterwards, however, American Zionism, like the country itself, returned to "normalcy." Membership in the movement plummeted; fundraising languished; potential settlers for Palestine were not to be found. One of the chief impediments to Zionism in America had to do with the nature of the relationship of American Jews to their country. Zionism was predicated on the proposition that Jews were doomed to .( 2 Michuel Brown be aliens in every country but their own.
    [Show full text]
  • Sociographie De La Doxa Coloniale Israélienne
    Université de Montréal Se représenter dominant et victime : sociographie de la doxa coloniale israélienne par Michaël Séguin Département de sociologie Faculté des arts et sciences Thèse présentée en vue de l’obtention du grade de Philosophiae Doctor (Ph.D.) en sociologie Août 2018 © Michaël Séguin, 2018 Université de Montréal Faculté des études supérieures et postdoctorales Cette thèse intitulée : Se représenter dominant et victime : sociographie de la doxa coloniale israélienne Présentée par : Michaël Séguin a été évaluée par un jury composé des personnes suivantes : Deena White, présidente-rapporteuse et représentante du doyen Paul Sabourin, directeur de recherche Yakov Rabkin, codirecteur de recherche Barbara Thériault, membre du jury Rachad Antonius, examinateur externe Résumé Dans un monde majoritairement postcolonial, Israël fait figure d’exception alors même que se perpétue sa domination d’un autre peuple, les Arabes palestiniens. Tandis qu’un nombre grandissant d’auteurs, y compris juifs, traitent de la question israélo-palestinienne comme d’un colonialisme de peuplement, et non plus comme d’un conflit ethnique entre groupes nationaux, se pose la question : comment une telle domination est-elle possible à l’ère des médias de masse ? Plus précisément, pourquoi cette domination est-elle si peu contestée de l’intérieur de la société israélienne alors même qu’elle contredit le discours public de l’État qui tente, par tous les moyens, de se faire accepter comme étant démocratique et éclairé ? Pour y répondre, cette thèse procède à une analyse de la connaissance de sens commun israélienne afin de détecter à la fois le mode de connaissance, issu des relations sociales, privilégié pour faire sens des rapports ethnonationaux, mais aussi la manière dont cette doxa vient légitimer la domination des Palestiniens.
    [Show full text]
  • Water: Israeli Strategy, Implications for Peace and the Viability of Palestine Harald D
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by DOCS@RWU Roger Williams University DOCS@RWU Macro Center Working Papers Center For Macro Projects and Diplomacy 4-1-2004 Water: Israeli strategy, implications for peace and the viability of Palestine Harald D. Fredericksen Water-Resources Management Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.rwu.edu/cmpd_working_papers Recommended Citation Fredericksen, Harald D., "Water: Israeli strategy, implications for peace and the viability of Palestine" (2004). Macro Center Working Papers. Paper 9. http://docs.rwu.edu/cmpd_working_papers/9 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center For Macro Projects and Diplomacy at DOCS@RWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Macro Center Working Papers by an authorized administrator of DOCS@RWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Volume 1 Center for Macro Projects and Diplomacy Working Paper Series Spring 2004 WATER: ISRAELI STRATEGY, IMPLICATIONS FOR PEACE AND THE VIABILITY OF PALESTINE Harald D. Frederiksen, Private Consultant, Water-Resources Management From Haaretz, June 21, 1999: “A total of 40,000 people living in Katna and six neighboring villages between Ramallah and Jerusalem are living on the extreme edge of a most precarious water supply. The high areas have almost no running water, while the other neighborhoods get running water between 3 and 4 days a week only. As a result, the Civil Administration has enforced severe rationing. Laundry is done once a fortnight, and people can only shower once or twice a week. Several children have fainted from dehydration.
    [Show full text]
  • The Labor Party and the Peace Camp
    The Labor Party and the Peace Camp By Uzi Baram In contemporary Israeli public discourse, the preoccupation with ideology has died down markedly, to the point that even releasing a political platform as part of elections campaigns has become superfluous. Politicians from across the political spectrum are focused on distinguishing themselves from other contenders by labeling themselves and their rivals as right, left and center, while floating around in the air are slogans such as “political left,” social left,” “soft right,” “new right,” and “mainstream right.” Yet what do “left” and “right” mean in Israel, and to what extent do these slogans as well as the political division in today’s Israel correlate with the political traditions of the various parties? Is the Labor Party the obvious and natural heir of The Workers Party of the Land of Israel (Mapai)? Did the historical Mapai under the stewardship of Ben Gurion view itself as a left-wing party? Did Menachem Begin’s Herut Party see itself as a right-wing party? The Zionist Left and the Soviet Union As far-fetched as it may seem in the eyes of today’s onlooker, during the first years after the establishment of the state, the position vis-à-vis the Soviet Union was the litmus test of the left camp, which was then called “the workers’ camp.” This camp viewed the centrist liberal “General Zionists” party, which was identified with European liberal and middle-class beliefs in private property and capitalism, as its chief ideological rival (and with which the heads of major cities such as Tel Aviv and Ramat Gan were affiliated)­.
    [Show full text]
  • Exporting Zionism
    Exporting Zionism: Architectural Modernism in Israeli-African Technical Cooperation, 1958-1973 Ayala Levin Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy under the Executive Committee of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2015 © 2015 Ayala Levin All rights reserved ABSTRACT Exporting Zionism: Architectural Modernism in Israeli-African Technical Cooperation, 1958-1973 Ayala Levin This dissertation explores Israeli architectural and construction aid in the 1960s – “the African decade” – when the majority of sub-Saharan African states gained independence from colonial rule. In the Cold War competition over development, Israel distinguished its aid by alleging a postcolonial status, similar geography, and a shared history of racial oppression to alleviate fears of neocolonial infiltration. I critically examine how Israel presented itself as a model for rapid development more applicable to African states than the West, and how the architects negotiated their professional practice in relation to the Israeli Foreign Ministry agendas, the African commissioners' expectations, and the international disciplinary discourse on modern architecture. I argue that while architectural modernism was promoted in the West as the International Style, Israeli architects translated it to the African context by imbuing it with nation-building qualities such as national cohesion, labor mobilization, skill acquisition and population dispersal. Based on their labor-Zionism settler-colonial experience,
    [Show full text]
  • Iraqi Jews: a History of Mass Exodus by Abbas Shiblak, Saqi, 2005, 215 Pp
    Iraqi Jews: A History of Mass Exodus by Abbas Shiblak, Saqi, 2005, 215 pp. Rayyan Al-Shawaf The 2003 toppling of Saddam Hussein’s Baath regime and the occupation of Iraq by Allied Coalition Forces has served to generate a good deal of interest in Iraqi history. As a result, in 2005 Saqi reissued Abbas Shiblak’s 1986 study The Lure of Zion: The Case of the Iraqi Jews. The revised edition, which includes a preface by Iraq historian Peter Sluglett as well as minor additions and modifications by the author, is entitled The Iraqi Jews: A History of Mass Exodus. Shiblak’s book, which deals with the mass immigration of Iraqi Jews to Israel in 1950-51, is important both as one of the few academic studies of the subject as well as a reminder of a time when Jews were an integral part of Iraq and other Arab countries. The other significant study of this subject is Moshe Gat’s The Jewish Exodus from Iraq, 1948-1951, which was published in 1997. A shorter encapsulation of Gat’s argument can be found in his 2000 Israel Affairs article Between‘ Terror and Emigration: The Case of Iraqi Jewry.’ Because of the diametrically opposed conclusions arrived at by the authors, it is useful to compare and contrast their accounts. In fact, Gat explicitly refuted many of Shiblak’s assertions as early as 1987, in his Immigrants and Minorities review of Shiblak’s The Lure of Zion. It is unclear why Shiblak has very conspicuously chosen to ignore Gat’s criticisms and his pointing out of errors in the initial version of the book.
    [Show full text]
  • Downloaded from Manchesterhive.Com at 09/26/2021 04:35:42AM Via Free Access DEF3 7/31/02 10:33 PM Page 42
    DEF3 7/31/02 10:33 PM Page 41 3 Between militarism and moderation in Israel: constructing security in historical perspective Jonathan B. Isacoff his chapter examines the concept of security through discursive contestation at the leadership level in a critical Middle Eastern case – that Tof Israel. The approach adopted here can be called historical constructivism in that it traces the fractured construction of security as a phenomenon that changes dramatically, and with significant political implications, over time. This historical constructivist approach is predicated on two fundamental claims. The first is that concepts such as ‘state’, ‘security’ and ‘nation’ are socially con- structed and thus will hold different meanings in different spatial and temporal contexts. The second is that the meaning of any socially constructed phenom- enon is perpetually contested. That is, one cannot allude to a single ‘objective’ understanding of security at any point in time. From these basic assumptions the chapter argues that it is both possible and necessary to distinguish between security – a state of protected existence – and the referent object of security – that which is to be protected.1 Related to this point is the contemporary Israeli notion of national or strategic security versus individual or ‘current’ security.2 All states and peoples want to be secure. In the case of Israel, however, the lines between these various and otherwise distinct concepts – security v. referent object; and state v. individual as referent object – have been constructed in an increasingly blurred fashion over time so as to advance the political agendas of specific political groups. In order to explain how and why this is the case, the chapter examines the specific discourses of secu- rity employed by opposing political groups during key periods in the history of the Arab–Israeli conflict.
    [Show full text]
  • Is It Anti-Semitic to Defend Palestinian Human Rights?
    Is It Anti-Semitic to Defend Palestinian Human Rights? Conclusion Press, Philadelphia, 1990) is a history of the Council during the period just before the creation of the “Jewish state.” By Edward C. Corrigan After Israel's spectacular success in the 1967 1943, a group of 92 Reform Arab Israeli war, however, a change in the policy rabbis, and many other prominent Ameri- towards Zionism occurred in the Council, which can Jews, created the Ameri- softened its strict anti-Zionist position. can Council for Judaism, with A separate organization was subse- In quently established in 1969 called the express intent of combating Zion- ism. Included in the Council’s leader- American Jewish Alternatives to Zion- ship were Rabbi Morris S. Lazaron of ism (AJAZ). The new group, which was Baltimore; Lessing J. Rosenwald, the based in New York, continued the origi- former chairman of Sears, Roebuck & nal anti Zionist tradition of the Ameri- Company, who became president of the can Council for Judaism. Rabbi Elmer Council; Rabbi Elmer Berger, who Berger served as president of AJAZ and became its executive director; Arthur also editor of its publication, the AJAZ Hays Sulzberger, publisher of The New Report, until shortly before his death in York Times; and Sidney Wallach of the 1996. The American Council for American Jewish Committee. Judaism is still in existence. It is non- An example of their views on Zionism Zionist rather than anti-Zionist, but is “Palestine,” a pamphlet published by highly critical of Israel’s policies toward the Council in 1944, which stated as the Palestinians.
    [Show full text]
  • Israel's Struggle Against Hamas
    Università degli Studi “Roma Tre” Scuola Dottorale in Scienze Politiche XXV Ciclo Israel’s Struggle Against Hamas Supervisore Dottorando Prof. Leopoldo Nuti Niccolò Petrelli Coordinatore della Sezione Prof. Leopoldo Nuti Introduction The PhD research, ‘Israel’s Struggle against Hamas: Strategic Culture, Adaptation and War’, studies the impact of cultural factors on the Israeli counter-insurgency vis-à-vis Hamas in the period comprised between 1987 and 2005, analyzing to what extent the peculiar traits of the Israeli approach to security and military affairs account for the shaping of a distinct ‘way of war’ and for the successes and failures of the Jewish state in countering the Islamic Resistance Movement’s insurgency. The concept of ‘counter-insurgency’ is logically contingent on that of ‘insurgency’, to which it applies. Being insurgency a protracted struggle to control a contested political space conducted by one or more popularly based non-state challengers1, ‘counter-insurgency’ could be defined as all those measures through which elements of national power are applied for the purpose of suppressing an insurgency. From this definition it appears clear how the concept constitutes an analytical paradigm through which scholars and practitioners approach asymmetric warfare (or war against ‘irregulars’, ‘partisans’ or ‘guerrillas’), that is struggles between non-state and state actors.2 Although old as human civilization, asymmetric warfare rose to prominence after 1945, coming to represent the norm, rather than the exception, of war.3 The end of the Cold War and the last two decades seemed to confirm the ascendancy of this specific kind of warfare over ‘conventional’ or ‘symmetric warfare’ and the setting of a pattern that will probably continue for some time.4 Counter-insurgency represents therefore a topic worth to study not only by virtue of its prominence in the history of warfare, but also in light of the nature of the conflicts confronting the international community, either currently and possibly also in the near future.
    [Show full text]
  • The Lavon Affair
    Israel Military Intelligence: The Lavon Affair jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/lavon.html Best choice for browsing Browse from Czech Republic Browse from France Browse from Sweden Browse from Canada (Summer 1954) Military Intelligence: Table of Contents | The Mossad | Targeted Assassinations The Lavon Affair is a spy story in Israel's early years that left a nasty mark on the young state, with reverberations for the following 20 years. It's name derived from Israeli Defense Minister Pinhas Lavon, though it is also referred to as " Esek HaBish" or "The Mishap". Revolving around nearly a dozen young Egyptian Jews who agreed to spy for Israel against their home country, the affair taps into a story of idealism and self-sacrifice as well as abandonment and an unwillingness to take responsibility. Due to strict censorship in Israel in the early 1950's, few knew that in the year 1954 Israeli underground cells that had been operating in Egypt were uncovered by the Egyptian police. A number of young Jews were arrested and forced to undergo a show trial. Two of them - Yosef Carmon and Max Binnet - committed suicide in prison due to the brutal interrogation methods of the Egyptian police. Two more - Dr. Moshe Marzouk of Cairo and Shmuel Azar of Alexandria - were sentenced to death and hanged in a Cairo prison. Israel glorified them as martyrs. Their memory was sanctified. Neighborhoods and gardens were named after them in Israel, as were dozens of children born in the year 1955. At the same time it was not publicly conceded that they died in the service of Israel.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1967 Arab-Israeli War Origins and Consequences
    The 1967 Arab-Israeli War Origins and Consequences The June 1967 War was a watershed moment in the history of the mod- ern Middle East. In six days, the Israelis defeated the Arab armies of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan and seized large portions of territory includ- ing the West Bank, East Jerusalem, the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula, and the Golan Heights. With the hindsight of four decades and access to recently declassified documents, two veteran scholars of the Middle East bring together some of the most knowledgeable experts in their fields to reassess the origins of the war and its regional reverberations. Each chapter takes a different perspective from the vantage point of a different participant, those that actually took part in the war, and the world powers – the United States, Soviet Union, Britain, and France – that played important roles behind the scenes. Their conclusions make for sober reading. At the heart of the story was the incompetence of the Egyptian high command under the leadership of Gamal Abdel Nasser and the rivalry between various Arab players who were deeply suspi- cious of each other’s motives. Israel, on the other side, gained a resound- ing victory for which, despite previous assessments to the contrary, there was no master plan. Wm. Roger Louis is the Kerr Professor of English History and Cul- ture at the University of Texas at Austin and Honorary Fellow of St. Antony’s College, Oxford. A past President of the American His- torical Association, he is the editor-in-chief of The Oxford History of the British Empire.
    [Show full text]