Preserving All of History

Appeared in the February 10, 2012 issue of the Jerusalem Post's "In Jerusalem":-

^

The Route of the Begin Run, February 24, 2012

^

1981 / 2012; Begin / Netanyahu

From a report in Israel Hayom:

Three decades ago, an Israeli prime minister faced his Cabinet and invoked the Holocaust in an emotional appeal to approve an air strike against an Arab atomic reactor.  Menachem Begin got the nod, cautioning that a nuclear-armed Iraq under Saddam Hussein would pose a threat to the existence of the Jewish state. On June 7, 1981, Israeli warplanes destroyed the nuclear facility near Baghdad.

The current prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, would also need ministerial backing, from his 15-member Security Cabinet, should he seek to attack Iran, despite Washington’s warnings of the risks to the global economy and U.S. regional interests...

...In 1981, Begin kept both the Knesset plenum and a key parliamentary security panel in the dark about the planned F-16 sneak attack, explaining later that he could not trust lawmakers not to leak details to the media.


The air force chief at the time, David Ivry, said the mission was approved by the Security Cabinet and then the full Cabinet, with all present being asked to sign secrecy contracts.

“First came the approval in principle, and then the detailed discussions and briefings,” Ivry told Reuters.

A briefing paper presented to Begin’s Cabinet ministers by Israeli military intelligence cautioned that Washington might respond to an attack against Iraq by clamping an arms embargo on Israel, according to “Tammuz in Flames,” a 1993 book on the operation by Israeli journalist Shlomo Nakdimon, whose manuscript was reviewed by close Begin aides.

But with just one holdout, and over opposition by Israel’s Mossad spy chief, the ministers voted in favor of the attack, which destroyed the French-built reactor without the loss of a single Israeli plane.

“The memory of the Holocaust in which six million Jews perished remained before [Begin’s] eyes throughout all the discussions,” Moshe Nissim, a Cabinet minister at the time, wrote in his own book about the strike.

“He underscored the fact that this action was saving thousands of Israeli children from the claws of the Butcher of Baghdad,” Nissim wrote.

Israel’s official statement on the 1981 air raid spoke of the need to eliminate “an existential threat to the people of Israel,” language echoed by Netanyahu, who has said the Holocaust has taught the Jewish state it must not shy from acting alone to thwart any danger to its survival...

To cast the net of consensus further, Netanyahu would almost certainly convene Israel’s centrist opposition leader, Tzipi Livni, to notify her of his plans and ask for her support.


Learning of plans for the strike against Iraq’s reactor, Shimon Peres, Labor opposition leader at the time and now Israeli president, cautioned Begin that Israel would be isolated internationally, “like a thistle in the desert,” if the attack went ahead.

As opposition leader in 2007, Likud party chief Netanyahu was reportedly consulted about the Syria strike by then-Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Though Netanyahu lacks chemistry with Livni, as a former Cabinet minister and Mossad spy she would not be viewed as a leak risk.

Three decades ago, Begin took no such chances.

Israeli warplanes were already on their way to Iraq when Begin, who also served as defense minister, summoned his Cabinet to his Jerusalem residence. Although the ministers had approved the operation, they had agreed that only Begin, his foreign minister and top generals would decide when to launch the raid.

“Shalom, my friends,” Begin told them, according to Nakdimon’s account. “At this moment, our planes are approaching Baghdad and the first one will be over the atomic reactor shortly.”

From Odessa to Tel Aviv, From Jabotinsky to Begin

From a lecture by JOACHIM SCHLÖR: ‘ ‘ON THE THIRD HAND…’ - News from a Rediscovered Civilisation in Memories of Odessa:

...Vladimir Ze’ev Jabotinsky, the journalist and newspaper essayist, was later to become the founder of the revisionist movement within Zionism. The contribution made by the Revisionists – who wanted to ‘return’ to the principles of the Basle Programme and the creation of a home for the Jews in the whole of Palestine, and were prepared to fight for that state – to the founding not only of Tel-Aviv but also of the state of Israel as a whole is a little-researched, unpopular topic: people are nowadays too quick to denounce Jabotinsky as the spiritual father of the ‘terrorists’ surrounding Menachem Begin, and so to consign him to oblivion. But the “brilliant journalist and lecturer,” whose portrait Arthur Koestler has drawn, was an early advocate of an unsentimental view of urban development, an approach shorn of mythology and oriented towards the Western liberal model. “He was brought up,” Koestler writes, “in the enlightened atmosphere of cosmopolitan Odessa, a stranger to Jewish tradition,” and on the basis of that
experience he opposed all those who wanted to build Tel-Aviv “as a kind of glorified ghetto, without the restrictions but with the traditions and atmosphere of the ghetto – and even the architecture of the ghetto, which the first colonists piously imitated.”3

Jabotinsky tried to transfer the liberal spirit of Odessa to Tel-Aviv. On the occasion of the 1929 Levant Fair he wrote that the organisers of the event,
“the group of young men who cluster around the Moshar v-Tassi,” had, at an early stage, already believed in the possibility of industrial development in the Land. It was this belief that the fairs symbolised – in the design of their pavilions and kiosks, in their aggressive, outward-directed activity, in their high regard for trade because it alone could forge the necessary links and contacts to enable the country to take its place in the international network of commercial forces:

The army of Jewish merchants scattered all over the world are our natural comrades, it is they who hold in their hands the fate of Palestine’s industry. We must not shut our eyes to the essential importance of this task. We have been influenced a little too much by the ringing rhetoric of what our friends in Germany call ‘Umschichtung’ [restructuring], a dream of creating a nation which should consist only of farmers and labourers without a single merchant among them. We took up cheap catchwords such as the merchant is only a ‘superfluous intermediary’, a sort of barrier between producer and consumer […]. Trade is the basis of all economic progress, of all communal, national and social development. And up till now the world has invented no better instrument able to assume this stupendous task […] than the individual merchant.

...The threads which once held together the cities of Europe have been cut. A road junction: here, in a dilapidated house barely supported by long wooden poles, Jabotinsky lived. At 17 he was already writing for Odessa Novosti; in 1903 he reported on the pogroms in Kishinev. Across the road lived Dizengoff, the future mayor of Tel-Aviv. Both were among the organizers of a Jewish self-defence group which in 1905 was able to prevent the pogroms from spreading to the district of Moldavanka in Odessa. Both men
were changed by the terrible news of the pogroms, and for both of them the founding of the Jewish self-defence organization was the first step of a journey that was to take them away from here, to somewhere new. In a small street: “Here modern Israel was born.” The two women look at Mr Merkulenko very dubiously. But here, at number 12, lived Leon Pinsker,
author of the pamphlet published in Berlin, and in German, entitled Auto-Emancipation. Pinsker, a doctor, joined the Hovevei Zion [Lovers of Zion],
held meetings here, and from here, in 1882, sent the first group ofg Biluim on their way to Palestine – the pioneers of the future state.4

______
3 Arthur Koestler, Arrow in the Blue. An Autobiography (London, Glasgow, 1952), pp.
106–107.
4 ‘The Manufacturer and the Merchant’. Speech by Mr V. Jabotinsky at the Manufacturers’
Conference, Palestine and Near East Economic Magazine. The IVth Palestine and Near East
Exhibition and Fair. Festivities in Celebration of the 20th Anniversary of the Founding of Tel-Aviv (Tel-Aviv, Palestine, 7th–30th April, 1929), pp. 183–5.

^

More Egyptian Opposition to Camp David Reported

An Iranian new agency reports that

Egyptian Party Stresses Necessity for Revising Camp David Accord

TEHRAN (FNA)- A leading Egyptian political party lashed out at Tel Aviv for breaching the Camp David Accord, and stressed the necessity for revising the treaty.

"Since the accord has emphasized establishment of peace in the region and unfortunately Israel has not implement it, the treaty should be revised and the conditions demanded by the Egyptian side should be implemented as soon as possible," Spokesman of Wafd Party Mohamed Mostafa Shardi told FNA on Saturday.

"While establishment of peace in the Middle-East can no doubt be expected if only Israel feels bound by the implementation of the articles of the Camp David Accord, Israel has never been committed to the treaty since it was
signed," he added...

...Speaking to FNA in Cairo in January, spokesman of the Salafi al-Nour party rejected reports about a meeting between the party's leaders and Israel's ambassador to Egypt, and described the reports as smear campaign to defame
the Islamist party..."Al-Nour is against the establishment of any relations with the Zionist regime," he stated.

...Early in December, a senior member of the Egyptian Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimun (Muslim Brotherhood) party underlined the necessity for revising Camp David Accord between Cairo and Tel Aviv, describing the pact as "cruel"...

^

American Likud "Begin Award" to Donald Rumsfeld

From this news item:-

Rumsfeld ‘Amazed’ by Washington Treatment of Israel, Vice Premier Highlights ‘Conceptual Failure’

...Vice Prime Minister Moshe “Bogie” Yaalon completed an intense journey to the United States during the fourth week of January. His voice was adamantly raised in defense of Israel.

On his final day of this trip to the United States, Ya’alon spoke in consultation with members of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations focusing on the Palestinian Authority campaign to “delegitimize, isolate and even prosecute Israel in international forums, including the United Nations and the International Criminal Court.” Current conditions in Gaza, and Iran’s efforts to develop nuclear weapon facilities and responses needed “to keep pressure on the regime” were among the topics discussed

...Ya’alon had expressed similar sentiments in his speech the night before at the annual gathering of the American Friends of Likud. In an atmosphere of shared purpose and camaraderie, Awardee Revital Azulay dedicated her honor to the work and devotion of the Young leadership of the AFL. She stressed the value of education in the development of Jewish identity.

The Hon. Yuval Steinitz, Israel’s Finance Minister, a former professor of philosophy, has successfully maintained Israel’s financial stability despite deeply troubled international economic conditions. Steinmetz expressed his appreciation to “all of the friends of Likud – really friends of Israel …it’s always wonderful to be among friends,” he mused.

...Former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld found the AFL gathering an appreciative audience. The Secretary said the United States “looks to Israel for lessons in fighting terrorism – based on her many years of experience.” He praised Israel’s economic reliance as “a testimony to a country welcoming of investment and enterprise.”

In accepting the Menachem Begin Award, Rumsfeld praised Prime Minister Netanyahu as one to whom the adjective “courage” applies. America had benefited from his counsel to “be more deliberate in coalition building: the mission must determine the coalition, not the coalition determines the mission.”

Mr. Rumsfeld elicited an especially warm response, stating “I am proud to stand with the American Friends of Likud, especially as some distance themselves from Israel. In my over 79 years, I have seen strange things done in name of diplomacy. Even I find it amazing to watch Washington’s current treatment of Israel.” He continued “you have a great many friends in the United States. I know that millions across the US appreciate and support the Israeli people…. Israel is not the cause for the region’s turmoil. The United States knows the miracle that is the Jewish State….For Israel, courage is a necessity.” Secretary Rumsfeld concluded his remarks saying “Americans eventually make the right choice. Our people will stand with Israel – as we should and as we must.” All assembled rose as the room resounded with appreciation and applause.

^

Book Review on J Auerbach's Altalena Book

From Altalena story revisited by Rabbi Jack Riemer in the Florida Jewish Journal on BROTHERS AT WAR by Jerold S. Auerbach:-

The past has been present lately, especially among right-wing Zionists. First, Moshe Arens of the Likud wrote a book arguing that the members of Betar fought as bravely as the left-wing Zionists in the Warsaw Ghetto uprising. And now, Jerold Auerbach has written a book reexaming the story of the Altalena...In this version of what happened, Menachem Begin comes out as the hero, and Ben Gurion comes out as the villain. Auerbach claims that Begin sincerely believed that some compromise could be worked out, and that he was stunned by Ben Gurion's decision to destroy the boat. To his eternal credit, Begin refused to permit his followers to fire back, because he would not allow Jews to fight against Jews, especially at a time when six Arab armies were fighting against Israel. And this book is an effort to set the historical record straight and to place the blame where Auerbach believes it belongs — on Ben Gurion and on the young officer, Yitzchak Rabin, who carried out the order to fire on the Altalena.

Why is the story of the Altalena so topical today? Because it raises the issue that Israel may have to confront once again in our time. Are there limits to what a government can do to its own people? Are there limits to what protesters can do against a government policy? What happens when the fabric of society is split apart by drastic actions and counter actions?

...What is the legitimacy of a government that uses brutal tactics against those who challenge it? How can you tell when a government is defending its legitimate powers and when it is using excessive force in order to crush its opposition and maintain itself in power?

...These are the kinds of questions that the sinking of the Altalena raised in Israel for the first time and that are now on the minds and hearts of Israelis. For the left, the Altalena established the principle that there can only be one government and one army in Israel.

For the right, the Altalena was a model of self restraint by a group that naively believed that the government was negotiating with them in good faith and was betrayed.

Who knows where the truth lies? Auerbach makes a very good case in this book for the right wing version of what happened. Many in Israel believe the left wing version of what happened. But everyone in Israel agrees that nothing like the Altalena must ever be allowed to happen again. Whoever is right on what happened that day, the Altalena remains as a warning to the settlers and to the soldiers and to the haredim that there are limits to what a country can allow from dissidents and it remains as a warning to the government and to the army that there is a limit to what a government can impose upon people who disagree.

^