Irgun Jaffa Operation Mentioned in New Book

A new book has just been published, An Intimate History of Arabs and Jews in Jaffa.
By Adam LeBor, Illustrated, 424 pp., W. W. Norton & Company, Paper, $14.95 and in the New York Times review, we caught this:-

Reading Adam LeBor’s “City of Oranges,” I once again met Fakhri Geday, along with much displacement. LeBor writes Jaffa’s past as a sprawling family saga. At its center are a half-dozen or so clans, Jewish and Arab, whose lives intertwine from the 19th century till today, as the Mediterranean port flowers and then is torn apart by conflict.

The Gedays, a Christian Arab family in Jaffa for generations, are one thread in the chronicle. Unlike other wealthy Arabs, Fakhri’s father, Youssef, refused to sell land to the Jews who poured into British-ruled Palestine. Unlike his neighbors, he also rejected panic and flight when Menachem Begin’s right-wing Irgun underground overran Jaffa in April and May 1948.

Since the reviewer is Gershom Gorenberg, it is to be expected to find the following line:-

That era ended in 1921, when tension between Arab nationalists and Zionists erupted into riots in Jaffa.

One might get the impression that the riots were mutual. After all, there was "tension" and riots (plural) "erupted". But as we all know, Arabs exploited a May Day march by socialists and communists which had nothing to do with the Arab-Israel conflict and set about invading Jewish homes, pillaging and murdering, including Yosef Haim Brener, the famous author, who wasn't in Jaffa at the time but in an orange grove near Abu-Kabbir. Almost 50 Jews were killed by Arabs and no Arabs were killed by Jews rather by British security personnel.

See here, here too and here as well.

News Items

1.

On Jerry Falwell

In the 1980s, Israel's Likud Party drew closer to the right wing in the U.S., and Falwell was a key figure in mobilizing conservative Christian voters. In her book "Spiritual Warfare: The Politics of the Christian Right", Sara Diamond notes that Falwell, often through his television broadcasts and his frequent trips to Israel, played a key role in "dr[awing] evangelicals to pay closer attention to Middle East politics."

In 1979, Israel rewarded Falwell with a private jet. Two years later, he received Israel's Jabotinsky Award for his support.

According to one account, "Jewish-evangelical relations had become so close by the early '80s that, immediately after Israel bombed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981, Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin telephoned Moral Majority leader Rev. Jerry Falwell before calling President Ronald Reagan to ask Falwell to 'explain to the Christian public the reasons for the bombing'."

2.

On the Darfur refugees

it is important that Israel take more far-reaching measures than simply designating resources for treating the refugees who found shelter in neighboring Chad. In such matters there is significance to symbolic measures – Menachem Begin demonstrated this with his first act as prime minister, when he permitted entry to Vietnamese refugees who were rescued by an Israeli ship after their boat had drowned at sea.

3.

On Flying an Islkamic Flag over the Temple Mount

Another possibility raised by the teams of Achimeir and Lapidot - raising a religious flag - is likewise complex and unclear. This possibility was spoken of in the summer of 1978 during the first Camp David peace talks, and the talks almost broke down as a result. The Egyptian president, Anwar Saadat, proposed flying a Saudi Arabian flag above the holy places in Jerusalem, but Menachem Begin rejected the possibility out of hand. "There is no way that something of that kind will ever take place in Jerusalem," Begin stipulated. "The Temple Mount is the holiest site in Jerusalem. The Israelis also do not raise any flag there. If there is peace, the Arabs will be able to fly flags on every embassy that they open in Jerusalem."

Despite Begin's resolute response, then U.S. president Jimmy Carter once again raised the Egyptian demand. Without this, he said, Sadat would not sign a peace treaty. Carter proposed that Israel agree that a flag be raised without a decision being taken at that stage on whether this would be a religious flag or the flag of a state. Dayan made it clear to Carter that should any flag be flown, it would be flown over the mosque and not on any other place on the Temple Mount. But Begin angrily rejected this possibility as well. "Not on the Temple Mount," he fumed. "We are losing our conscience. Is it not enough that we have forbidden [Jews] to pray on the Temple Mount? We will not be able to agree to that also for too long a time. But the raising of a religious flag on the Temple Mount would be tantamount to recognition that it belongs to the Muslims."

Begin was so infuriated by the idea of a foreign flag over the Temple Mount that several years later he rejected an enticing Saudi proposal that was brought to him by businessmen Yaakov Nimrodi, Al Schwimmer and Hank Greenspan: $100 billion for developing a Middle East of Peace, in return for allowing the Saudi flag to be raised over the Temple Mount.

Yair Sheleg's Comments on the Upheaval Commemoration

'To benefit the people'

Besides the 40th anniversary of the unification of Jerusalem, these days also mark the 30th anniversary of the political upheaval that brought the Likud to power. Menachem Begin's personality played a dominant role in his government's decisions, especially during his first term. His influence can be seen as a common denominator that explained some of those salient decisions in completely different fields: economic liberalism (which began in the realm of foreign currency and became the basis of today's consumer economy); expansion of the settlements; and the sweeping exemption from military service granted to yeshiva students (until Begin, this exemption was granted to only an annual quota of young men).

It is true that each of these decisions can be explained separately - the settlements were part of Begin's political outlook; the exemption for the ultra-Orthodox was related to coalition demands; and the economic policy can be attributed to processes that were under way in the world and to the position of his coalition partners from the Liberal Party. But after all this, it seems Begin's personality played an important role, too, as epitomized in his famous slogan, "to benefit the people."

Begin was a good man who wanted very much to do well by everyone, to enable everyone to realize his or her wishes, and perhaps this is why he was so beloved. But this "good" sometimes came at the expense of the overall national interest. It is no coincidence that what began with "benefiting the people" in the name of principled arguments eventually evolved in the Likud Central Committee into the distribution of jobs and the plunder of the public coffers, in order to benefit those who saw themselves as "representatives of the people" who had been deprived in the past.

If there is today nostalgia for the maligned Mapai, it is precisely because of this point. It is not that Mapai was perfect; Mapai officials behaved in a shameful way in their persecution of political rivals, in distributing jobs only to their own people, in believing that their rule was essential for managing the state. But the longing derives from the belated recognition, after nearly three decades of the proliferation of sectoral interests, that Mapai's policies, denigrated in the past as overly centralized, were at least conducted on behalf of the national interest: Mapai officials also regarded Judea and Samaria as precious lands, but they were ready to relinquish them for the sake of what they viewed as a national interest. They imposed cold, rational considerations over deceptive emotions.

It is impossible, and unnecessary, to return to the strict, centralized policy that characterized Mapai, especially because it also had serious flaws, pushing away broad sectors of society. But there is a need to return to the principle of placing the national interest in the center of policy, rather than sectoral and private desires. This is true even in a privatized field like economics: There is certainly great importance in private entrepreneurship - which is far more efficient and agile than the public sector. (We impose many bureaucratic constraints on the public sector, seeking to make sure that the money that comes out of our pockets is well-supervised and is not spent arbitrarily.) This is the profound reason why the Gaydamaks of the world can come up with much quicker responses than the public system.

But the danger of private initiative is that its entire goal is ultimately to enrich its owners. Therefore, even if it has efficiency on its side, the bottom line is that this efficiency is channeled to benefit the owners rather than consumers. Therefore, every economic area perhaps needs the conditions of a free market, but also requires strong regulation to protect us from what is permissively called in retrospect "market failures" - that is, from situations in which the competitiveness and efficiency do not operate in the public interest, but against it.

And Yossi Sarid Has Something to Say

The upheaval that wasn't

Three days before the 1977 elections I ran into the foreign minister on the main street of Metula. I was then a young Knesset member at the end of his first term and he was - then as always - Yigal Allon. He was in high spirits, having just come out of a successful election meeting, whereas I was in a bad mood. I feel we've lost the elections, I told him. He laughed and tried to calm me: "We may lose a few seats, but if we weren't defeated four years ago, right after the Yom Kippur War, there's no chance we'd be beaten now."

I know he interpreted my defeatism at the time as end-of-campaign fatigue. I was then information chairman of the Labor Alignment (the alliance of Mapai, the largest left-wing party in the country with Achdut Ha'avoda) campaign. I saw his response as the obtuseness of being in power too long. It not only corrupts but also blinds the eyes of the wise.

A few months earlier I met the West German chancellor, Willy Brandt, who visited me in Kiryat Shmona during his visit in Israel. I made the same pessimistic forecast, but added that perhaps Labor, out of power, would rehabilitate and heal itself. The experienced chancellor shook his head and said: "I have been young, and now I am old; yet I have not ever seen a defeated party rehabilitate itself in opposition."

In retrospect, I daresay he was right. There are illnesses that only get worse in the political wilderness, and they attack mainly parties that have never been weaned from power.

Yesterday was the 30th anniversary of the upheaval - the Likud's rise to power. It's not good for a democracy to have a single ruling party. So 1977's turnabout should be seen positively, at least in principle. The Likud's beginning seemed promising. What the Alignment failed to do in its various incarnations in 30 years - make the first peace with a major Arab state - Menachem Begin pulled off in an amazingly short time. For a brief moment, it seemed to confound all the predictions of disaster. The land might after all overflow with milk and honey.

But the moment was brief indeed. Everything Mapai had spoiled, the Likud spoiled further. Under Begin's leadership the rifts and gaps in Israeli society widened. Granted, the Jews from Arab countries felt better, felt at home, but that feeling didn't pay their grocery bills. Poverty, for the most part, increased, while a few became hugely wealthy. The ultra-Orthodox draft dodging spread, and yeshiva pupils multiplied and increased and now fill the earth.

The occupation strengthened its grasp on the land, and the settlements expanded their boundaries. The seed of calamity planted by Golda, Galili and Dayan took hold and grew and sprouted all the wild growths.

Jerusalem, which was never united and never will be, received an annexation law that drove all the ambassadors from it.

At the end of Begin's term the first Lebanon War broke out. It was a preemptive war of choice, and it was obvious from the beginning that it was a mistake. In the 18 years we were in Lebanon, our presence exacted more than 1,000 victims and finally defeated Begin himself. The voice and hands were Begin's, but the legs that knocked over the bucket were Ariel Sharon's.

Begin was a decent, honest man, who would be horrified to find what happened here after his death. Mapai at the end of its hegemony was a corrupt party but its sins were like the driven snow compared to the Likud's era in power. Corruption lost all shame, and Begin's heritage was stained unrecognizably by the Diadochi.

A few weeks ago retired Judge Sara Sirota recalled in a newspaper report that a thief once explained why he broke into Pinhas Sapir's house. He was sure he said that in the treasurer's house there'd be a treasure. To his amazement all he found was an old watch. Today's thieves would not emerge empty-handed from the homes of prime ministers and ministers.

Thirty years since the Likud came to power, it's easy to be nostalgic for the good old Mapainiks and their culture, whatever their flaws.

After all that has happened since, one may well ask - was there an upheaval? And one should also answer - there was no upheaval.

More on Likud Faction Meeting at the Begin Center

Likud celebrates 30 years since first rise to power, honors Begin

The members of the Likud Knesset faction - then and now - who came together to mark the 30th anniversary of the Likud's first rise to power, took advantage of the occasion to express their longing for their founder, Menachem Begin.

MK Silvan Shalom said Begin was a prime example, in contrast to this government, that "leadership must come with clean hands, purity of standards and honesty."

"What characterized Begin and what is so lacking in this country," said MK Yuval Steinitz, "is leadership with backbone." MK Gideon Sa'ar said "today's leadership is not leadership." MK Michael Eitan said "Begin's greatness was that he tried to do the impossible and be both a good politician and a human being."

Thus, the group that might constitute the next leadership of Israel drew the outlines of the characteristics necessary for leadership. When they were asked why leadership is lacking, Steinitz answered, "Today it is more difficult."

Outstanding in its absence was a speech by former Knesset speaker MK Reuven Rivlin. He was present, but did not speak. The race for the presidency apparently requires him to exercise caution not to insult or anger anyone. Also missing (obviously) was the former Likud MK who is now prime minister, Ehud Olmert.

The meeting, which took place at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center in Jerusalem, was also the opportunity to reminisce, especially about where those present were on May 17, 1977.

Limor Livnat said she volunteered to work the chalkboard that night so she would be allowed into headquarters. During the night, she chalked up the thrilling results that flowed in from the polls. Sa'ar said he remembered that night very well, though he was only 10 years old.

Yuval Steinitz, a former leftist, admitted that he had voted for the Democratic Movement for Change (Dash), but Likud chairman MK Benjamin Netanyahu granted him absolution since he had mended his ways.

Netanyahu discussed events in Sderot, proposing a varied menu of actions from "stopping services like electricity and water in a controlled manner to bringing in limited ground forces to areas of rocket launches, to a distance of four to five kilometers."

Netanyahu also said that "paralysis and helplessness must pass from the world." How is that connected to Begin? Begin, according to Netanyahu, understood that the prime obligation of the government to its citizens is to protect their lives.

The result of this understanding, the head of the opposition al so noted, was "first and foremost the blowing up of the nuclear reactor in Iraq.

Begin acted with great daring against international opinion and against the United States." Silvan Shalom said he thought blowing up the Iraqi nuclear reactor was Begin's most important act.

Was there a feeling around the table of missing the blowing up of nuclear plants?

Netanyahu: "No, but admiration for what was done."

That was Haaretz.

Here's the Jerusalem Post:-

Likud chairman Binyamin Netanyahu Thursday called upon Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to take serious steps to end rocket attacks on Sderot from the Gaza Strip.

Speaking at a Likud faction meeting at the Menachem Begin Heritage Center marking the 30th anniversary of the party's 1977 rise to power, Netanyahu said that Olmert should learn from Begin's 1981 attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor that a government's primary responsibility is to protect its people.

"The government can do a lot to protect its people," Netanyahu said. "It could evacuate whomever necessary, enact a closure on the Gaza Strip, stop providing services like electricity and water, or decide on a limited invasion of four or five kilometers to distance the range of the Kassams. But the government isn't doing anything to protect the people of Sderot, because it is paralyzed," he said.

In an interview with Army Radio, Netanyahu compared the current situation to that prior to the 1977 race. He said that in both instances, Israel was governed by leaders who had failed in war and were out of touch with the sentiment of the people.

Comparing himself to Begin, Netanyahu said that "Begin was also seen as a danger to peace" and that the slogan "anyone but Begin" had been replaced by "anyone but Bibi." He downplayed criticism in the Likud that he was not doing enough to overthrow Olmert.

"I'm trying to convince people in the Knesset that this government cannot continue, but many of them are too interested in sticking to their jobs," Netanyahu said. "The reason Shas isn't leaving is not because I haven't met with Rabbi Ovadia Yosef. Overthrowing a government is a process that develops, and we're getting there."

Netanyahu's Likud rival, MK Silvan Shalom, met with Yosef earlier this week in an effort to persuade him to topple Olmert; he has also met with Israel Beiteinu leader Avigdor Lieberman. Shalom said the rabbi told him that the Shas Council of Torah Sages would meet soon to consider the matter.

"Bibi is paralyzed and it's unexplainable," Shalom said earlier this week. "We needed to do something and he wasn't doing it, so I decided to do it myself. If he doesn't do anything, there won't be elections any time soon."

The faction, joined by Likud MKs from 1977, watched a broadcast of the coverage of Begin's victory. The MKs laughed when Begin said in his victory speech that he was waiting for a "telegram of congratulations" from vanquished Labor candidate Shimon Peres.

Netanyahu defined Begin's legacy as "remaining consistent with one's vision, fighting for it, knowing how to lose and keeping on fighting for it until it is achieved."

Begin Center At Night

A Koby Harati Picture:-

Likud Knesset Faction Meets to Mark 30 Years to the Upheaval

Bibi slams gov’t inaction

Opposition leader Benjamin Netanyahu accused the government of not doing enough to protect residents of Sderot and the western Negev.

“The government doesn’t understand that its ultimate obligation is to prevent the shelling of Sderot’s homes,” he said, “We can’t allow this situation to persist.”

During a speech at a Likud factional meeting on Thursday [conducted at the Begin Center to mark the 30 year anniversary since the election victory of Menachem Begin], Netanyahu also suggested several steps that the government could take in order to put an end to the Qassam rocket fire in the South.

“The government can do a lot of things to protect its citizens … It can impose a closure on the Gaza Strip, stop providing certain services to the Palestinian Authority such as electricity and water, and temporarily enter Gaza, four or five kilometers in,” Netanyahu said, prior to reports of several IDF tanks entering the city.

“At the moment, the government isn’t doing anything to protect Sderot residents. This silence, this omission, this helplessness has to go,” he added.

News of the Idf operation then reached the meeting, but MK Limor Livnat dismissed it, saying it was only done for the “appearance of a military operation”.

“If the government doesn’t give a real, serious response to the massive firing at Sderot over the past few days, it is not worthy of its place.”

MK Silvan Shalom said that a “ground assault is needed, and it is impossible to exterminate terror without it”.