Tuesday, January 10, 2006

The Menachem Begin quote ("In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him.") is another example of the fact that Israel had launched a war of choice, your complaint that I didn't include his rationalization is irrelevant. The bottom line is the war had nothing to do with defense, Israel wanted more.

General Ezer Weizman, Chief of Operations, Israeli Defence Forces, General Staff:
The former Commander of the Air Force, General Ezer Weitzman stated that there was "no threat of destruction" but that the attack on Egypt, Jordan and Syria was nevertheless justified so that Israel could "exist according the scale, spirit, and quality she now embodies." "There was never a danger of extermination. This hypothesis had never been considered in any serious meeting." (Ha'aretz, March 29, 1972)

"Citing corroboratory statements by Chief of Staff Chaim Bar-Lev and General Mattiyahu Peled, Amnon Kapelioul wrote that "no serious argument has been advanced to refute the thesis of the three generals." p. 100
Fateful Triangle, Updated Edition : The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians

General Yitzhak Rabin, Chief of Staff, Israeli Defence Forces:
"I do not believe that Nasser wanted war. The two divisions which he sent into Sinai on May 14 would not have been enough to unleash an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it." (Le Monde, February 28, 1968 )

The pattern of taking more started "immediately after the armistice agreements of 1949, Israel began encroachments into the demilitarized zones along with military attacks with many civilian casualties and the expulsion of thousands of Arabs" p. 101 Fateful Triangle, Updated Edition : The United States, Israel, and the Palestinians

What right did Israel have to the Straits of Tiran anyway? They were opened by force
when Israel attacked Egypt in 1956. Nasser had every right to close them as Nasser said he did because Israel continued to refuse to honor the UN resolutions calling on it to allow the Palestinians refugees expelled during the 1948 war to return home. (Israel was accepted into the United Nations on condition that it accept the Right of Return of the Palestinian refugees. Israel Violates UN Resolution )

Israel had no right to launch a war of aggression in 1956 and then get rewarded for it by being allowed to use the Straits. "Indeed, President Eisenhower had delivered perhaps the most impassioned defense of the principle that Israel’s withdrawal must be without conditions, asking rhetorically if: ”…a nation which attacks and occupies a foreign territory in the face of United Nations disapproval should be allowed to impose conditions on its withdrawal?” p. 137 Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, New and Revised Edition

The UN should not reward aggressors, the UN could not 'condone a change of the status juris resulting from military action contrary to the provisions of the Charter' p. 137 Image And Reality And Israel had continued its aggression against Syria, Egypt was under no obligation to help Israel by allowing it to ship through the Straits. Even a claim of a "right of free passage" doesn't include shipping supplies to facilitate military aggressions. Egypt's case was very strong and Israel knew it stood a real chance of losing its claim of a right of passage had the issue been decided on a legal basis.

Your wikipedai writer is very dishonest with the claim that "Israel viewed the closure of the straits with alarm" In no way was Israel dependent on the Straits. "The official terms of the blockade barred all Israeli-flagged vessels, and non-Israeli-flagged vessels carrying strategic cargo, form passing through the Straits. Yet, according to the UN Secretariat, not a single Israeli-flagged vessel had used the port of Eilat in the previous two and a half years. Indeed, a mere 5% of Israel’s trade passed through Eilat. The only significant commodity formally affected by the blockade was oil from Iran, which could have been re-routed (albeit at greater cost) through Haifa." p. 139 Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict, New and Revised Edition

It is absurd to think Israel had a right to use the Straits to facilitate its aggressions and planned aggressions.
I think it is clear that Egypt was within its right to prevent its waterways to be used for this end. Egypt's actions were accordance with International Law and Egypt was willing to have the matter arbitrated. And it clear Israel didn't think it had a strong case since it refuse to have the matter settled in the World Court. Israel anted another war in 1967 just like it started the previous war in 1956.

1 comment:

DebunkingZionism said...

Great blog.