ISRAEL MATZAV: Netanyahu's mentor blasts him for supporting 'Palestinian state'

The man who launched Prime Minister Netanyahu's political career, Moshe Arens, blasts Prime Minister Netanyahu for his support for a 'Palestinian state' in a column in Tuesday's Haaretz.

Like then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak, who 13 years ago offered then-Palestinian President Yasser Arafat almost everything, including the Temple Mount, and on being refused declared proudly that he had now proved that there was really nobody to talk to on the Palestinian side. Presumably, it will be another victory for Israeli PR.

And if, believe it or not, Abbas is prepared to accept the Israeli offer, Israel will have saved itself from becoming a "binational" state, will have removed the stigma of being an "occupier," or a "colonial power," as Justice Minister Tzipi Livni says, and will be applauded by the whole "international community." So it's "win-win." Either way we come out smelling like a rose.

But not so fast. If Abbas remains obstinate, despite the Israeli enticement and American pressure, will this really be a net gain for Israel? Will the offer of Judea and Samaria rejected by Abbas then just vanish, like a concession written on ice that melts with the first heat wave, disappearing forever? Not on your life. What was offered first by Barak, then by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and now by Netanyahu, will be written in stone and require Herculean efforts in the future to erase. A net loss.

If he agrees, what then? A solution to the Palestinian problem, an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and no further demands by the Palestinians on Israel - neither for the right of return nor for additional territory - in other words, peace? Not by a long shot.

Just listen to Netanyahu speaking at Mount Herzl on the 109th anniversary of the death of Theodor Herzl, and listen closely: "[W]e do not want a binational country. However, let no one delude themselves into thinking that if we reach an agreement with the Palestinians it would erase the wild slander against the Jewish state."

What does that mean? An agreement with Abbas won't be the end of the conflict and it won't be peace. And there will be additional demands made on Israel and there will be rockets falling on Israel - but the heart of the Land of Israel, Judea and Samaria, will have been abandoned by Israel.

Arens appointed then 32-year old Binyamin Netanyahu to be his deputy when Arens was appointed Ambassador to the United States in January 1982. Netanyahu stayed in that position through 1984 (including spending nearly every night of the First Lebanon War in the summer of 1982 being interviewed by Ted Koppel on Nightline, which was how he became a household name in the US), when he became Israel's Ambassador to the United Nations for four years. 

It's time for Netanyahu to listen to his mentor.

Nakba, a self-inflicted catastrophe; Why is it that the Arabs do not accept that it was the war that they began in 1948, which is the cause of their suffering? By Moshe Arens |

Many catastrophes occur in this cruel world. Some are caused by nature, and over them humans have no control. Some are man-made - catastrophes caused by wars of aggression and wars of oppression by one people against another. Such was World War II, an attempt by Germany to conquer the world, oppress the non-Germanic peoples and exterminate the Jews. It took more than five years to roll back the conquering German armies, at great sacrifice to the Allied armies that defeated Germany. On May 8, V-E Day, the world celebrates the victory in Europe, the day on which Germany surrendered unconditionally in 1945. It was a victory of light over darkness.

The German people suffered during that war. More than 5 million German soldiers were killed during the fighting, and more than 2 million German civilians died during the war. In addition, millions were left homeless and millions became refugees as eastern Germany was turned over to Poland and the Sudeten region was returned to Czechoslovakia after the war. German cities were destroyed by aerial bombardments. Thirty-nine square kilometers of Dresden's city center were destroyed. Greatly damaged were the cities of Hamburg, Cologne and Berlin, in addition to many other German cities, in an aerial campaign to disrupt the German war effort and force Germany to surrender.

Yet the German people do not commemorate V-E Day as their day of catastrophe, as the German Nakba. No demonstrations are held in Germany on that day. The German people know that they brought the catastrophe upon themselves. They know there is no reason to shift the blame for their catastrophe onto others; they have only themselves to blame.

There is another day on which the world celebrates victory in World War II. It is V-J Day, August 15, the day in 1945 when Japan, Germany's ally, surrendered unconditionally to the Allied forces. The Japanese people suffered grievously during the war - a war in which they tried to conquer China, the Philippines, Burma and Indonesia. More than 2 million Japanese soldiers were killed in the war and more than 3 million Japanese civilians perished. Tokyo was firebombed, and two atomic bombs devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

But the Japanese people do not commemorate their suffering during the war on V-J Day as the Japanese Nakba. They know that they brought that catastrophe upon themselves. They know that the blame for their suffering cannot be shifted onto others.

So what is the Palestinian Nakba all about? Those who promote the commemoration of the "Palestinian catastrophe" have chosen May 15 - the day in 1948 on which the Arab armies invaded Palestine in order to destroy the infant Jewish state - as Nakba Day. The Arabs intended to destroy the Jewish community in Palestine, were confident that they were going to win, but in the end lost the war. That is the origin of the Palestinian catastrophe, a catastrophe the Arabs brought upon themselves.

So why is it that the Arabs do not accept that it was the war that they began, the catastrophe that they intended to inflict on the Jewish community in Palestine, which is the cause of their suffering? That their catastrophe is self-inflicted? Why don't they recognize their own responsibility for their catastrophe, as do the Germans and the Japanese following World War II, and instead try to place the blame on Israel?

The difference is that the Germans and Japanese were forced to surrender unconditionally, and when the war was over they harbored no hope and had no intentions of overcoming the powers that had defeated them. The Arabs, however, did not surrender; they were prepared for an armistice - no more. Israel had neither the power nor the intention to force them to surrender unconditionally. And unlike the Germans and the Japanese after World War II, many Palestinians and their Arab supporters harbor hopes of ultimately defeating the State of Israel and destroying the Jewish state.

For them the Nakba demonstrations are one more stick with which to beat Israel. With a total disregard for the facts, they are out there demonstrating on May 15, blaming Israel for a catastrophe they brought upon themselves.

And those Jews in Israel and abroad who join the Nakba demonstrations year after year, waving Palestinian flags? The Jewish students at Tel Aviv University who join their Palestinian colleagues in blaming Israel for the "Palestinian catastrophe"? They are what Lenin called the "useful idiots" who are so important when a lie is to be spread.

Moshe Arens on Peace, Tyrants, and Dealing with Gaza

Professor Moshe Arens, former Defense Minister and former Ambassador to the U.S., spoke to Arutz Sheva about the issues facing the nation, including anarchy in Sinai, hostility in Egypt, and whether or not to go to war in Gaza.

You voted against the peace treaty with Egypt. Today we see growing calls in Egypt to cancel it. Is this what you were afraid of when you voted against it?

I objected because there was no reason, after they attacked us four times and were defeated, to give them back what they lost. There is no precedent for that in the history of international relations. So I thought we needed to insist on much better terms.

What do you have to say about the bringing down of the Israeli flag at the Cairo embassy, the threats on the ambassador's life and the calls to cancel the peace treaty?

In case it wasn't already clear, we are now learning that it is much easier to reach a deal with a dictator and tyrant than with a country in a state of anarchy, like Egypt today. Sadat and Mubarak were tyrants, and the assumption was that we could trust their word because they would make sure it was implemented.

Now we need to thank the Creator and rejoice over the fact that those who wanted to reach a deal exchanging the Golan for peace, failed. If they had not, we would now see in the Golan what we see in Sinai.

What do you think we can expect in Sinai after losing all our bartering chips there?

It's anarchy. We're dependent on what happens in Egypt. We still don't see something stabilizing there. With anarchy, anything can happen... Nobody rules in Sinai. The Bedouins who work with Hamas terrorists are in charge there, and we are paying the price.

What should we do in this reality, where there's a threat, but on the other hand they are warning us to do what we can to maintain ties with Egypt in light of the sensitivity?

It doesn't depend on us, but on what happens in Egypt. We must remember that the source of the trouble is Gaza, whether things come from Gaza directly, or indirectly via Sinai. The source is in Gaza and that is what we need to deal with.

Also in Gaza, they tell us the situation is complex. The world is watching... How should we react there, do you think?

The problem in Gaza is different. The problem is that we didn't finish the work in Cast Lead. The minute we didn't finish the work, and left Hamas with thousands of missiles and the ability to replenish its supplies, we knew that the day would come when we would have to deal with it again.

The problem is that for various reasons, including international considerations, we don't have an operation like that twice a week. When we were in there, we needed to finish, and I believe we'll need to find an opportunity to do so.

As long as Hamas rules there and has the ability to threaten Israeli citizens in the south and beyond, and as long as they have the groups they claim not to have control over like Islamic Jihad, as long as that's the situation, what happened is what will happen, and we will have no choice but to go in to Gaza.

With all due respect to 'Iron Dome,' an important technological achievement, it cannot defend our citizens against thousands of missiles.

Israel facing new wave of Arab aggression; As it has become clear that Israel is able to overcome military aggression, its enemies chose another direction: a worldwide campaign to delegitimize the state. By Moshe Arens

Three waves of aggression have been launched against Israel during the last 63 years, in attempts by Israel's enemies to destroy the Jewish state. The first wave, an attempt to defeat the Israeli army on the battlefield, began in 1948 and continued, with interruptions, until 1973. The Yom Kippur War, which was launched with simultaneous assaults by Syria and Egypt, from the north and the south, respectively, caught Israel by surprise, before it had a chance to mobilize its army reserves, and these armies initially made substantial advances on both fronts. However, this was to be the last Arab attempt to challenge Israel on the battlefield. Within three weeks the Israel Defenses Forces, having called up its reserve units, crossed the Suez Canal, cut off the Egyptian Third Army and stood 101 kilometers from Cairo; in the north, Israeli forces were within artillery range of Damascus.

At this stage, both Egypt and Syria began pleading for a cease-fire to be put in place. After launching the war under optimal conditions and being totally defeated within three weeks, it had become clear to Israel's enemies that beating the IDF on the battlefield was not an option. Throughout the 38 years that have elapsed since, Israeli deterrence has been effective.

With the deployment of their armies no longer a viable option, Israel's enemies decided to use the weapon of terror. That was the second wave of aggression against Israel. The terror weapon was twofold: rockets launched from a distance against Israeli population centers, and suicide bombers. With the arrival of the suicide bombers - a precision weapon that the terrorist intent on suicide was able to place in buses, restaurants and wedding halls - the terror weapon, which until then had not been considered a major threat to Israel's existence, began to tear away at the fabric of Israeli society.

The terrorists claimed that what could not be achieved on the battlefield could be achieved in the streets of Israel's cities. Many in Israel insisted that terrorism could not be defeated militarily. The IDF and the security services proved them wrong with Operation Defensive Shield, in April 2002, when the army entered Palestinian cities and suppressed the terrorist menace. The terror-rocket threat, from Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, has not been eliminated but Israel is capable of dealing with it at a time of its choosing.

As it became clear that Israel had overcome both waves of aggression, its enemies chose another direction. This time it was a worldwide campaign to delegitimize the State of Israel, an attempt to make Israel an outcast among the nations, subjecting it to boycotts, disinvestment and sanctions. This campaign is gaining momentum.

The first wave of aggression naturally had the support of the Arab world. The second wave was also supported by Europe's far left and various fringe terror organizations. But the global campaign for the delegitimization of Israel will need much broader support if it is to succeed. It is not very difficult to mobilize such support, starting with the United Nations. Nearly one third of UN member states are Muslim countries, assuring an automatic majority for any anti-Israel resolution at the General Assembly. Any of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council can veto a resolution by the council; Russia and China are disinclined to veto anti-Israeli resolutions, each for its own political and economic reasons.

The Quartet, a relatively new forum consisting of the United States, Russia, the European Union and the UN, has become another source of pressure against Israel. Add to all these the many Muslims living in Western Europe, the well-meaning "liberals" who are convinced that they know more about what is good for Israel than the democratically elected government of the state - a pressure group that includes a good number of Jews and even Israelis - and it is clear that a formidable coalition against Israel already exists. Although not all of the components of this coalition seek the destruction of the State of Israel, its more extreme elements have everyone else in tow.

Fortunately, Israel has grown strong economically and militarily over the years and should be able to overcome this third wave of aggression, as it has the first two.

The Palestinian narrative is a falsification of history If true peace is ever to reign among Israel and its Arab neighbors, it is important that the Arabs recognize that what they call the Nakba was a self-inflicted tragedy. By Moshe Arens

The legendary TV sleuth Columbo used to question witnesses to a crime he was investigating by confronting them brusquely: "Just give me the facts," he would say. He was not interested in hearing conflicting subjective accounts of the kind that appear in Akira Kurosawa's famous film "Rashomon," where each of the witnesses to a crime gave his subjective impression in mutually contradictory ways. The facts, that is all he wanted to hear. The facts, that is what is required of those who teach history to our children in school when they teach the history of Israel's War of Independence.

Some years ago, the Ministry of Education instructed schools to teach our children the "Palestinian narrative" in addition to the Jewish (Israeli? ) narrative of the events of Israel's War of Independence. Now that this instruction has been countermanded, a demand is voiced by some that the "Palestinian narrative" nevertheless continue to be taught in our schools. Are there really two narratives which our children should be taught? Is history no more than a collection of conflicting narratives?

The "narrative" mode of history is something of recent vintage, a fad not likely to persist. It is the facts that we want our children to be taught in history lessons. There may be different interpretations of certain events that may need to be elaborated, even when the events themselves have been established beyond doubt. It is only when the actual course of events has been difficult or impossible to ascertain that there is room for presenting different versions.

As a matter of fact, the narrative form of teaching history seems to have struck root primarily in Israel. Would anyone suggest that in American schools the "Japanese narrative" of the American-Japanese conflict during World War II be taught alongside the "American narrative"? Is the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941 no more than the American version? Or how about teaching in Russian schools the "German narrative" of the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941? This seems too preposterous to contemplate.

So why is this happening in Israel? Yes, there is a "Palestinian narrative" of the 1948 war, and it is called "Nakba." But as every student of that war and the still-living witnesses know only too well, the Nakba version is no more than a pack of lies. No juggling and politicized interpretations of the events of that war, in which one percent of the Jewish population fell fighting against the Arab attack, can change the fact that the Arab world - the local Arab militias and the regular armies of the neighboring Arab countries, plus Iraqi forces - attempted to destroy the Jewish State in a war they started immediately after the UN resolution dividing western Palestine into Jewish and Arab states in November 1947.

Six thousand Jews - soldiers and civilians - fell in that war fighting against the Arab onslaught. Where the Arabs were successful the Jewish population was killed or deported, and all Jewish property was destroyed. What happened in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem and in the Etzion bloc in May 1948 when they fell to the Jordanian Legion was a portent of the fate that awaited the entire Jewish community had the Arabs won this war. All this has been effaced in the "Palestinian narrative."

Is it suggested that this falsification of history should be taught to schoolchildren - Jews and Arabs - in Israel?

It is true that the Arab population of Palestine suffered grievously during that war. But it is also beyond doubt that this tragedy was brought on them by the decisions taken by the Arab leadership. It is essential that this part of the history of Israel's War of Independence, of the "Israeli narrative" if you like, be taught in our schools to Jewish and Arab children alike. And if true peace is ever to reign among Israel and its Arab neighbors, it is important that the Arabs recognize that what they call the Nakba was a self-inflicted tragedy.