posted by Lewis Lipkin.
1st part of 2
This article is about population exchange, specifically, the physical separation of Arabs from Israelis. Over time, there have been several pendulum swings in opinion as to the morality and justice in doing this. Currently, there is increasing interest both from the political Left and the political Right in, at the very least, discussing exchange as an alternative to unworkable peace processes.
It doesn't take a crystal ball to see that the resolution of the West Bank and Gaza strip problems will sooner or later be resolved by negotiation (unlikely) or, regrettably, by war. In the event that these territories come under full Israeli control, it has to be understood that such control must be accompanied by two necessary conditions.
- The first is a legal annexation of what are now called "occupied territories".
- The second is a completion of the population exchange that began before 1948 when nearly a million Jews were expelled or "encouraged" to leave Arab lands and (despite Arab and British obstruction) settled in
. The Arab-promoted flight of the Palestinian Arabs in 1948 and 1967 was not the second part of this transfer -- a refugee camp is not a home. Israel
Without completion of the population exchange -- transfering the Palestinian Arabs and settling them in neighboring Arab lands --
The current status(Oct 2002) of the Oslo War is briefly this:
Israel(both the pre 1967 land and the territories of the West Bank and ) is effectively infiltrated by close to two million Arabs. Gaza
- Both the Israeli Arabs and the Palestinian Arabs are openly supportive of anti-Israeli terrorism -- suicide bombing, weapons of mass destruction, etc.
- Arab schools within
Israeldeeply inculcate a hatred of , Israelis, and all Jews -- an indoctrination that has progressively deepened for several decades. Generations of implacable terrorists are now in schools being prepared for 2010, 2020 and later, if necessary Israel
- After decades of Israeli concessions, land transfer and treaties that were broken before their ink was dry, many Israeli military officers now seem to discount faithless Arab promises. Acknowledging that the Arab intent is the destruction of the State, they no longer see "Peace" as the objective, but, rather, a victory over the PLO.
- With each, now almost daily, terrorist attack, the expectation that
should "take risks for peace" becomes ever more absurd. Israel
- The events of Sept 11 has changed the parameters of warfare not only for the
but for all developed countries. Tactics that could defend the pitifully constrained geography of United States are now not adequate to repel both external Arab enemies and multiple simultaneous mass terrorist attacks by the internal Arab fifth column. Israel
Arab Attitudes Towards
The almost universal Israel Arab and Palestinian antagonism to
This sampling is backed by other recent polls.
Efraim Karsh (Commentary, July-August 2002) shows that the term Occupation now refers to the entire State of Israel, not just the Territories. Arabs now call
".... into question not Israel's presence in the West Bank and Gaza but its very legitimacy as a state.........There are limits to Israel's ability to transform a virulent enemy into a peace partner, and those limits have long since been reached.......at fault is the perduring Arab view that the creation of the Jewish state was an original act of `inhuman occupation' with which compromise of any final kind is beyond the realm of the possible."
This hardening attitude is reinforced for successive generations by what Arab children are taught in their schools and even by what they read in their comic books. In the Palestinian schools, the Jewish victims are demonized while the perpetrators of eight decades of anti-Jewish violence in Arab lands are treated as heros who may attain the Islamic paradise. The danger becomes even more evident when we realize that each entering class is indoctrinated and that the numbers of confirmed internal enemies grows with each school year. David Horowitz (Why Israel Is The Victim In The Middle East, Center for the Study of Popular Culture, p 15) provides a graphic description:
... "the mosques and schools of the Arabs, generally -- and the Palestinians in particular -- preach and teach Jew hatred every day. Elementary school children in Palestinian Arab schools are even taught to chant `Death to the heathen Jews' in their classrooms as they are learning to read. It should not be overlooked, that these twin policies of deprivation (of the Palestinian Arabs) and hatred (of the Jews) are carried out without any protest from any sector of Palestinian or Arab society."
The Basis For A Possible Transfer
I believe we should stop denying the history of Arab hostility. There have been Arab attacks, Arab slaughters, Arab progroms and Arab wars against the Jews, beginning as early as 1922. The evidence of history clearly shows that separation in whole or in part of the populations is necessary, if
When the hostility between the two sides is of such long duration and of such intensity, it warrants unusual action.
The action taken in the face of irreconcilable differences ranging in scope from a street-brawl to the
It is possible to identify three categories of mass population movements that are precipitated by irreconcilable differences among peoples within a political entity. Briefly they are: emigration (encouraged or forced); expulsion (which differs from forced emigration in that family, economic and social values are more or less ignored during the process); and exchange, i.e., the legal and enforced exchange of populations so as to eliminate conflict by eliminating contact. As we shall see, population transfer does not necessarily have extremely severe social or economic consequences for the transferees. Some of these patterns are noted in the historical footnote below. I devote the immediate discussion to relevant events of the 20th and 21st centuries.
Two major twentieth century episodes of ethnic slaughter showed the necessity of separating irreconcilably hostile ethnic groups. During World War I (WWI), the Moslems committed genocide on the Armenians. It is true that the exigencies of war made intervention impractical, but, whatever the reason, the other Central Powers made no effective opposition. The second event was the gutting of the Greek-occupied Turkish city of
During and after World War I, the 19th century political chess game was continued in the
Just at that time the League of Nations under Fridtjof Nansen's leadership -- he won the 1922 Nobel Peace prize for this work -- helped to impose the Greek-Turkish population exchange (http://www.Hellenic Resources Network), which saved thousands of Greek and Turkish lives. The first clause of the Treaty states:
"As from the 1st May, 1923, there shall take place a compulsory exchange of Turkish nationals of the Greek Orthodox religion established in Turkish territory, and of Greek nationals of the Moslem religion established in Greek territory. These persons shall not return to live in
Additional clauses go into details protecting family structure and economic interest in great detail. To monitor and protect the function of the treaty, a High Commission was established which included
The results have been regarded as a political success and, because of the lives saved, as morally justified. Its political justification resides in the peace established by the physical separation of the previous combatants.
The newly born United Nations after World War II (WWII) was faced by the same dilemma that confronted the
Ethnic integrity and the rights of man could not be the primary determinants of borders. If ethnicity and human rights had been logically and systematically applied by the makers of treaties, it would have resulted in hundreds of micro nations across the map of
The opposite alternative, sweeping population exchanges, was rejected. The victorious Russians would have none of this and neither would the French, or other victors.
Instead, the ad hoc diplomatic solutions resulted in the formation of multinational states in which a dominant ethnic group was de facto in charge of an included cluster of minority groups. The national rights of the minorities were consequently compromised. For example, passports were issued in the name of the dominant group -- you were a Chechoslovak even though you were a ethnic German. The paradigm is the creation by the League and the revivification by the UN of the former
WWII also re-animated the ancient peace table principle: (Samuel Katz, ibid, p. 190)
"If the victim [of aggression], however succeeds in repelling the aggressor, he holds the territory he has conquered or regained at least until he is ready to make a peace treaty and only the peace treaty will determine the fate of those territories."
To discuss the effectiveness and morality of population transfer, we are going to use as reference standard for comparison the territorial and demographic policies of the
".....unlimited admissions of Soviet troops and that they institute governments friendly to the
This geographical shield was fortified by an effective population transfer. More than 120,000 Balts were deported to the Siberian Far East. How many survived the Gulag is an open question. Their places were taken by Russians and other nationalities who had but little time left to build the defense against Hitler's 1941 stroke.
This was a characteristic Russian geopolitical maneuver. As Bernard Pares (History of Russia, Vintage Edition, 1965, Knopf N.Y) points out in his chapter on the 2nd Fatherland War (the Russian name for the Hitler Invasion):
"There are certain constant elements in the history of Russian military defence.....
At the end of WWII, in reconstructing Eastern Europe, the depth defense was preserved by creating a
The geography and topography of the broad flat plain extending from northern
The Cold War had not begun, yet no one in the West complained. Samuel Katz (ibid, p. 191) reports that even Winston Churchill in the House of Commons declared:
"Twice in our lifetime
This was before any peace treaty with
The Russian annexations were not unique. The Czechs, even before the war was over, executed a forced territorial and population exchange with the Hungarians, who were Axis satellites.
Even while still in exile during the war, the Czech-Slovak governments decreed the exile of Hungarians from the territories to be recovered at the end of the war. The population exchange that eventually took place is detailed in http://www.htmh.hu/benesangol.htm.
The contrast in Israeli policy in 1967 and 1971 to that of the WWII victors is striking.
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
Post a Comment