ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, July 3, 1996 TAG: 9607030022
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-13 EDITION: METRO
COLUMN: CAL THOMAS
SOURCE: CAL THOMAS
THE CNN anchor reported that the terrorist bombing in Saudi Arabia that killed at least 19 Americans ``shocked the world.'' If, indeed, the world was shocked, it is the world's shock - more than the bombing - that is shocking.
The thought that this act might be considered surprising betrays an appalling ignorance of the history of the conflict in the Middle East. This encompasses far more than that which has existed between Israel and its Arab neighbors for the past half-century, a recent development relatively speaking.
During the recent election campaign in Israel, former Prime Minister Shimon Peres said he didn't want to keep referring to history when arguing Israel's positions. But without a knowledge of history, Israel is not just doomed to repeat it - Israel is doomed.
The success of Arab propaganda, Western betrayal and media ignorance has rewritten history in a manner that is positively Orwellian. Everything has been thrown down the Memory Hole and replaced with a modern ``history'' that goes something like this:
The Jews invaded Arab land when they began returning to ``Palestine'' (a word created out of nothing - such an entity has no historical parent), gobbling up Arab property and displacing legal residents. When Israel became a state in 1948, it continued to dislodge and render homeless and stateless a people whose ties to the land are at least as ancient as the Jews'.
Now, Israel is trying to prevent the legitimate national aspirations of the ``Palestinian people,'' which includes their own state and is to be carved out of the ``West Bank'' (a recent creation, since 1967).
According to the Palestine Liberation Organization Covenant, as well as statements by the dictatorial leaders of Syria, Iraq and Iran (as well as by PLO leader Yasser Arafat when he's addressing his own people), a Palestinian state would not be the end of it. That is a steppingstone for the eradication of the tiny parcel, roughly the size of Delaware, that would be left of Israel.
Out of this historical fiction comes the idea that only Israel holds the keys to peace and that only actions by Israel will determine whether the ``peace process'' advances or stalls. By this ``logic,'' any terrorist act becomes Israel's fault because it is not moving quickly enough in the direction of ``peace.'' This is the position of former Arab League ambassador to the United Nations Clovis Maksoud, who said last week that the Saudi Arabian bombing was understandable in view of the election of ``hard-liner'' Benjamin Netanyahu as Israeli prime minister.
Given the monotone that passes for informed reporting, most Americans would probably be surprised - legitimately - to learn the following: The Balfour Declaration in 1917 promised the Jewish people a national home in ``Palestine'' (previously called Judea and Samaria and, even earlier, Canaan; ``Palestine'' was revived not by Arabs but by the British); the Arab-Jewish agreement at Versailles in 1919 welcomed Jewish immigration and hailed ``Zionism'' - the establishment of a Jewish state alongside the Arab nations; the League of Nations Mandate of 1922 recognized ``the historic connection of the Jewish people with Palestine'' and ``the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country''; the betrayal of the Jewish people by the British, Americans, Arabs and others who once gave them aid and comfort.
When one looks at real history - apart from certain ``facts'' on the record colored by political ideology - it becomes clear that it was the Jews, not the Arabs, who were forcibly removed from their historic home, established on this 3,000th anniversary of King David's entry into Jerusalem (and extending another 1,000 years before).
Anyone looking for a succinct, accurate and accessible history of the treatment of Jews should read Netanyahu's book, ``A Place Among the Nations.'' In addition to correcting revised history, Netanyahu writes: ``In the court of public opinion as in any court, the question of who attacked whom - who initiated an assault and who acted in self-defense - is central to the verdict. The Arab states embarked on an unprecedented campaign to persuade the West that it was not they, the Arabs, who had attacked Israel, but Israel that had attacked them. Thus the results of their own aggression against Israel - the bloodshed, the refugees, the capture of Arab-controlled land - were instead presented as its causes. They were now deemed unprovoked evils that had been perpetrated by the Jews, grievances that the Arabs were merely and innocently trying to redress. It was not the Arabs who were the guilty party, but Israel that had fended off their attacks.''
In light of this and much more unrevised history, peace talks can proceed. But this government is not about to relinquish the Golan Heights or territory west of the Jordan River, where construction of new homes continues at a rapid pace. Nor will it redivide Jerusalem. That still leaves plenty to negotiate, beginning not with ``land for peace'' but with whether Israel's enemies are prepared to make peace with the facts.
- Los Angeles Times Syndicate
LENGTH: Medium: 90 linesby CNB