STOP NATO: �NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK

--------------------------- ListBot Sponsor --------------------------
Get a low APR NextCard Visa in 30 seconds!
     1.  Fill in the brief application
     2.  Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
     3.  Get rates as low as 2.99% Intro or 9.99% Ongoing APR and no
annual fee!
Apply NOW!
http://www.bcentral.com/listbot/NextCard
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In a message dated 22/06/01 10:16:01 Eastern Daylight Time, 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

<< HE SECOND HALF OF 1948"
 > >
 > >                         THE SHARON-YA'ALON PLAN
 > >
 > >                               By Prof. Tanya Reinhart*
 > >
 > >Official declarations and many reports in the Israeli media indicate 
 that
 > >the Israeli military and political leadership are aiming, eventually, at
 a
 > >total destruction of the Palestinian authority, and, with it, the 
 process
 > >of
 > >Oslo, which is now dominantly considered by them a 'historical mistake'.
 > >Let
 > >us trace some of the background for this development.
 > >
 > >Ever since the 1967 occupation, the military and political elites (which
 > >have been always closely intertwined in Israel) deliberated over the
 > >question of how to keep maximum land with minimum Palestinian 
 population.
 > >The leaders of the '1948 generation' - Alon, Sharon, Dayan, Rabin and
 > >Peres - were raised on the myth of redemption of land. But a simple
 > >solution
 > >of annexation of the occupied territories would have turned the occupied
 > >Palestinians into Israeli citizens, and this would have caused what has
 > >been
 > >labeled the "demographic problem" - the fear that the Jewish majority
 could
 > >not be preserved. Therefore, two basic conceptions were developed.
 > >
 > >The Alon plan consisted of annexation of 35-40% of the territories to
 > >Israel, and self-rule or partnership in a confederation of the rest, the
 > >land on which the Palestinians actually live. This plan originated with
 > >those who thought that it is impossible to repeat the 1948 'solution' of
 > >mass expulsion, for moral as well as world public opinion 
 considerations.
 > >The second view, whose primary spokesman was Sharon, assumed that it is
 > >possible to find more acceptable and sophisticated ways to achieve a 
 1948
 > >style 'solution' - it is only necessary to find another country for the
 > >Palestinians, such as Jordan, and to make sure that as many as possible
 of
 > >them will move there. This was a part of Sharon's global worldview by
 which
 > >Israel can establish "new orders" in the region (see the Lebanon war).
 > >
 > >In Oslo, the Alon plan route triumphed, where gradually it became
 apparent
 > >that it is even possible to extend the "Arab-free" areas. In practice,
 the
 > >Palestinians have already been dispossessed of half of their lands, 
 which
 > >are now state lands, security zones and "land reserves for the
 > >settlements".
 > >However, it appeared that Israel will be satisfied with that, and will
 > >allow
 > >the PA to run the enclaves in which the Palestinians still reside. The
 > >security establishment expressed full confidence in the ability of the
 > >Palestinian security forces - which were created and trained in
 cooperation
 > >with the Israeli ones - to control the frustration of the Palestinians
 and
 > >protect the security of the settlers and the Israeli home front.
 > >
 > >But the victory of the Alon plan wasn't complete. Even the little that
 the
 > >Palestinians did get, seemed too much to some in the military circles,
 > >whose
 > >most vocal spokesman in the early years of Oslo was then chief of staff,
 > >Ehud Barak. Another consistent voice which has emerged is that of
 Brigadier
 > >Moshe (Bugi) Ya'alon, who is also known for his connections with the
 > >settlers. As head of the military intelligence -Ama"n- (1995-1998),
 Ya'alon
 > >confronted the subsequent chief of staff, Amnon Shahak, an Oslo
 supporter,
 > >and has consolidated the anti-Oslo line which now dominates the military
 > >intelligence view. Contradicting the Shin Bet position and the many 
 media
 > >reports about security cooperation between Israel and the Palestinian
 > >authority, Ya'alon claimed in a cabinet meeting in September 1997, and
 > >later, that "Arafat is giving a green light to terror".
 > >
 > >The objection to the Oslo conception in the military circles was based 
 on
 > >the view that it will be impossible to maintain such an arrangement in
 the
 > >long term. If the Palestinians have a political infrastructure and armed
 > >forces, they will eventually try to rebel. Therefore, the only way is to
 > >overthrow the Palestinian authority, and the whole Oslo conception. The
 > >first step on this route is to convince the public that Arafat is still 
 a
 > >terrorist and is personally responsible for the acts of all groups from
 the
 > >Islamic Jihad to Hizbollah.
 > >
 > >During Barak's days in office, Ya'alon became one of his closets
 confidants
 > >in the restricted military team which Barak has assembled to work with
 > >(Amir
 > >Oren, Ha'aretz, Nov 17, 00). The same team was prepared already at the
 > >beginning of the Intifada for a total attack on the Palestinian
 authority,
 > >on both the military and the propaganda levels. On the later, this
 included
 > >the "White book" on the crimes of Arafat and the PA. This is the same
 team
 > >which is now briefing the political level, as well as US 
 representatives,
 > >and is responsible for the dominance of the call for toppling the PA.
 > >
 > >In modern times, wars aren't openly started over land and water. In 
 order
 > >to
 > >attack, you first need to prove that the enemy isn't willing to live in
 > >peace and is threatening our mere existence. Barak managed to do that.
 Now
 > >conditions are ripe for executing Sharon's plan, or as Ya'alon put it in
 > >November 2000, for "the second half of 1948". Before we reach that black
 > >line, there is one option which was never tried before: to leave the
 > >occupied territories now.
 > >
 > >* Prof. Reinhart is Professor of Linguistics at Tel Aviv University.
 This
 > >article was published on June 10 in Hebrew by Yediot Aharonot.   The
 author
 > >can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
  >>




______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]


THE SECOND HALF OF 1948"
> >
> >                         THE SHARON-YA'ALON PLAN
> >
> >                               By Prof. Tanya Reinhart*
> >
> >Official declarations and many reports in the Israeli media indicate 
that
> >the Israeli military and political leadership are aiming, eventually, at
a
> >total destruction of the Palestinian authority, and, with it, the 
process
> >of
> >Oslo, which is now dominantly considered by them a 'historical mistake'.
> >Let
> >us trace some of the background for this development.
> >
> >Ever since the 1967 occupation, the military and political elites (which
> >have been always closely intertwined in Israel) deliberated over the
> >question of how to keep maximum land with minimum Palestinian 
population.
> >The leaders of the '1948 generation' - Alon, Sharon, Dayan, Rabin and
> >Peres - were raised on the myth of redemption of land. But a simple
> >solution
> >of annexation of the occupied territories would have turned the occupied
> >Palestinians into Israeli citizens, and this would have caused what has
> >been
> >labeled the "demographic problem" - the fear that the Jewish majority
could
> >not be preserved. Therefore, two basic conceptions were developed.
> >
> >The Alon plan consisted of annexation of 35-40% of the territories to
> >Israel, and self-rule or partnership in a confederation of the rest, the
> >land on which the Palestinians actually live. This plan originated with
> >those who thought that it is impossible to repeat the 1948 'solution' of
> >mass expulsion, for moral as well as world public opinion 
considerations.
> >The second view, whose primary spokesman was Sharon, assumed that it is
> >possible to find more acceptable and sophisticated ways to achieve a 
1948
> >style 'solution' - it is only necessary to find another country for the
> >Palestinians, such as Jordan, and to make sure that as many as possible
of
> >them will move there. This was a part of Sharon's global worldview by
which
> >Israel can establish "new orders" in the region (see the Lebanon war).
> >
> >In Oslo, the Alon plan route triumphed, where gradually it became
apparent
> >that it is even possible to extend the "Arab-free" areas. In practice,
the
> >Palestinians have already been dispossessed of half of their lands, 
which
> >are now state lands, security zones and "land reserves for the
> >settlements".
> >However, it appeared that Israel will be satisfied with that, and will
> >allow
> >the PA to run the enclaves in which the Palestinians still reside. The
> >security establishment expressed full confidence in the ability of the
> >Palestinian security forces - which were created and trained in
cooperation
> >with the Israeli ones - to control the frustration of the Palestinians
and
> >protect the security of the settlers and the Israeli home front.
> >
> >But the victory of the Alon plan wasn't complete. Even the little that
the
> >Palestinians did get, seemed too much to some in the military circles,
> >whose
> >most vocal spokesman in the early years of Oslo was then chief of staff,
> >Ehud Barak. Another consistent voice which has emerged is that of
Brigadier
> >Moshe (Bugi) Ya'alon, who is also known for his connections with the
> >settlers. As head of the military intelligence -Ama"n- (1995-1998),
Ya'alon
> >confronted the subsequent chief of staff, Amnon Shahak, an Oslo
supporter,
> >and has consolidated the anti-Oslo line which now dominates the military
> >intelligence view. Contradicting the Shin Bet position and the many 
media
> >reports about security cooperation between Israel and the Palestinian
> >authority, Ya'alon claimed in a cabinet meeting in September 1997, and
> >later, that "Arafat is giving a green light to terror".
> >
> >The objection to the Oslo conception in the military circles was based 
on
> >the view that it will be impossible to maintain such an arrangement in
the
> >long term. If the Palestinians have a political infrastructure and armed
> >forces, they will eventually try to rebel. Therefore, the only way is to
> >overthrow the Palestinian authority, and the whole Oslo conception. The
> >first step on this route is to convince the public that Arafat is still 
a
> >terrorist and is personally responsible for the acts of all groups from
the
> >Islamic Jihad to Hizbollah.
> >
> >During Barak's days in office, Ya'alon became one of his closets
confidants
> >in the restricted military team which Barak has assembled to work with
> >(Amir
> >Oren, Ha'aretz, Nov 17, 00). The same team was prepared already at the
> >beginning of the Intifada for a total attack on the Palestinian
authority,
> >on both the military and the propaganda levels. On the later, this
included
> >the "White book" on the crimes of Arafat and the PA. This is the same
team
> >which is now briefing the political level, as well as US 
representatives,
> >and is responsible for the dominance of the call for toppling the PA.
> >
> >In modern times, wars aren't openly started over land and water. In 
order
> >to
> >attack, you first need to prove that the enemy isn't willing to live in
> >peace and is threatening our mere existence. Barak managed to do that.
Now
> >conditions are ripe for executing Sharon's plan, or as Ya'alon put it in
> >November 2000, for "the second half of 1948". Before we reach that black
> >line, there is one option which was never tried before: to leave the
> >occupied territories now.
> >
> >* Prof. Reinhart is Professor of Linguistics at Tel Aviv University.
This
> >article was published on June 10 in Hebrew by Yediot Aharonot.   The
author
> >can be reached at [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Reply via email to