Sharon's plan is to drive Palestinians across the Jordan

The Sunday Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | 04/28/2002

[Pokey78]

THE leading Israeli historian Martin van Creveld predicts that a US attack on Iraq or a terrorist strike at home could trigger a massive mobilisation to clear the occupied territories of their two million Arabs

Two years ago, less than eight per cent of those who took part in a Gallup poll among Jewish Israelis said they were in favour of what is euphemistically called "transfer" - that is, the expulsion of perhaps two million Palestinians across the River Jordan. This month that figure reached 44 per cent.

Earlier this year, when a journalist asked Ariel Sharon whether he favoured such a move, the Israeli prime minister said he did not think in such terms. A glance at his memoirs, however, shows that he has not always been so fastidious.

In September 1970 King Hussein of Jordan fell on the Palestinians in his kingdom, killing perhaps 5,000 to 10,000. The then Gen Sharon, serving as Commanding Officer, Southern Front, argued that Israel's policy of helping the king was a mistake; instead it should have tried to topple the Hashemite regime.

He has often said since that Jordan, which, according to him, has a Palestinian majority even now, is the Palestinian state. The inference - that the Palestinians should go there - is clear.

During its 1948 War of Independence, Israel drove 650,000 Palestinians from their homes into neighbouring countries. If it were to try something similar today, the outcome could well be a regional war. More and more people in Jerusalem believe that such is Mr Sharon's objective.

It might explain why Mr Sharon, famous for his ability to plan ahead, appears not to have a plan. In fact, he has always harboured a very clear plan - nothing less than to rid Israel of the Palestinians.

Few people, least of all me, want the following events to happen. But such a scenario could easily come about. Mr Sharon would have to wait for a suitable opportunity - such as an American offensive against Iraq, which some Israelis think is going to take place in early summer.

Mr Sharon himself told Colin Powell, the secretary of state, that America should not allow the situation in Israel to delay the operation.

An uprising in Jordan, followed by the collapse of King Abdullah's regime, would also present such an opportunity - as would a spectacular act of terrorism inside Israel that killed hundreds.

Should such circumstances arise, then Israel would mobilise with lightning speed - even now, much of its male population is on standby.

First, the country's three ultra-modern submarines would take up firing positions out at sea. Borders would be closed, a news blackout imposed, and all foreign journalists rounded up and confined to a hotel as guests of the Government.

A force of 12 divisions, 11 of them armoured, plus various territorial units suitable for occupation duties, would be deployed: five against Egypt, three against Syria, and one opposite Lebanon. This would leave three to face east as well as enough forces to put a tank inside every Arab-Israeli village just in case their populations get any funny ideas.

The expulsion of the Palestinians would require only a few brigades. They would not drag people out of their houses but use heavy artillery to drive them out; the damage caused to Jenin would look like a pinprick in comparison.

Any outside intervention would be held off by the Israeli air force. In 1982, the last time it engaged in large-scale operations, it destroyed 19 Syrian anti-aircraft batteries and shot down 100 Syrian aircraft against the loss of one.

Its advantage is much greater now than it was then and would present an awesome threat to any Syrian armoured attack on the Golan Heights.

As for the Egyptians, they are separated from Israel by 150 miles or so of open desert. Judging by what happened in 1967, should they try to cross it they would be destroyed.

The Jordanian and Lebanese armed forces are too small to count and Iraq is in no position to intervene, given that it has not recovered its pre-1991 strength and is being held down by the Americans. Saddam Hussein may launch some of the 30 to 40 missiles he probably has.

The damage they can do, however, is limited. Should Saddam be mad enough to resort to weapons of mass destruction, then Israel's response would be so "awesome and terrible" (as Yitzhak Shamir, the former prime minister, once said) as to defy the imagination.

Some believe that the international community will not permit such an ethnic cleansing. I would not count on it. If Mr Sharon decides to go ahead, the only country that can stop him is the United States.

The US, however, regards itself as being at war with parts of the Muslim world that have supported Osama bin Laden. America will not necessarily object to that world being taught a lesson - particularly if it could be as swift and brutal as the 1967 campaign; and also particularly if it does not disrupt the flow of oil for too long.

Israeli military experts estimate that such a war could be over in just eight days. If the Arab states do not intervene, it will end with the Palestinians expelled and Jordan in ruins.

If they do intervene, the result will be the same, with the main Arab armies destroyed. Israel would, of course, take some casualties, especially in the north, where its population would come under fire from Hizbollah.

However, their number would be limited and Israel would stand triumphant, as it did in 1948, 1956, 1967 and 1973. Are you listening Mr Arafat?

• Prof van Creveld is author of The Sword and the Olive; a Critical History of the Israel Defence Force (New York, 1998). He lives in Jerusalem

[sobieski]

How can you say that Sharon doesn't want to ethnically cleanse the West Bank? That was the plan of the late Tourism Minister Zeevi. It's a policy that has cabinet level approval in our Western, democratic ally.

[Icthus]

"..such a terrifying photo?.."

Let me ask you a question......do you think this tank went door to door in a Palistinian neighborhood and gathered up all those kids and made them run ahead of it?

Or is it concievable, that those kids were antagonizing Israeli soldiers or throwing rocks at the tank? (are any of them holding rocks?) Now I'm not sure about how you would or have raised children....but the "kids" you speak of in the photo have no business anywhere near a piece of armed military equipment...period!

When a Pali parent encourages a "child" to participate in this war, they have to expect that eventually that child will be wounded or , heaven forbid, killed. They have become combatants.

We can all sit here behind our computer screens and armchair quarterback this issue to death....but the facts are real, the Pali's have been, without a doubt, the instigators of much of what is happening today.

When the press release photographs such as this, tell me how the Israeli's are "running down" those poor kids?

[sobieski]

I can see the Israeli interest. Where's America's in such an operation?

[wewereright]

I don't really see the Pals as cowards who must attack civilians - rather hopelessly out guned thanks to my hard earned tax dollars given to the I's each year. They are doing the only thing they can....not that I agree with it...but I understand the dynamic that causes the hateful acts.

[wewereright]

Your reply is a real hoot...the darn tanks are right in the Pals' neighborhood!!!!!! What would you do if your community was occupied by a foreign military?

[AmishDude]

Saddam in turn will fire missiles at Israel. The Palestinians will go wild with ecstasy and launch massive sympathy attacks all over Gaza and the West Bank.

This will, of course, make Israel the bad guy. How gauche of them to stand in the way of Iraqi missles.

Safire, Krauthammer, Podhoretz and Kristol

Interesting list of pundits there. Any reason you picked them and not Buckley, Will or Noonan? Any reason at all?

[cardinal4]

What would you do if your community was occupied by a foreign military?

Id stop sending suicide bombers into their communities,but thats just me.

[Icthus]

"..the I's do not treat them as equals.."

Correct me if I'm wrong....but, in 1967, didn't Israel get attacked by several Arab countries that broadcast over the airwaves for the Pali's to leave the area so they would not get involved in the bloodshed? As I recall history, 650,000 left VOLUNTARILY. Those that stayed, were made Israeli citizens.

That 650,000 has since swelled into 4 or 5 million. That's 4 or 5 million that have sworn to run Israel into the sea and destroy all of Israel. Should Israel let those millions waltz right on across the border?

What would YOU do if you were an Israeli?

[marron]

Let's be honest - there are more and more illegal settlements all the time. How can peace follow that?

Everyone knows what the Israelis are up to. They mean to keep the West Bank. That is why, as I have said, the Pals might normally expect sympathy here.

But remember; we live in a multi-racial, multi-cultural country. Not everyone here is thrilled about the foreigners in our midst, but we aren't killing their women and children to make them go back to where they came from.

If they are willing to live among us in peace, and operate their businesses, and raise their families, no one here is going to harm them.

Likewise, Arabs in Israel live there in peace, unmolested by the Israeli majority. They serve in parliament. They sometimes serve in the Armed Forces.

When some Israeli developer built a subdivision on the West Bank, the Pals had the choice of accepting their new neighbors as neighbors. Like normal people do.

[DentsRun]

I can see the Israeli interest. Where's America's in such an operation?

You're right. If Israel feels it should attack every country in the middle east to guarantee its security then it should go ahead and do it. All that I ask is Amercan boys not be sent to die in another country's war.

[wewereright]

I would have built a wall at the pre-67 borders...but that has not happend because the I's have bigger plans....hence the hundreds of illegal settlements on the P's land.

But remember the 700,000 Pals were driven from their homes when Israel was created ....out of violance of course.

[Icthus]

I understand the dynamics of WHY the Pali's are doing what they are doing....

What I don't understand is why they have refused to accept Israel's concessions. There has never been a Palistinian government, a Palistinian language, or a Palistinian culture (unless that would be suicide bombing). It wasn't until 1967 that the Pali's (a.k.a. "arabs") decided that their precious homeland was stolen. Did the UN offer the Pali's a state in 1948??????? Did they choose to accept that offer??????

[wewereright]

If the settlements were not considered part of Israel OK but they represent an expansion of the already disputed boundaries.

[DentsRun]

When some Israeli developer built a subdivision on the West Bank, the Pals had the choice of accepting their new neighbors as neighbors. Like normal people do.

That "developer' was Ariel Sharon. He didn't just built settlements, he surrounded them with barbed wire, put in tanks to protect them, demolished existing towns to build on the ruins, connected them with Israeli-only roads and kept the existing residents from using them. Some developer. I hope he never comes to my neighborhood.

[Icthus]

"..driven from their homes.."

It is my understanding, they left due to the invading arab armies. Please correct if I'm wrong.

[wewereright]

No language, no culture....does that mean no rights? Geese I quite tired of reading that "there never was a Palestine," well who the heck cares 700000 people were displaced when Israel was created. Are their lives worth anything to the Israel firsters? How would you feel ....being run out of your home?

[DentsRun]

DentsRun: Safire, Krauthammer, Podhoretz and Kristol

Interesting list of pundits there. Any reason you picked them and not Buckley, Will or Noonan? Any reason at all?

Yes, because their loyalty is suspect. They put the welfare of a foreign government ahead of that of America.

[wewereright]

does it really matter why - accept that they didn't want to?

[mrustow]

I would have built a wall at the pre-67 borders...but that has not happend because the I's have bigger plans....hence the hundreds of illegal settlements on the P's land.

The P's land? I haven't heard of any Israeli settlements in Jordan.

But remember the 700,000 Pals were driven from their homes when Israel was created ....out of violance of course.

You have any sources for that, besides Al-Jazeera and Stormfront?

Oh, I get it. If a Jew bought land from an Arab, and the Arab left, you call that Jewish "violance" (sic). If an Arab left the country, hoping to come back after Holocaust II a few weeks later, and take back his old place, as well as those of his Jewish neightbors, you call that Jewish "violance" (sic) too. If all the Jews were dead, you'd still complain about Jewish "violance" (sic).

[medved]

What about the Saudis? I mean, if I'm Sharon, then at some point I'd want to do something for the guys who're bankrolling all the BS and pulling the strings.