Tuesday, June 4

MCC Palestine Update #49

MCC Palestine Update #49

4 June 2002

“These will probably be bulldozed under this week," sighs Muhammad Kalloush sadly as he bends over cucumber plants in his field in Ras al-Wad east of Bethlehem. The day before, Israeli military bulldozers had uprooted olive trees nearby as part of the initial land-clearing for a new bypass road which will connect the illegal Israeli settlements of Tekoa and Nokidim with Jerusalem.

The bulldozers have come onto Kalloush's land before. Kalloush is one of 65 farmers participating in a project operated by the Applied Research Institute-Jerusalem and supported by MCC and the Canadian Food Grains Bank to test rainfed farming seed varieties. In March 2002, paving the way for the bypass road, bulldozers plowed under land Kalloush had planted with chickpeas as part of the project. While he quickly replanted the land with cucumbers, Kalloush has few illusions that the bulldozers won't be back.

The bypass road under construction is the pet project of the former Israeli Cabinet Minister Avigador Lieberman, a resident of Nokidim and an outspoken proponent of what is euphemistically called the "transfer" of Palestinians from the West Bank. The road will enable settlers to travel to Jerusalem without passing through Palestinian villages.

MCC, with funds from the Canadian Food Grains Bank, supports the Applied Research Institute in its work with Palestinian farmers to find seed varieties which perform well in a climate where rainfall is often limited. Participating farmers are testing various of wheat, lentils and chickpeas. Unfortunately, 30% of the test plots this spring were negatively effected by the Israeli occupation, with some test plots plowed under to make way for the settlement road and with others overgrown with weeds while farmers were confined to their homes during weeks of 24-hour-a-day curfew.

"It's more than your land being bulldozed and your plants uprooted," laments Nader Hreimat, project coordinator for the Applied Research Institute. "It's your culture and history that are uprooted." Farmers whose families have worked land for generations now are watching it be confiscated. "America is silent, but God can't be silent in the face of injustice," says Ibrahim Salahat, a farmer in Za'atareh village, a village whose lands will be confiscated for the new bypass road. "The truth is the truth and can't be kept quiet."

Below you will find four pieces, all of them addressing what is euphemistically called "transfer" within Israeli political discourse, namely, the driving out of Palestinians from the occupied territories. While most people doubt that such a horrific scenario will materialize, the increased rhetoric on the Israeli right talking about transfer is leading Israeli peace activists to warn about the dangers of such discourse. The first piece, by Profs. Oren Yiftchael and Neve Gordon, warns that recent moves to legitimize the expulsion of Palestinian cave-dwellers from the foothills south of Hebron will set a dangerous precedent. In a second piece published in The Telegraph, Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld outlines a frightening scenario in which transfer becomes reality. In the third item, Jeff Halper discusses the incarceration of Palestinians into increasingly smaller bits of land in the occupied territories. Finally, Uri Avneri outlines what he imagines the military operations orders might be which are guiding the Sharon government's policies.

1. The Lurking Shadow of Expulsion
Oren Yiftachel and Neve Gordon
May 15, 2002

(This article was originally written in Hebrew in order to be published in Haaretz but was rejected).

The State of Israel has reached an important crossroad. For some months now the nationalist camp, aided by the media, has been trickling into the public discourse the idea of expulsion -- branded in Israel as "transfer" -- despite the fact that it is antithetical to both international norms and human rights covenants. There are, of course, various formulations for how the transfer of the Palestinian population should be carried out, ranging from the aggressive version proposed by ex-minister Avigdor Lieberman, through the 'soft' version of "voluntary transfer" according to the right wing party "Moledet," and all the way to the idea of abrogating the political rights of the Palestinians and transferring them from their land and homes "only at a time of need," as suggested by Minister and inner Cabinet Member Efi Eitam.

Accordingly, the idea of expelling Palestinians from their land is already deeply entrenched in the political discourse, and has acquired legitimacy within broad sectors of the Israeli public. Labor Party Minister Ephraim Sneh's new plan, which proposes territorial exchange of Arab localities in Israel with West Bank Jewish settlements, suggests that even segments within the Israeli peace camp are prepared to adopt political programs inspired by the "transfer" idea.

Recently, the transfer proponents have been handed the chance to begin implementing an expulsion at the expense of a particularly weak Palestinian population, the cave inhabitants living in the South Hebron region of the occupied West Bank. The impact of such an expulsion, particularly as a political and legal precedent, cannot be overstated. A "small" transfer now is likely to sanction more extensive expulsions in the future, just as the first entry of the Israeli military into Area "A" during summer 2001 prepared the ground for the massive and deadly invasion dubbed "Defensive Shield."

Here are some of the facts. The cave dwellers live off of agriculture and tending flocks, and have preserved a unique cultural way of life since the early 19th century. After the 1948 war they lived under Jordanian rule, while losing all their land located on Israel's side of the border. Following the occupation of the West Bank in 1967, Israel set up military bases on parts of their property and closed off a whole section for training purposes. The inhabitants' living space was accordingly already small when the government began (in the early 1980s) to establish Jewish settlements in the region -- such as Carmel, Maon and Susiya -- a considerable number of which were founded in an attempt to create territorial contiguity beyond the Green Line. During the 1990s, particularly when Ehud Barak was prime minister, Jewish ranches were established alongside the settlements, causing additional friction with the Palestinian population.

In May 1999, Barak's government, in coordination with settler leaders, carried out the first organized expulsion, in which 750 local residents were driven out of their homes on the pretence invading state land. Despite a Supreme Court injunction permitting the Palestinian residents to return to their land, the cave dwellers continued to be exposed to pressure from the Israeli military and Jewish settlers; pressure that included the destruction of houses, tents and caves, ruining water holes, uprooting olive trees, and preventing the residents from reaching their land for purposes of cultivation and grazing. Simultaneously, the government continued to expropriate more land, setting up illegal Jewish outposts and issuing writs limiting the stay of Palestinian residents in the area. The principle was to establish facts on the ground.

It was Shakespeare who wrote somewhere that "there is method behind the madness." And indeed, all these actions were carried out by the military -- whether the Defense Minister was Arens, Barak or Ben-Eliezer -- with the aim of exhausting the residents and forcing them out. It seems that the Defense Ministers acted according to a premeditated plan whose practical purpose is to annex the whole area to Israel "clean" of Arabs in order to create a corridor from Be'er Sheva to the Jewish settlement Kiryat Arba. This claim is not a figment of our imagination, since it appears on the maps the Israeli delegation presented the Palestinians during the Camp David talks.

The threat of transfer has been hovering over the cave dwellers' heads even since the 1999 expulsion, and it is at the end of this June that the Supreme Court is scheduled to convene in order to discuss their status. Underlying the verbal 'laundering' of 'security considerations' or 'illegality' is a vital question: Will the Supreme Court permit the Sharon- Ben Eliezer -Eitam government to carry out a "population transfer." If the Court decides to expel the Palestinian residents it will create a dangerous precedent, essentially granting legal, political and moral legitimacy to transfer. A decision of this sort will shake the precarious barriers still holding back the expulsion option, and the inevitable horrific consequences of escalating the bloody conflict. It is with great apprehension that we wait to see whether the Supreme Court will turn a blind eye to the cave dwellers' plight or whether it will prevent the further deterioration of ethnic relations in this troubled land.

For more information on the case, consult: http://www.southebron.com

For more information on: Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD): http://www.icahd.org
Ta'ayush -- Arab-Jewish Partnership

Oren Yiftachel is the head of the Geography Department and Neve Gordon is a lecturer in the Politics and Government Department, both at Ben Gurion University, Israel.

2. Arial Sharon's plan is to drive Palestinians across the Jordan
Martin van Creveld
The Telegraph, 28 April 2002

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 prese> 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

3. Incarceration of Transfer: The Post-Incursion Plan
Jeff Halper
May 26, 2002

Like Sharon's 1982 war in Lebanon, which was also minimized as simply an "operation" (Operation Peace for the Galilee), Operation Defensive Shield had political goals far beyond that indicated by its modest defensive" name. Under the guise of destroying the "infrastructure of terrorism," Sharon (and his willing partner Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, the elected head of the Labor Party) believe they have accomplished two major goals that fundamentally alter the political situation. In Jenin they destroyed the Palestinians' ability to resist the ever-expanding Occupation. And in Ramallah they destroyed the infrastructure of Palestinian civil society, rendering the Palestinians unable to govern themselves. To be sure, terrorist "incidents" will still occur occasionally, but the Israeli army is today engaged in mopping up exercises. It enters Palestinian areas with absolute impunity, with nary a whiff of opposition from the international community.

The Israeli government believes it has defeated the Palestinians once and for all. What is left is mopping up operations what we are witnessing these days in towns and cities throughout the West Bank and construction of a type of rule that leaves Israel firmly in control of Jerusalem and the West Bank (and its settlement network intact), yet relieves it of direct rule over the Territories' three million Palestinians. It is no coincidence that Israeli and American insistence on "reforms" within the Palestinian Authority begin with the security services and that Washington has "discovered" in Muhammad Dahlan a "leader" it can deal with. So, too, can the vilification campaign being waged against Arafat be interpreted as trying to get beyond him to a leader who will sign off on a mini-state that ensures Israel's continued control.

In order to make this all palatable to the international community, however, Israel and the US must also offer a sop to the notion of Palestinian self-determination. The outlines of Sharon's grand scheme are already taking shape on the ground. Israel's emerging post-incursion strategy has three main components:

(1) "Separation."

On the surface the notion of "separation" seems to be an innocent security measure. It involves the construction of a massive "buffer zone" extending along the "Green Line" some 10-20 kilometers into Palestinian territory, where Israel is currently erecting a formidable maze of concrete walls and barricades, trenches, canals, electrified and barbed-wire fences, bunkers, guard towers, surveillance cameras, security crossings and platforms. While it has its security side, the policy of separation is intended to delineate the areas of the West Bank that Israel wishes to claim. In eliminates forever the possibility that the thick corridor between the Ariel settlement bloc and Greater Jerusalem will be relinquished to the Palestinians, as Clinton's plan envisioned. It places the large settlements in the western part of the West Bank squarely (and irreversibly) within the de facto border created by the security installations including East Jerusalem, which is today being "isolated" from the wider West Bank.

"Separation" is, in the end, a mechanism for annexation of about 15% of the West Bank under the guise of "security," effectively removing it as a subject of negotiation. The militarized "buffer zone" is only one component of a wider system of incorporation that includes the construction of the Trans-Israel Highway and the "by-pass" highways that link it to the settlements.

(2) Cantonization.

One of the most dramatic outcomes of the Israeli incursions is the effective nullification of Areas A, B and C, fundamental components of the Oslo process. Instead a new, more rational form of control is emerging, one that institutionalizes the siege on the Palestinian cities and turns it into a permanent administrative arrangement. The extra-territorial status of Areas A and B, supposedly under the civil jurisdiction the Palestinian Authority, has been effectively ended. Areas A and B will be replaced by an even more constricting system of cantons (called euphemistically and misleadingly "security zones" in Israeli parlance).

The West Bank, it was announced this week, will be carved into eight zones organized around the major cities: Jenin, Nablus, Qalqilya, Tul Karm, Ramallah, Jericho, Bethlehem and Hebron. Gaza will be divided into three such zones. Besides restrictions on movement of people, Palestinian cargoes will have to be transferred "back-to-back" to Israeli trucks at platforms strategically located between Palestinian cities, then re-transferred back to Palestinian vehicles for transport to their Palestinian destinations. Cargo travelling between Hebron and Jenin, for example, will have to be loaded and unloaded some five or six times. Not only does this policy violate international law guaranteeing freedom of movement in occupied territories, it also deals a devastating blow to Palestinian commerce, already virtually moribund.

Cantonization also requires restrictions on Palestinian movement reminiscent of South Africa's notorious "pass laws." Palestinian residents will need permits issued by the Civil Administration, Israel's military government, for travel between cities and cantons within the West Bank and Gaza. These permits will be valid for specified hours only (5 AM-7 PM), and will have to be renewed each month. Like the South African "passbooks," these internal permits imprison Palestinian residents within their tiny cantons.

The Civil Administration has also announced that West Bank residents of Areas A and B will be denied all entry to Israel (including East Jerusalem), thus tightening the already strangling "closure."

(3) Settlement and Israel-Only Highway Expansion.

Besides military and administrative measures, Israel has always relied on "creating facts on the ground" to make its presence in the Occupied Territories irreversible and neutralize any attempt to wrest control from it. Simultaneous to presenting its cantonization plan, the government publicly announced its intention to build 957 housing units in the West Bank settlements, most in the "Greater Jerusalem" area. Both its timing and the casual, almost contemptuous way it was announced at a time when the international community is working to freeze settlement construction under the US Tenet Plan indicates the degree to which Israel feels its activities are beyond international control. And the construction of the 480 kilometer system of "by-pass" highways that link the settlements into Israel while creating additional barriers to Palestinian movement continues unabated.

Since the Palestinians have been roundly and, in Sharon's view, permanently defeated, there is no longer any need to give even lip- service to the limited independence envisioned for the Palestinians in the Oslo "peace process." The ongoing incursions begun in late March have destroyed Oslo once and for all a key goal of Sharon and his predecessor/successor Netanyahu. We have returned to the notion of "autonomy" formulated by Sharon's mentor Menachem Begin, and for which the Civil Administration was established in 1981 and for which the war in Lebanon was fought in 1982. The Palestinians' choice, to put it starkly but precisely, is between incarceration and transfer.

Sharon's grand scheme (until such a time that transfer is made possible, i.e. when a Palestinian state emerges in Jordan) is today emerging "on the ground" as follows: The West Bank will be divided into three or four separate cantons according to settlement blocs and Israeli highways already in place. A northern canton would be created around the city of Nablus, a central one around Ramallah and a southern one in the area of Hebron, with a possible separation of Qalkilya and Tul Karm from the rest. Each would be disconnected from the other and connected independently to Israel. A road or two might connect the different cantons, but checkpoints and cargo docks would ensure completely Israeli control. Each canton would be granted local autonomy under the supervision of the Civil Authority.

Since the international community would demand a sop (no more) to Palestinian self-determination, Gaza will become the Palestinian state, probably when Arafat leaves the scene and a more compliant leader can be found to sign off on such an arrangement. If Israel was hard- pressed to concede more, it could upgrade the status of the Palestinians in the West Bank from "residents of autonomous cantons" to Palestinian "citizens without endangering its control.

Does Israel really believe this scenario is possible, that the Palestinians will submit to a truncated set of autonomous islands instead of a viable and truly sovereign state? The answer is "yes." Given the state of international response for the foreseeable future, Israel sees little effective opposition to this arrangement provided that it can maintain a kind of "industrial quiet" that will allow the US, Europe and the Arab states to get on with their particular agendas. Besides some discordant noises coming from NGOs and some churches (as well as the Muslim community abroad, whose influence has been largely neutralized since 9-11), the international community has proven extremely compliant. Incarceration, and eventually transfer, seems eminently plausible to Sharon and his colleagues. Despite protestations by Sharon, the May 12th vote by acclamation of the Likud Central Committee against the establishment of any Palestinian state flowed logically and smoothly from "Operation Defensive Shield."

(Jeff Halper is the Coordinator of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions. He can be reached at icahd@zahav.net.il. This brief has been published by the Center for Policy Analysis on Palestinian in Washington DC.)

4. Operations Order
Uri Avnery
Gush Shalom, 25 May 2002

If Ariel Sharon were to formulate his intentions as an military operations order, like he used to do in the army, instead of hiding them behind a host of smoke screens, it would look like this:

1. Aims:

To bring the Zionist Revolution to its conclusion, by turning all of Eretz-Israel, from the sea to the Jordan river, into a Jewish state, with a minimum of non-Jewish inhabitants (if any at all).

2. Information:

The 1948 War of Independence was broken off before achieving its aim. The State of Israel was established only on 78% of the land, which brought about the removal of only 64% of the Palestinians. In the 1967 Six-Day War we conquered the remaining 22% of the territories, but successive Israeli governments lacked the necessary willpower to conclude the Zionist revolution
by annexing the territories and removing the remaining Arab population.

Now a window of opportunity has opened for concluding the job. Only one super-power (the US) remains; all the other powers (the UN, Europe, Russia and others) have effectively been eliminated.

The US is now lending us unlimited and unqualified support. It is to be hoped that it will continue to do so even when we employ harsh methods in the pursuit of our national aims. Experience shows that even when somebody in the American administration resists the implementation of our aims, this resistance collapses when faced with our determined stand (Operation “Defensive Shield”). Our control over both houses of the Congress and our decisive influence on most of the American media guarantee us freedom of action.

3. Methods:

Our task will be achieved by the following methods, to be employed simultaneously:

a. Military operations, to break the armed Palestinian resistance.

b. Economic pressure, to cause mass Arab emigration from the country.

c. Settlement activity, to cut up the territories and prepare them for annexation to Israel.

d. Political action, to break the Palestinian political and social institutions.

4. Implementation:

(a) Military operations: These will be conducted incessantly, without long pauses. The whole army, including the reserves, will be employed for this task, even if this necessitates a weakening of our preparedness vis-a-vis the Arab states and limiting training.

The IDF will occupy the Palestinian territories as needed, for long and short periods, in order to catch, arrest or execute all Palestinian militants who could organize resistance to our policy. For this purpose there is no difference between terrorists and political leaders, between armed or civil resistance, between Hamas and Fatah. Maximal destruction of property will cause deterrence. This will be a repeated action, in order to eliminate every new set of leaders as it emerges.

Our actions will necessarily increase the motivation for terrorists to execute suicide- bombings in Israel. These will provide us – both in the domestic and the international arena – with reasons for our military action, which will be seen as a response.

The IDF will also assume a central role in exercising economic pressure (as follows).

It must be ensured that no officer who does not wholeheartedly support this task attains a senior position (Chief-of-Staff, officer in charge of regional commands, chief of departments, commander of divisions and brigades). For fulfilling a historic mission, hardness and cruelty are needed; there can be no place for bleeding hearts.

(b) Economic pressure: Mass expulsion, like in 1948, can be effected only in a special situation, such as a fully-fledged war or during an exceptional international event that draws away world attention.

Until this eventuality occurs, Palestinians must be induced to leave the country by economic pressure that makes their life intolerable. Such pressure will be achieved through closures and blockades that will prevent the movement of merchants and workers, teachers and pupils, doctors and patients. The whole economic life in the territories must be gradually brought to a standstill, so that the ability of the heads of families to feed their children is effectively destroyed.

IDF actions will enclose the Palestinians in small enclaves, where they will receive some kind of limited local autonomy, so as to relieve us of any formal responsibility for their situation.

In the prosecution of this policy, international public opinion and international aid agencies must be taken into account. From time to time, exceptions must be made to prevent extreme situations from arising.

(c) Settlement activity: This is a central tool for fulfilling the historic task. In spite of the fact that all Israeli governments since 1967 have understood this and acted accordingly, the tempo was slow. While more than 30% of Judea and Samaria are part of the town planning areas of the settlements, hardly more than 1% is actually settled. This is an intolerable scandal which must be speedily rectified. All ministries must take part in this urgent effort, devoting a considerable part of their resources to it.

Existing settlements must be enlarged and new ones set up by all possible means (takeovers after terrorist attacks, new neighborhoods far from the existing settlements, etc.) The network of bypass roads must be expanded rapidly in order to cut off Palestinians towns and villages, to annex more land to the settlements and strengthen our control on the ground. All this must be done according to the existing strategic plan, which prevents Palestinian territorial continuity and tightens the economic blockade.

For the settlement effort, the economic resources of all ministries must be centralized and all other tasks must take second place. More people, including new immigrants, must be encouraged to join the settlements. If necessary, young couples should be offered villas at zero cost. The flight of the factories from the settlement industrial parks, following threats by the European Community, must be stopped.

The IDF will devote the necessary resources to the protection of the settlements and the roads leading to them, even if this means calling up the reserves and ordering a whole battalion to protect one single isolated settlement.

(d) Political pressure: Breaking the Palestinian leadership is a central component of the whole campaign. In order to destroy the ability of the Palestinians to resist, the central leadership, and especially Yasser Arafat, who is a unifying symbol and a strong leader, must be eliminated.
Therefore, the whole propaganda effort must be concentrated on Arafat personally. Every Palestinian factor that is ready to fight against Arafat (including Hamas) must be exploited, as well
as anti-Arafat utterances by Israeli left-wing extremists. Arafat will be physically eliminated once the international situation permits.

At the same time, in-fighting between second-row Palestinian leaders must be encouraged, in order to create a leadership vacuum, such as existed in 1948.

All these pressures – military, economic, settlement and political – must be increased, until the situation of the Palestinians becomes so intolerable that they prefer to move to Jordan. If a historical opportunity for mass expulsion should present itself, we shall exploit it rapidly. The
apparatus for this must already be prepared now. The Israeli Arabs are a special problem, as they
have been given (by mistake) Israeli citizenship. The problem demands a creative solution, in
accordance with our main aims.

No comments: