End the Occupation
by Uri
Avnery
by Uri Avnery
DIGG THIS
A story has
it that Oscar Wilde once attended the premiere of a colleague's
play and every few minutes raised his hat. When asked about this
odd behavior, he replied: "I am a courteous person. I raise
my hat when I meet an old acquaintance."
If I wore a
hat, I would have to raise it every few minutes these days when
I view TV talk shows, listen to the radio or read the papers. I
keep meeting things I wrote years ago, and especially things I have
written since the beginning of this war.
For example:
for decades I have warned again and again that the occupation is
corrupting our army. Now the papers are full of learned articles
by respected commentators, who have discovered surprise! surprise!
that the occupation has corrupted our army.
In such cases
we say in Hebrew: "Good morning, Elijahu!" You have woken
up at long last.
If there is
a touch of irony in my remark, I do apologize. After all, I wrote
in the hope that my words would convince the readers and especially
people of the Israeli establishment and that they would pass them
on. When this is happening now, I am quite happy about the plagiarism.
But it is important
to spell out how the occupation has "corrupted our army."
Otherwise it is just an empty slogan, and we shall learn nothing
from it.
A personal
flashback: in the middle of the 1948 war I had an unpleasant experience.
After a day of heavy fighting, I was sleeping soundly in a field
near the Arab village Suafir (now Sapir). All around me were sleeping
the other soldiers of my company, Samson's Foxes. Suddenly I was
woken up by a tremendous explosion. An Egyptian plane had dropped
a bomb on us. Killed: none. Wounded: 1.
How's that?
Very simple: we were all lying in our personal foxholes, which we
had dug, in spite of our fatigue, before going to sleep. It was
self-evident to us that when we arrived anywhere, the first thing
to do was dig in. Sometimes we changed locations three times a day,
and every time we dug foxholes. We knew that our lives depended
on it.
Not anymore.
In one of the most deadly incidents in the Second Lebanon War, 12
members of a company were killed by a rocket near Kfar Giladi, while
sitting around in an open field. The soldiers later complained that
they had not been led to a shelter. Have today's soldiers never
heard of a foxhole? Have they been issued with personal shovels
at all?
Inside Lebanon,
why did the soldiers congregate in the rooms of houses, where they
were hit by anti-tank missiles, instead of digging foxholes?
It seems that
the army has been weaned from this practice. No wonder: an army
that is dealing with "terrorists" in the West Bank and
Gaza does not need to take any special precautions. After all, no
air force drops bombs on them, no artillery shells them. They need
no special protection.
That is true
of all our armed forces on land, in the air and on the sea. It is
certainly a luxury to fight against an enemy who cannot defend himself
properly. But it is dangerous to get used to it.
The navy, for
example. For years now it has been sailing along the shores of Gaza
and Lebanon, shelling at pleasure, arresting fishermen, checking
ships. It never dreamed that the enemy could shoot back. Suddenly
it happened and on live television, too. Hizbullah hit it with
a land-to-sea missile.
There was no
end to the surprise. It was almost considered as Chutzpah. What,
an enemy who shoots back? What next? And why did Army Intelligence
not warn us that they have such an unheard of thing, a land-to-sea
missile?
In the air
as on the sea. For years now, Air Force pilots shoot and bomb and
kill at will. They are able to hit a moving car with great precision
(together with the passers-by, of course). Their technical level
is excellent. But what? Nobody is shooting at them while they are
doing this.
The Royal Air
Force boys during the blitz ("the few to whom so many owe so
much") had to confront the determined pilots of the Luftwaffe,
and most of them were killed. Later, the British and Americans who
bombed Germany ran the gauntlet of murderous flak.
But our pilots
have no such problems. When they are in action over the West Bank
and Gaza, there are no enemy pilots, no surface-to-air missiles,
no flak. The sky belongs to them, and they can concentrate on their
real job: to destroy the infrastructure of life and act as flying
executioners, "eliminate" the objects of "targeted
liquidations," feeling only a "slight bang on the wing"
while releasing a one-ton bomb over a residential area.
Does that create
a good air force? Does that prepare them for battle with a real
enemy? In Lebanon the pilots have not (yet) met anti-aircraft fire.
The only helicopter shot down was hit by anti-tank fire while landing
troops. But what about the next war everybody is speaking about?
And the ground
troops? Were they prepared for this war?
For 39 years
now they have been compelled to carry out the jobs of a colonial
police force: to run after children throwing stones and Molotov
cocktails, to drag away women trying to protect their sons from
arrest, to capture people sleeping at home. To stand for hours at
the checkpoints and decide whether to let a pregnant woman reach
the hospital or send back a sick old man. At the worst, they have
to invade a casbah, to face untrained "terrorists" who
have nothing but Kalashnikovs to fight against the tanks and airplanes
of their occupiers, as well as courage and an unbelievable determination.
Suddenly these
soldiers were sent to Lebanon to confront tough, well trained and
highly motivated guerilla fighters who are ready to die while carrying
out their mission. Fighters who have learned to appear from an unexpected
direction, to disappear into well-prepared bunkers, to use advanced
and effective weapons.
"We were
not trained for this war!" the reserve soldiers now complain.
They are right. Where could they have been trained? In the alleys
of Jabalieh refugee camp? In the well-rehearsed scenes of embraces
and tears, while removing pampered settlers with "sensitivity
and determination"? Clearly it was easier to blockade Yasser
Arafat and his few untrained bodyguards in the Mukata'ah compound
in Ramallah than to conquer Bint Jbeil over and over again.
That applies
even more to the tanks. It is easy to drive a tank along the main
street of Gaza or over a row of houses in a refugee camp, facing
only stone-throwing boys, when the opponent has no trained fighters
or half-way modern weapons. It's a hell of a difference driving
the same tank in a built-up area in Lebanon, when a trained guerilla
with an effective anti-tank weapon can lurk behind every corner.
That's a different story altogether. The more so as our army's most
modern tank is not immune from missiles.
The deepest
rot appeared in the logistics system. It just did not function.
And why should it? There is no need for complex logistics to bring
water and food to the soldiers at the Kalandia checkpoint.
The simple
truth is that for decades now our army has not faced a serious military
force. The last time was 24 years ago, during the First Lebanon
War, when it fought against the Syrian army.
At the time
we said in my magazine, Haolam Hazeh, that the war was a complete
military failure, a fact that was suppressed by all the military
commentators. In that war, too, our army did not reach its targets
on time according to the plan: it reached them either late or not
at all. In the Syrian sector the army did not reach its assigned
objective at all: the Beirut-Damascus road. In the Palestinian sector,
it reached that road much too late, and only after violating the
agreed cease-fire.
The last serious
war of our army was the Yom Kippur war. After the initial disgraceful
setbacks, it did indeed attain an impressive victory. But that was
only six years into the occupation. Now, 33 years later, we see
the full damage done by the cancer called occupation, which by now
has spread to all the organs of the military body.
How to stop
the cancer?
The military
commentator Ze'ev Schiff has a patent medicine. Schiff generally
reflects the views of the army high command. (Perhaps over the last
40 years, there may have been instances when he voiced opinions
that were not identical with those of the General Staff, but if
so, they have escaped me.) He proposes to shift the burden of occupation
from the army to the Border Police.
Sounds reasonable,
but is completely unrealistic. How can Israel create a second big
force to maintain the occupation, on top of the army, which already
costs something approaching 12 billion dollars a year?
But, thank
goodness, there is another remedy. An amazingly simple one: to free
ourselves from the occupation once and for all. To get out of the
occupied territories in agreement and cooperation with the Palestinians.
To make peace with the Palestinian people, so they can establish
their independent state side by side with Israel.
And, while
we are at it, to make peace with Syria and Lebanon, too.
So that the
"Defense Army for Israel," as it is officially called
in Hebrew, can go back to its original purpose: to defend the recognized
international borders of the State of Israel.
August
25, 2006
Uri
Avnery is a longtime Israeli peace activist. Since 1948 he has advocated
the setting up of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. In 1974,
Uri Avnery was the first Israeli to establish contact with PLO leadership.
In 1982 he was the first Israeli ever to meet Yassir Arafat, after
crossing the lines in besieged Beirut. He served three terms in
the Israeli Parliament (Knesset), and is the founder of Gush Shalom
(Peace Bloc). Visit his
Website.
Copyright
© 2006 Uri Avnery
|