Another Round Begins in The Middle East

[Pekka]

I've been trying to take lots of things into consideration while thinking how this conflict... I mean who is responsible. At this point, it makes no sense trying to do that. So I've chosen to go action by action. Of course Israel holds a firm place in my head anyway, but even in this case, Hamas started with their rockets. Why fire those from civilian places, it is not because they wouldn't expect retaliation, it is exactly because they know there will be retaliation.

This time, however, Israelis waited. Did that stop Hamas? No. Like little kids they poked and poked and poked, after being warned, kept poking. What do you do? You attack, or you're not much of a country, letting yourself being poked like that.

FOr Hamas, it's always a win-win. No matter what they do, it always increases, they always gain popularity. Should they bring heat from the Israeli side because they've been naughty again, well they get support because evil Israelis are again killing everyone. Should they ever be able to walk in a path of peace, they'd be again heroes, giving them peace over evil Israelis.

I'm saying there's no ****ing way Hamas can ever lose their PR campagn, especially inside their own territory. No matter what you do, they always gain from it. You can be nice, you can be tough, they win inside their folks.

So again, what do you do? You strike hard, that's what you do. You teach them Hamas ****ers a lesson. They will like it for sure, but they like all the ways you response or remain silent. You can't really get rid of them, because it's impossible to kill them all. You're always going to end up killing bunch of civies as well, because that's the way Hamas fights.

From Israeli side, I see only two options. To try to kill every single Hamas personnel, or to move into another country, or walk into the sea. Doesn't leave much options in my books. All options are futile. Press won't even bother trying to cover that Hamas is again firing rockets, hundreds of them against civies in Israel. Just like a hobby. But that's nto interesting, it only gets interesting if Israel responds at some point and sends few tanks.

To me, the basic problem of Israeli response, IMO, is that they wait too long. They are way too patient, and then they respond hard sometimes. Maybe answering faster and softer would be better, to avoid civilian casualties? I don't know. Or to just simply hunt down every Hamas terrorist POS and take them down when the opportunity arises. But I guess that's what they're trying to do.

But I go case by case from now on. Who broke the peace? Hamas did.

[Sirotnikov]

Could you expand on this part a bit. This is something that I havent' heard before and would love to know more about it so when everyone is throwing around the "STOLEN" term I can keep things in perspective.

you're welcome to read some pages of

http://books.google.com/books?id=hpvnNILnO3kC&pg=PA71&lpg=PA71&dq=jewish+land+purchases&source=web&ots=znjeGCvwRi&sig=OV4KxK8DhFpQPpVdUHaroyejBsM&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA53,M1

I don't have exact numbers.

Jews certainly didn't own all the land of 1948 Israel, and probably not even most of it.

[Nikolai]

In 1939, Jews, which constitited just below 30% of the total population, owned 5 % of the land in the Palestinian mandate, which constituted around 10% of all cultivable land. In September 1947, the UNSCOP found that Jews constituted roughtly a third of the population and owned 6 % of the land.

[Unimatrix11]

i wonder in how many states the mexicans were entitled to rule based on such numbers today...

[Unimatrix11]

Edit: Do you have figures for the sebsqeuent decades as well ?

[Nikolai]

I'll check, I don't think so, but it's been a while since I took the course, so it might be. But I'd think the figure is radically different, the whole of Palestine had 1.3 million Arabs in 1946, after the independence war the area controlled of Israel had only 160.000 of them.

[Unimatrix11]

... The only proven way to stop people from hating Jews is to kick the ever-loving **** out of them.

And you believe that? Well, apart from the obvious fact, that the palis still seem to hate the jews, and thus there is no proven way to stop them do that, do you really think, by pure logic arguments, that this sentence makes any sense?

[Sirotnikov]

Siro, your own link says nothing about 200,000 Arabs fleeing Palestine before the war started. It says 175-200,000 Arabs had fled by May 3rd of 1948, six months after the war had begun. The vast majority of Arabs fled after the civil war broke out at the end of November, 1947, mainly as a result of Jewish action or the fear of them.

The war started in Nov. / Dec. 47? Interesting. You're welcome to name Israeli war operations from Nov / Dec 1947 then.

To expand on my point - there were no major-scale Israeli actions prior to April 1948. "Plan Dalet" which is often misquoted to show orders for deportation, did not take effect until late April.

What you're referring to is the "civil war" period - hostilities which took hundreds of civilian lives on both sides, and can certainly not be described as organized or initiated by Israeli forces. The nature of the war during Nov 47-April 48 does not bear the nature of organized evictions or any planned attempt at deporting palestinians, as you originally suggested.

Let's return to your original statement:

The residents of a great number of Arab villages were either forced out by the Haganah or fled in fear of eviction or massacre like that suffered by the Arab residents of Deir Yassin at the hands of the Irgun. Some Arabs did leave on the own initiative, but they were decidedly in the minority.

Major military action began in April 1948. Deir Yassin happened in April 1948.

The text I qutoed speaks of 170-200 thousand people who fled by May 3rd. - effectively the end of April. Sources I read say that very large waves (50K) appeared as early as November-December, and that there was a hefty trickle all through 1947.

This proves that out of the 400-600(?)K refugees, a third (170-200K) fled clearly on their own initiative, before major scale Haganah actions, and without evidence of eviction or forced deportation. Most of those, even before the events of Deir Yassin (rumors of which were bloated by both sides for tactical and political purposes).
Your revised description of a reality where Arabs flee due to the increasing hostilities fits perfectly with my narrative - people flee on their own initiative, because they expect a full out war.

This does not sit well with the spirit of your original post, saying that those who left on their own are "a decisive minority" and putting blame for the refugees on Haganah initiative.

Arab fear of war, even specifically of Jewish action, certainly does not equal an organized Israeli initiative to drive local residents out. Nor does it justify continuously blaming Israeli forces of putting everyone on trucks and deporting them.

I'm not saying that such incidents did not occur during battle - they did, and they were apparently suggested policy for dealing with places who showed resistance. This was however a tactical decision, and not a part of a grand scale strategy to deport palestinian inhabitantsm as Israel is usually blamed.

[Nikolai]

After a quich check, I can't see that any exact numbers are given, other than the following: During the first years after the indepence war, "the [Israeli] government expropriated thousands of acres of Israeli Arab land and forcibly relocated the dispatched inhabitants". In the 1980s, Begin's administration decided that "unregistered and uncultivated land would be classified as state land to be dealt with as the Israeli authorities saw fit." Due to the confused system that existed after Ottoman, British and then Jordanian rule, 500.000 acres on the West Bank, slightly more than 40% of the total land area, and 30% of the Gaza strip, was transferred to Israeli state ownership by the early 1980s. This of course was changed with the Oslo accords, but I don't know by which numbers.

[Unimatrix11]

I'll check, I don't think so, but it's been a while since I took the course, so it might be. But I'd think the figure is radically different, the whole of Palestine had 1.3 million Arabs in 1946, after the independence war the area controlled of Israel had only 160.000 of them.

They all probably sold their land willingly. But seriously - how exactly came that about? I mean, they didnt just leave, right? And if so, why?

EDIT: Crosspost

[Nikolai]

The land bought before the independence war, was bought by Jews from the Palestinian notables, who owned most land at that time.

[Sirotnikov]

Now that Gaza has all but been freed/conquered/occupied, what will Israel do next with it?

Israel is very far from conquering or occupying Gaza.

It operates in built areas surrounding cities, but not one city has been occupied so far AFAIK.

The scale of the Israeli incursion is inflated. IDF troops have not captured the cities and did not begin entering them. This is reserved as a 3rd step of escalation, which is threatened if Hamas continues firing rockets and if a succesful international solution is not created.

There's no viable palestinian rule possible, since the elected government (hamas) is at the root of the conflict. More elections therefore do not seem a good idea either. Any other palestion group/faction taking charge of Gaza will be seen as collaborators/traitors and working against democracy/the will of the people. The same will go for any Arab government taking charge of Gaza (as has been the case since '48)

An arab / internationally imposed rule for a period of time is possibly the proper solution.
It could serve to demilitirize the Gazan society, and stop its terror factories.
Motivation for terrorism would decrease and most importantly - terrorist activity would become secret and hunted, and not a publical official display.

Deportation of the palestinians, [...] merely showing that deportation doesn't bring a solution from terrorism in the first place.

I'm unaware of any Israeli representative, or even any Israeli politician for that matter that suggests deportation.

Any such initiatives are reserved to the respective posters who posted them.

I would disagree however that deportation doesn't solve terrorism. It does. Wiping out a place works wonders. It's just not something that Israel can afford humanely and morally, and I would be the first to object it.

Deportation of Hamas leaders is something else though.

The international community, be it the UN or any other unilateral/multinational effort, won't be to keen to get involved. [...] It doesn't really help that Israel doesn't really give a turd about the UN anyway.

The UN certainly does not have a good record. The people who arrive on the scene, be it humanitarian efforts or peace-keeping efforts are usually under armed, don't have a strong enough directive, and often the persons fulfilling such duties are biased to the point they fail at their duties.

An example would be the cooperation of elements in the UN forces in Lebanon with Hizbullah in October 2000 and the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers.

The EU, scoffed by the US-ians and Israel, won't be keen either. After 'Oslo' they invested heavily into getting Gaza and the Westbank some economic leverage under the motto: 'if people have something to loose, they won't be so stupid as to wage all they got'. This has not worked out: all investments in economic infrastructure have bore no fruit. It doesn't really help that Israel doesn't give a turd about Europe anyway, unless it's the eurovision song-contest.

Not true.
Israel is very much interested in internation regulation, that would stop Hamas from being exclusive Israel's problem. Hamas is unreigned and uncontrolled. They attack us at will, and no one nudges, but when Israel finally responds we get blamed.

Israel wants a solution that would create a strong and viable security arrangement vis-a-vis Gaza. If that is successful, Israel will get the heck out.

So, that leaves Israel itself:
What are they going to do with Gaza? Do they have any clue?

We would much rater not deal with Gaza city. But if international consensus can't be reached, we'll have to.

[Sirotnikov]

I'll check, I don't think so, but it's been a while since I took the course, so it might be. But I'd think the figure is radically different, the whole of Palestine had 1.3 million Arabs in 1946, after the independence war the area controlled of Israel had only 160.000 of them.

It's not a legitimate comparison because the comparison is made between dramatically different territories.

According to the censuses I read, the amount in Israeli controlled land was around 700K. This amounts to the difference of around 500-600 refugees. Some 20,000 more were allowed to return as part of family reunification in the following years.

[Nikolai]

The statistics are quite clear, only 160.000 were left in Israeli controlled land after the independence war and it's aftermath. But of course that area was much smaller than the whole that my 1946 numbers are from. In what became Israel after the indepence war, 700k did indeed live, but Plan D with it's forced expulsions throughout '48 and '49 resulted in only 160.000 being left within the borders of Israel after the last armistice. In 1950, 960.000 refugees were registered by the UN. Which obviously must mean that the UN did something wrong/was fooled. Which is nothing new.

[Sirotnikov]

The statistics are quite clear, only 160.000 were left in Israeli controlled land after the independence war and it's aftermath. But of course that area was much smaller than the whole that my 1946 numbers are from.

then we agree.

In what became Israel after the indepence war, 700k did indeed live, but Plan D with it's forced expulsions throughout '48 and '49 resulted in only 160.000 being left within the borders of Israel after the last armistice.

I suggest you
a) read the text of Plan D http://www.mideastweb.org/pland.htm to see that text dealing expulsions is very insignificant in the full scale of the document. The expulsions described as a tactical step to be applied to border villages of tactical importance that host resistance. Not as a general policy

b) read the replies I posted to Naked Gents Rut regarding how much of the population has actually fled on their own initiative, and with no bearing to Plan D or any Israeli actions.

In 1950, 960.000 refugees were registered by the UN. Which obviously must mean that the UN did something wrong/was fooled. Which is nothing new.

Odd enough, because 700K - 160K -20K (which returned) = 520K and not 960 thousand.

Politization of the problem certainly has its toll. UN refugee agencies have always artificially increased the Palestinian census, as well as the refugees census for political reasons.