The Israel-Arab Reader

by Walter Laqueur

This seventh revised and updated edition published 2008

  Copyright © B. L. Mazel, Inc., 1969, 1970

  Copyright © Walter Laqueur, 1976

  Copyright © Walter Laqueur and Barry Rubin, 1984, 1995, 2001, 2008

  All rights reserved

  eISBN : 978-0-143-11379-9

  CIP data available

  The scanning, uploading and distribution of this book via the Internet or via any other means without the permission of the publisher is illegal and punishable by law. Please purchase only authorized electronic editions, and do not participate in or encourage electronic piracy of copyrighted materials. Your support of the author’s rights is appreciated.

  http://us.penguingroup.com

  Introduction to the Seventh Edition

  It is unusual for a book on contemporary politics to go through seven editions and dozens of printings, and to sell tens of thousands of copies over forty years, but such is the case with The Israel-Arab Reader. The reason—and the problem—is that the conflict does not come to an end but carries on, always with new developments and permutations. In fact, it is hard to think of another issue as long-lived and with as perennially high a profile (often in the news on a daily basis) as the Arab-Israeli conflict.

  The last edition appeared in 2001, just after the almost decade-long “peace process” had clearly failed. This new edition is being published as the unsolvable nature of the issue has become more apparent, following a five-year-long war—the second intifada—and Hamas’s partial displacement of Fatah and the PLO as the leadership of the Palestinian movement (which the PLO had headed for forty years).

  There is thus plenty of new information, albeit room for only a careful selection of new material. Fortunately, on this occasion no earlier text had to be excised. We hope this new edition will help teachers, students, policy makers, and the large segment of the public interested in the conflict to understand better its history and development.

  The Israel-Arab Reader itself has weathered remarkable and massive changes. A long, complex history in the region predates 1967, the year the Six-Day War prompted preparations for the book’s publication. The war definitively and permanently put the conflict at the forefront of international interest and activity. At the time, Gamal Abdel Nasser was still president of Egypt. David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s founding prime minister, was alive. Yasir Arafat was being appointed head of the PLO, which had barely begun any armed activity. Yitzhak Rabin was at the beginning of his political career, serving as Israeli ambassador in Washington. Syrian president Hafiz al-Asad was a leading figure in Syria but not yet the country’s sole ruler. The shah was still ruling Iran. In Iraq, the Ba’th Party, whose behind-the-scenes strongman was one Saddam Hussein, was soon to seize power. In Jidda, Saudi Arabia, Osama Bin Laden was about to enter the al-Thayer Model School.

  The Lebanese civil war, which lasted fifteen years, was still ahead, as were the 1973 war, two intifadas, scores of peace plans, and tens of thousands of hours of diplomatic activity. Neither Hamas nor Hizballah had yet been established.

  It is useful to recall that while the Middle East of 1968 was not among the calmest regions, many of its more violent conflicts still lay ahead— among them the long and bloody war between Iraq and Iran, the two Gulf wars, the Jordanian and Lebanese civil wars, the Iranian Islamist revolution, and clashes provoked by the radical Islamist upsurge in the Middle East. These developments coincided with huge changes in the sphere of international affairs during the last forty years—most significantly the end of the cold war—which would have a direct impact on the conflict itself.

  While some of the global and regional conflicts on the international agenda in 1968 have been resolved or at least reduced to manageable proportions, conflict in the Middle East has spread and to some extent grown in intensity. The Israeli-Arab conflict is still further from a resolution than is generally thought, but it has less of a monopoly among conflicts than it did in 1968.

  As the conflict has endured, so have attempts to bring it to an end or at least to achieve temporary or local arrangements to defuse it. After innumerable truces and an even greater number of visits by leading statesmen, there has been some apparent progress. Egypt and Jordan signed peace treaties with Israel, and there was even an Israel-PLO agreement, albeit one that was never fully implemented in a comprehensive peace settlement.

  For four decades, The Israel-Arab Reader has tried to document these developments as objectively as possible. Over the years, it has become a standard text for those who want to familiarize themselves with the essential issues involved in this conflict. With the constant need to bring it up to date, it has been impossible—despite its increase in size—to include all but the most crucial documents. We have tried to achieve this aim inasmuch as it is feasible within a limited framework and are glad that sustained demand for the book suggests our endeavor has been appreciated. Few, if any, such anthologies have had as long a shelf life as this one. Documents do not speak for themselves, but they are essential for any deeper understanding of historical and political developments.

  Walter Laqueur

  Barry Rubin

  November 2007

  Part I

  From the Bilu to the British Mandate’s End

  Bilu Group: Manifesto (1882)

  Bilu are the first letters of a passage in Isaiah, Chapter 2, Verse 5: “House of Jacob, come, let us go.” The Biluim, about five hundred young people mainly from the Kharkov region, were part of the wider movement of the “Lovers of Zion” (Hovevei Zion), which had developedin Russia in the early eighteen-eighties, mainly under the impact of the pogroms of 1881. This manifesto was issued by a Bilu group in Constantinople in 1882.

  To our brothers and sisters in Exile!

  ‘If I help not myself, who will help me?’

  Nearly two thousand years have elapsed since, in an evil hour, after a heroic struggle, the glory of our Temple vanished in fire and our kings and chieftains changed their crowns and diadems for the chains of exile. We lost our country where dwelt our beloved sires. Into the Exile we took with us, of all our glories, only a spark of the fire by which our Temple, the abode of our Great One, was engirdled, and this little spark kept us alive while the towers of our enemies crumbled into dust, and this spark leapt into celestial flame and shed light on the heroes of our race and inspired them to endure the horrors of the dance of death and the tortures of the autos-da-fé. And this spark is again kindling and will shine for us, a true pillar of fire going before us on the road to Zion, while behind us is a pillar of cloud, the pillar of oppression threatening to destroy us. Sleepest thou, O our nation? What hast thou been doing until 1882? Sleeping, and dreaming the false dream of Assimilation. Now, thank God, thou art awakened from thy slothful slumber. The Pogroms have awakened thee from thy charmed sleep. Thine eyes are open to recognise the cloudy delusive hopes. Canst thou listen silently to the taunts and mockeries of thine enemies? . . . Where is thy ancient pride, thine olden spirit? Remember that thou wast a nation possessing a wise religion, a law, a constitution, a celestial Temple whose wall is still a silent witness to the glories of the past; that thy sons dwelt in palaces and towers, and thy cities flourished in the splendour of civilisation, while these enemies of thine dwelt like beasts in the muddy marshes of their dark woods. While thy children were clad in purple and fine linen, they wore the rough skins of the wolf and the bear. Art thou not ashamed?

  Hopeless is your state in the West; the star of your future is gleaming in the East. Deeply conscious of all this, and inspired by the true teaching of our great master, Hillel, ‘If I help not myself, who will help me?’ we propose to form the following society for national ends. 1. The Society will be named ‘BILU’, according to the motto ‘House of Jacob, come, let us go’. It will be divided into local branches according to the numbers of its members.

  2. The seat of the Committee shall be Jerusalem.

  3. Donations and contributions shall be unfixed and unlimited.

 
WE WANT: 1. A home in our country. It was given us by the mercy of God; it is ours as registered in the archives of history.

  2. To beg it of the Sultan himself, and if it be impossible to obtain this, to beg that we may at least possess it as a state within a larger state; the internal administration to be ours, to have our civil and political rights, and to act with the Turkish Empire only in foreign affairs, so as to help our brother Ishmael in the time of his need.

  We hope that the interests of our glorious nation will rouse the national spirit in rich and powerful men, and that everyone, rich or poor, will give his best labours to the holy cause.

  Greetings, dear brothers and sisters!

  HEAR, O ISRAEL! The Lord our God, the Lord is one, and our land Zion is our one hope.

  GOD be with us! THE PIONEERS OF BILU

  Theodor Herzl: The Jewish State (1896)

  Theodor Herzl (1860-1904) was the founder of modern political Zionism.In the preface to Der Juden staat (1896) he says: “The idea which I have developed in this pamphlet is a very old one: it is the restoration of the Jewish State.”

  . . . The Jewish question still exists. It would be foolish to deny it. It is a remnant of the Middle Ages, which civilized nations do not even yet seem able to shake off, try as they will. They certainly showed a generous desire to do so when they emancipated us. The Jewish question exists wherever Jews live in perceptible numbers. Where it does not exist, it is carried by Jews in the course of their migrations. We naturally move to those places where we are not persecuted, and there our presence produces persecution. This is the case in every country, and will remain so, even in those highly civilized—for instance, France—until the Jewish question finds a solution on a political basis. The unfortunate Jews are now carrying the seeds of anti-Semitism into England; they have already introduced it into America.

  I believe that I understand anti-Semitism, which is really a highly complex movement. I consider it from a Jewish standpoint, yet without fear or hatred. I believe that I can see what elements there are in it of vulgar sport, of common trade jealousy, of inherited prejudice, of religious intolerance, and also of pretended self-defence. I think the Jewish question is no more a social than a religious one, notwithstanding that it sometimes takes these and other forms. It is a national question, which can only be solved by making it a political world-question to be discussed and settled by the civilized nations of the world in council.

  We are a people—one people.

  We have honestly endeavored everywhere to merge ourselves in the social life of surrounding communities and to preserve the faith of our fathers. We are not permitted to do so. In vain are we loyal patriots, our loyalty in some places running to extremes; in vain do we make the same sacrifices of life and property as our fellow-citizens; in vain do we strive to increase the fame of our native land in science and art, or her wealth by trade and commerce. In countries where we have lived for centuries we are still cried down as strangers, and often by those whose ancestors were not yet domiciled in the land where Jews had already had experience of suffering. The majority may decide which are the strangers; for this, as indeed every point which arises in the relations between nations, is a question of might. I do not here surrender any portion of our prescriptive right, when I make this statement merely in my own name as an individual. In the world as it now is and for an indefinite period will probably remain, might precedes right. It is useless, therefore, for us to be loyal patriots, as were the Huguenots who were forced to emigrate. If we could only be left in peace . . . .

  But I think we shall not be left in peace.

  Oppression and persecution cannot exterminate us. No nation on earth has survived such struggles and sufferings as we have gone through. Jew-baiting has merely stripped off our weaklings; the strong among us were invariably true to their race when persecution broke out against them. This attitude was most clearly apparent in the period immediately following the emancipation of the Jews. Those Jews who were advanced intellectually and materially entirely lost the feeling of belonging to their race. Wherever our political well-being has lasted for any length of time, we have assimilated with our surroundings. I think this is not discreditable. Hence, the statesman who would wish to see a Jewish strain in his nation would have to provide for the duration of our political well-being; and even a Bismarck could not do that.

  For old prejudices against us still lie deep in the hearts of the people. He who would have proofs of this need only listen to the people where they speak with frankness and simplicity: proverb and fairy-tale are both anti-Semitic. A nation is everywhere a great child, which can certainly be educated; but its education would, even in most favorable circumstances, occupy such a vast amount of time that we could, as already mentioned, remove our own difficulties by other means long before the process was accomplished.

  Assimilation, by which I understood not only external conformity in dress, habits, customs, and language, but also identity of feeling and manner—assimilation of Jews could be effected only by intermarriage. But the need for mixed marriages would have to be felt by the majority; their mere recognition by law would certainly not suffice. . . .

  No one can deny the gravity of the situation of the Jews. Wherever they live in perceptible numbers, they are more or less persecuted. Their equality before the law, granted by statute, has become practically a dead letter. They are debarred from filling even moderately high positions, either in the army, or in any public or private capacity. And attempts are made to thrust them out of business also: “Don’t buy from Jews!”

  Attacks in Parliaments, in assemblies, in the press, in the pulpit, in the street, on journeys—for example, their exclusion from certain hotels— even in places of recreation, become daily more numerous. The forms of persecutions vary according to the countries and social circles in which they occur. In Russia, imposts are levied on Jewish villages; in Rumania, a few persons are put to death; in Germany, they get a good beating occasionally; in Austria, anti-Semites exercise terrorism over all public life; in Algeria, there are travelling agitators; in Paris, the Jews are shut out of the so-called best social circles and excluded from clubs. Shades of anti-Jewish feeling are innumerable. But this is not to be an attempt to make out a doleful category of Jewish hardships.

  I do not intend to arouse sympathetic emotions on our behalf. That would be a foolish, futile, and undignified proceeding. I shall content myself with putting the following questions to the Jews: Is it not true that, in countries where we live in perceptible numbers, the position of Jewish lawyers, doctors, technicians, teachers, and employees of all descriptions becomes daily more intolerable? Is it not true, that the Jewish middle classes are seriously threatened? Is it not true, that the passions of the mob are incited against our wealthy people? Is it not true, that our poor endure greater sufferings than any other proletariat? I think that this external pressure makes itself felt everywhere. In our economically upper classes it causes discomfort, in our middle classes continual and grave anxieties, in our lower classes absolute despair.

  Everything tends, in fact, to one and the same conclusion, which is clearly enunciated in that classic Berlin phrase: “Juden Raus!” (Out with the Jews!)

  I shall now put the Question in the briefest possible form: Are we to “get out” now and where to?

  Or, may we yet remain? And, how long?

  Let us first settle the point of staying where we are. Can we hope for better days, can we possess our souls in patience, can we wait in pious resignation till the princes and peoples of this earth are more mercifully disposed towards us? I say that we cannot hope for a change in the current of feeling. And why not? Even if we were as near to the hearts of princes as are their other subjects, they could not protect us. They would only feel popular hatred by showing us too much favor. By “too much,” I really mean less than is claimed as a right by every ordinary citizen, or by every race. The nations in whose midst Jews live are all either covertly or openly anti-Semitic.


  The common people have not, and indeed cannot have, any historic comprehension. They do not know that the sins of the Middle Ages are now being visited on the nations of Europe. We are what the Ghetto made us. We have attained pre-eminence in finance, because medieval conditions drove us to it. The same process is now being repeated. We are again being forced into finance—now it is the stock exchange—by being kept out of other branches of economic activity. Being on the stock exchange, we are consequently exposed afresh to contempt. At the same time we continue to produce an abundance of mediocre intellects who find no outlet, and this endangers our social position as much as does our increasing wealth. Educated Jews without means are now rapidly becoming socialists. Hence we are certain to suffer very severely in the struggle between classes, because we stand in the most exposed position in the camps of both socialists and capitalists . . .

  The Plan

  The whole plan is in its essence perfectly simple, as it must necessarily be if it is to come within the comprehension of all.

  Let the sovereignty be granted us over a portion of the globe large enough to satisfy the rightful requirements of a nation; the rest we shall manage for ourselves.

  The creation of a new State is neither ridiculous nor impossible. We have in our day witnessed the process in connection with nations which were not largely members of the middle class, but poorer, less educated, and consequently weaker than ourselves. The governments of all countries scourged by anti-Semitism will be keenly interested in assisting us to obtain the sovereignty we want.

  The plan, simple in design, but complicated in execution, will be carried out by two agencies: The Society of Jews and the Jewish Company.

  The Society of Jews will do the preparatory work in the domains of science and politics, which the Jewish Company will afterwards apply practically.