watch out for Comoros
It is a veritable rite of passage for Zionist apologists to wax agonizingly about Israel's tragic position amongst 22 Arab countries who are conspiring in a region-wide attempt to drive Israel into the Mediterranean.
Witness the following representative example:
Israel is a tiny country, with only six million inhabitants (a million of whom are Arabs). It is surrounded by 22 Arab countries, with 300 million people.
The purpose of such a comparison is twofold: first, to demonstrate that Israel teeters on the crumbling edge of imminent destruction seven days a week and twice on Sundays, and second, should the first argument fail to stick, that the Arab hordes already possess massive tracts of land - why not allow just a little bit of colonialism?
I'll refrain from commenting on the second, for what should be obvious reasons, and instead turn to the first. Who is this international cabal seeking the destruction of the chosen people? The problem is that it doesn't exist - at least not in anything resembling the dire terms in which it is described.
We’ll start with a basic fact: Israel only has, in a strict definition of "surround," four Arab neighbors - Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Egypt. And, problematic to those attempting to fabricate this group's intransigent hostility, these four countries all fall into one of two categories. Either they have peace treaties with Israel (Jordan, Egypt), or Israel is still occupying parts of their land (Syria’s Golan Heights, Lebanon’s Shebaa Farms). In other words, the only surrounding countries with which Israel does not currently have a peace treaty are countries whose land it is illegally sitting on.
Interesting to note is that Israel has previously occupied territory administered by Egypt and Jordan as well – in the course of the Six-Day War, Israel captured both East Jerusalem and the West Bank from Jordan, and the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza Strip from Egypt. One might (rightfully) point out that Jordan and Egypt had little right to the land themselves. But if that’s the case, then neither does Israel. And in a broader sense, what nation-state has a “right” to any piece of territory?
Returning to Israel’s supposedly tenuous position, forever a tremor away from being swallowed by the same menacing neighbors whose land it has a record of stealing, one is left to wonder just which of the 18 non-bordering Arab states will be behind the quake.
- Is it Comoros, whose 600,000 inhabitants live primarily on 3 volcanic and desperately poor islands off of the not-so nearby southeast coast of Africa?
- Or Iraq, which is currently occupied by the military of Israel’s simultaneous overlord and vassal state?
- Maybe Mauritania or Morocco, which are closer to “surrounding” Brazil than they are to engulfing Israel?
- Western Sahara, one of the world’s most barren and unpopulated areas, and whose independence as an actual country is in dispute?
- Somalia, which lacks a central government?
What becomes clear then, is that this tired propaganda line is indeed malarkey, and should go the way of the dodo. If Israel is indeed facing existential threats from anyone, it’s Iran – a country that is definitively non-Arab. Credit the hubris of Zionists for harping on a classification of countries that supposedly imperil Israel’s very existence, all while ignoring an actual adversary. Such is the work of deception.
posted by Kevin @ 12:30 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
If Israel is the size of New Jersey (hardly an original thought), then what's the size of the slivers of historic Palestine being offered to its native population? Delaware?
You note that Iran and Turkey are "Arab countries." This is simply false, and only ignorance or racism can explain the mentality of those willing to throw all countries with Muslim populations into that category.
The United States is, indeed, occupying land originally belonging to indigenous peoples, as well as parts of Mexico, which of course is a recognition of fact - it has nothing to do with me "consider[ing]" it that way. And yes, I, as well as the framers of international law, am indeed willing to assert "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war" - the exact wording of UN 242, which Israel continues to callously ignore to this day. Supporting the premise that gaining territory through war is legitimate would open up the world to 18th century-style colonialism, which in fact is exactly what Israel is practicing.
You failed to address any issues raised in the original post, provide any evidence for your accusations, or otherwise make any comments at all worthy of response, so I'll refrain from commenting further.
Good post. A few more points:
1. The infamous claim that Nasser said he wanted to "push the Jews into the sea" during the Six Day War is false. No evidence that he or any Arab leader ever said such a thing has ever been produced.
British MP Christopher Mayhew raised this point, and offered 5,000 pounds to anyone who could demonstrate otherwise. Not only did no one ever claim the prize, but when one Warren Bergson took him to court over the claim, Mayhew won.
2. Israel has the fourth largest military in the world. Even without the peace treaties, Israel's neighbors pose no existential threat.
3. It's wrong to approach the question, I think, of one of all Arabs vs. all Israelis (which I know you're not, but I think it's an important point to make anyway).
The Arab countries don't really have a strong native capitalist class, since they depend economically, militarily and diplomatically on the imperialist countries. So as much as they might resent it, Arab elites maintain their position only by defnding the interests of the imperialist powers, particularly the U.S. Sometimes they might miscalculate and try to assert some independence, and that's why Israel's there -- to act as the watchdog.
So where do the Palestinians factor in here? Simply put, Arab elites greatly fear a genuine mass movement among the Palestinians, because a genuine national liberation movement would endanger their own rule. So they'll side with the weak-kneed PLO against Israel, but with Israel against th Palestinians themselves.
Sarah:
1. Yes, Israel is the size of New Jersey. It's also a major military power and has the backing of the U.S.
2. As Kevin pointed out, neither Iran nor Turkey. For future reference, Iran is populated mostly be Persians (and also Azeri, Gilaki and Mazandarani, and Kurds, among others), Turkey mainly by Turks and Kurds. The latter has been an ally of Israel for some time.
3. Even accepting the claim that the governments of surrounding countries want to destroy Israel, one has to deal with the fact that while these countries' military spending amounts to about $150 per person, while Israel's amounts to about $1,500 per person.
4. Of course, one should not accept these claims, for reasons outlined in my other comment. The ones crying for Israel's destruction are not the ones who make the decisions in these countries.
5. Hitler strongly believed that countries had a right to acquire land through war. Those who believe in democracy and human rights do not.
Post a Comment
<< Home