 |
Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. He also has degrees in Economics, Politics, and Jewish History & Thought.
|
|
|
|
By Ariel Natan Pasko
June 8, 2004
With the passing of former American President Ronald W. Reagan, another element from a bygone era gains closure. The "Cold War" is just a distant memory, the "Evil Empire" he worked so hard to bring down is no more. That legacy, no one will be able to take away from him. Many in America and Israel have written about his close relations with American Jews, and his fond feelings for Israel, all true. But truth demands that we look at a man in his completeness, warts and all.
I remember clearly: It was September 1st, 1982. I was at the home, of my now long deceased Jewish history professor. I had been working with him as a research assistant on the first three volumes of his planned magna opus five-volume complete history of the Jewish people. He never lived to complete the fifth volume. We had been working several hours that day, but at 8:00 pm, we needed to finish up because President Reagan was going to speak to the nation.
The PLO and arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat had been expelled from Lebanon, under the watchful eye of then Defense Minister Ariel Sharon. In those days, it was acceptable to call Arafat a terrorist and people didn't look at you funny, wondering why you're being so extreme. It would take another 12 years for Arafat to "win" his Nobel Peace Prize, and a few more, for most people to realize it was a farce.
President Reagan and then Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin had an ongoing up and down relationship. They were very different people. Reagan was a mid-western self-made man of simple roots, an actor and later a politician. Begin was a prim and proper European-trained lawyer and a Jew who survived the Holocaust era. Begin was also a fervent nationalist, proud of his country Israel, and its achievements, who believed in the rightness of his cause, the survival of the Jewish People, at all cost. In this, there actually was some similarity between them, Reagan also believed in the greatness of his country and tried to revive its spirit. Both were fighters for their causes, and they often clashed.
I recall the previous fall-winter of 1981. After a long drawn out political battle over U.S. plans to sell advanced radar planes - AWACS - to Saudi Arabia in October - planes Israel felt compromised it's security - ended in victory for President Reagan, he tried to balance the American-Israel association by proposing a "strategic relationship" with Israel in November. Reagan, during the heated debate over the AWACS sale had said, "It is not the business of other nations to make American foreign policy," in reference to Israel.
In December of 1981, the Israeli Knesset led by Prime Minister Menachem Begin, passed the "Golan Heights Law" officially annexing the territory captured by Israel from Syria in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Syria had previously used the territory to repeatedly shell Israeli civilian areas down below the Heights, and with massive public support, the Israeli government decided to solidify - in law - its determination never to return to such a situation. Even now, there is a consensus in Israel not to return the Golan Height to Syrian control. Reagan, angry, withdrew the "strategic relationship" offer.
As a response to Reagan's previous statement about foreign countries making American policy, and his withdrawal of the "offer," Begin gave a rousing speech, reminding all who would listen that Israel is not a "Banana Republic". Israel would also not let foreign powers interfere with its pursuit of its vital security needs, such as securing the Golan Heights.
On June 6th, 1982 - seventeen years, to the day, from the beginning of 1967 Six Day War - Israel entered Lebanon to put an end to PLO rocket attacks on Israeli cities in the north. Within three days, Israel swept north to Beirut, driving the PLO northward. There was little bloodshed in those three days, because most PLO terrorists chose to run instead of holding their ground and fight. The mostly Shiites and Christians in South Lebanon, hailed Israelis as liberators, so horrendous was the PLO atrocities against them. Israel was poised to enter Beirut, and route the PLO once and for all. But Ronald Reagan didn't want that. The Arabist State Department pulled out their old myth that Israel couldn't enter an Arab capital because the Arabs would "lose face" and then they wouldn't be able to make peace with Israel later. The same stale argument was made to keep Israel from fully routing the Syrian Army in 1973, and penetrating into Damascus. Under tremendous pressure, Begin hesitated for three weeks, during which time, the PLO dug in, increasing the likelihood of fierce house-to-house combat in civilian neighborhoods. The PLO had for years terrorized the civilians in Lebanon, creating a state-within-a-state, and had no compunction in using civilians as shields against the invading Israeli forces. Begin backed off, and the famed "siege of Beirut" began.
If Reagan hadn't pressured Begin, or if Begin hadn't backed down, the PLO instead of digging in, would have continued fleeing northward, and the Israeli Army could have crossed through Beirut as it had the South of Lebanon, with nary a shot fired. Once, north of Beirut in open territory, Israel could have finished off the PLO for good. That is the greatest tragedy of the war.
During this period, Reagan secretly formulated a plan not only to get Israel to pull its troops out of Lebanon, but to force Israel into withdrawing from Judea and Samaria - the West Bank - and Gaza. Reagan envisioned Palestinian autonomy in a federal system with Jordan.
And that brings us back to my professor's house that September evening. We sat there, in front of the TV, glued to our seats...
On September 1st, 1982, Ronald Reagan - in a nationwide televised speech - unveiled his plan. Reagan began, "My fellow Americans, today has been a day that should make us proud. It marked the end of the successful evacuation of the PLO from Beirut, Lebanon...But the situation in Lebanon is only part of the overall problem of conflict in the Middle East. So, over the past 2 weeks, while events in Beirut dominated the front page, America was engaged in a quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to lay the groundwork for a broader peace in the region...The evacuation of the PLO from Beirut is now complete, and we can now help the Lebanese to rebuild their war-torn country..."
And so, on September 17, 1982, with American help, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 520, demanding that "all non-Lebanese forces" leave Lebanon, which was understood to include Syria. But, almost twenty-two years later, Syria, in one of the most vicious occupations in recent memory, still occupies Lebanon. Recently, the U.S. has moved one step closer to realizing Reagan's vision. Last year the Congress passed the "The Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003," which President Bush signed into law. It calls on Syria to halt support for terrorism, end the occupation of Lebanon, stop production of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and holds Syria accountable for the illegal Syrian-Iraqi trade, which provided Iraq with the weapons that killed American troops, and stop the flow of weapons and fighters into Iraq. Only time will tell if it changes Syria's behavior or the nature of its regime.
Reagan spoke that September evening of the Camp David Accords and the American brokered peace treaty with Egypt. He referred to "the tragic assassination of President Sadat" and the breakdown of the "autonomy" talks. Then Reagan continued, "But the opportunities for peace in the Middle East do not begin and end in Lebanon. As we help Lebanon rebuild, we must also move to resolve the root causes of conflict between Arabs and Israelis...The war in Lebanon has demonstrated many things, but two consequences are key to the peace process. First, the military losses of the PLO have not diminished the yearning of the Palestinian people for a just solution of their claims; and, second, while Israel's military successes in Lebanon have demonstrated that its armed forces are second to none in the region, they alone cannot bring just and lasting peace to Israel and her neighbors."
As we watched, I reminded my professor that Ariel Sharon was against the peace treaty Begin signed with Egypt.
Reagan continued, "The question now is how to reconcile Israel's legitimate security concerns with the legitimate rights of the Palestinians. And that answer can only come at the negotiating table. Each party must recognize that the outcome must be acceptable to all and that true peace will require compromises by all. So, tonight I'm calling for a fresh start...I call on Israel to make clear that the security for which she yearns can only be achieved through genuine peace, a peace requiring magnanimity, vision, and courage. I call on the Palestinian people to recognize that their own political aspirations are inextricably bound to recognition of Israel's right to a secure future. And I call on the Arab States to accept the reality of Israel -- and the reality that peace and justice are to be gained only through hard, fair, direct negotiation."
Reagan declared, "The time has come for a new realism on the part of all the peoples of the Middle East. The State of Israel is an accomplished fact; it deserves unchallenged legitimacy within the community of nations. But Israel's legitimacy has thus far been recognized by too few countries and has been denied by every Arab State except Egypt. Israel exists; it has a right to exist in peace behind secure and defensible borders; and it has a right to demand of its neighbors that they recognize those facts."
It would be another twelve years till the second Arab state, Jordan, would sign a peace treaty with Israel, the greater Arab world for the most part still hasn't fully accepted Israel's existence. Ariel Sharon was against that treaty too. The Arab League Economic Boycott against Israel, which the League promised to be bring to a close in the heady "peace-making days" of the early 1990's - much touted in the media - hasn't completely ended, in fact Syria in recent months has been trying to fully revive it.
Then Reagan said, "I have personally followed and supported Israel's heroic struggle for survival, ever since the founding of the State of Israel 34 years ago. In the pre-1967 borders Israel was barely 10 miles wide at its narrowest point. The bulk of Israel's population lived within artillery range of hostile Arab armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again."
When my professor heard this, he smiled, referring to Reagan's friendship with Israel.
About the situation of the Palestinians, Reagan said, "Only through broader participation in the peace process, most immediately by Jordan and by the Palestinians, will Israel be able to rest confident in the knowledge that its security and integrity will be respected by its neighbors. Only through the process of negotiation can all the nations of the Middle East achieve a secure peace."
Here President Reagan began to spell out his plan, which included Jordanian involvement, a Palestinian-Jordanian Confederation. "First, as outlined in the Camp David accords, there must be a period of time during which the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza will have full autonomy over their own affairs. Due consideration must be given to the principle of self-government by the inhabitants of the territories and to the legitimate security concerns of the parties involved. The purpose of the 5-year period of transition which would begin after free elections for a self-governing Palestinian authority is to prove to the Palestinians that they can run their own affairs and that such Palestinian autonomy poses no threat to Israel's security," Reagan said.
He continued, "The United States will not support the use of any additional land for the purpose of settlements during the transitional period. Indeed, the immediate adoption of a settlement freeze by Israel, more than any other action, could create the confidence needed for wider participation in these talks. Further settlement activity is in no way necessary for the security of Israel and only diminishes the confidence of the Arabs that a final outcome can be freely and fairly negotiated. I want to make the American position well understood. The purpose of this transitional period is the peaceful and orderly transfer of authority from Israel to the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. At the same time, such a transfer must not interfere with Israel's security requirements."
Reagan called for a settlement freeze, but not settlement evacuation. He also said, "Beyond the transition period, as we look to the future of the West Bank and Gaza, it is clear to me that peace cannot be achieved by the formation of an independent Palestinian state in those territories, nor is it achievable on the basis of Israeli sovereignty or permanent control over the West Bank and Gaza. So, the United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and we will not support annexation or permanent control by Israel."
Let me repeat that, "...the United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza..."
Reagan pointed out that, "The final status of these lands must, of course, be reached through the give and take of negotiations. But it is the firm view of the United States that self-government by the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza in association with Jordan offers the best chance for a durable, just, and lasting peace. We base our approach squarely on the principle that the Arab-Israeli conflict should be resolved through negotiations involving an exchange of territory for peace."
Reagan referred to United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 and continued, "When the border is negotiated between Jordan and Israel, our view on the extent to which Israel should be asked to give up territory will be heavily affected by the extent of true peace and normalization, and the security arrangements offered in return."
Again, there is no reference to dismantling "settlements," i.e. Jewish communities.
About Jerusalem, Reagan said, "Finally, we remain convinced that Jerusalem must remain undivided, but its final status should be decided through negotiation."
My professor smiled again, "Jerusalem won't be divided, he said." But I pointed out to him that it didn't mean the U.S. recognized Israel's right to its "eternal capital," Reagan said, "its final status should be decided through negotiation."
"And, make no mistake, the United States will oppose any proposal from any party and at any point in the negotiating process that threatens the security of Israel. America's commitment to the security of Israel is ironclad, and, I might add, so is mine," Reagan assured.
He ended with, "And I fervently hope that the Palestinians and Jordan, with the support of their Arab colleagues, will accept this opportunity."
So one can summarize, President Reagan said, no Palestinian State, no return to the 1967 borders, and an undivided Jerusalem...
At the time, I wasn't that impressed by the speech, I wasn't as enthralled as other pro-Israel activists were about Reagan's plan. Many stressed that he said no Palestinian State, no return to the 1967 borders, and an undivided Jerusalem, but I would point out he doesn't recognize the Jewish people's historic and spiritual claims to Judea and Samaria - the West Bank, or Israel's rights in its capital city, Jerusalem.
About Reagan's other legacy, he referred to it in his speech, "When our administration assumed office in January of 1981...There were two basic issues we had to address. First, there was the strategic threat to the region posed by the Soviet Union and its surrogates, best demonstrated by the brutal war in Afghanistan...With regard to the Soviet threat, we have strengthened our efforts to develop with our friends and allies a joint policy to deter the Soviets and their surrogates from further expansion in the region and, if necessary, to defend against it."
Reagan will always be remembered for helping cause the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Ronald Reagan fought the "Cold War" for over thirty years. But during this time, the US and USSR maintained diplomatic relations throughout their rivalry, and they recognized each other's existence. That situation is not so with between Israel and much of the Arab/Islamic world, till today. Even with Egypt, a state that Israel has signed a formal peace treaty with, relations are described as a "Cold Peace".
That's a lie, it's misinformation, it's "spin". Israel is in a situation of "Cold War" with Egypt - who for over three years has withdrawn its ambassador from Israel - in just one of many treaty violations. Egypt does nothing to prevent the Palestinians from smuggling arms into Gaza. Egypt does nothing to outlaw - as the treaty stipulates - anti-Semitic propaganda in Egyptian media and society. The hatred of Israel, that continues to be propagated in Egypt, is worthy of the Nazis, and far more virulent, than that which the former Soviet Union heaped on America.
Given the Islamic Barbarism overcoming the region and the world; given the clear lack of interest on the part of the Palestinian leadership - from Arafat on down - to end terror and work something out with Israel; given Israel's steadfast refusal to just "curl up and die;" Israel awaits a leader, who like Reagan fought the "Evil Empire" and won. George W. has that in common with Reagan (the W. for his middle name). Does he have what it takes to achieve victory over the "Axis of Evil" in his "War on Terror"?
Better yet, maybe Israel truly awaits a leader like Begin, willing to "clash" with an American president and stay the course, for the sake of Jewish rights and Israeli security, or, even better, someone who won't back down in the crucial moment. For the last ten years, Israeli leaders, Rabin, Netanyahu, Barak and now Sharon have kept good relations with Washington, but that's led to a "peace process," almost 1,500 murdered, and thousands injured from Palestinian terror.
With hindsight, I must say, Reagan's ideas regarding the "peace process" were down right benign, in comparison to what's been bandied about since, such as Oslo and the Roadmap. During the early Clinton years, "the heady days of peace-making," Israel under Rabin, nearly "gave the whole store away." And, now with the "bulldozer" as prime minister - even though Sharon was opposed to both peace treaties - he's suggested bringing Egypt and Jordan back into Gaza and the West Bank as part of his "disengagement" plan.
Recently, the Israeli cabinet bullied by Sharon, even voted to consider uprooting Jews from Gaza. I don't think Ronald Reagan would have accepted the ethnic cleansing of Jews from their homeland.
I miss those "squabbles" between Reagan and Begin...
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
