Fatalidades no conflito árabe-israelense

O conflito árabe-israelense ocupa apenas o 49º Lugar em número de vítimas entre todos os conflitos desde 1950



Diz-se frequentemente - e não só por extremistas - que o conflito árabe-israelense é o mais mortal e, de acordo com isso, Israel é tido como o país mais agressivo e perigoso do mundo (a frente até de países como Irã, China, Coréia do Norte e Venezuela).

Um exemplo disso foi o discurso do então primeiro-ministro britânico Tony Blair no Congresso norte-americano, em julho de 2003: "O terrorismo não será derrotado sem a paz no Oriente Médio entre Israel e a Palestina. É aqui que o veneno é incubado. É aqui que o extremista pode confundir na mente de um número assustadoramente grande de pessoas o argumento para a criação de um estado palestino e a destruição de Israel". Este ponto de vista tolo e simplista leva muitos europeus a ver Israel como o país mais ameaçador do planeta.

Mas será isso verdade?

A fim de colocar as fatalidades árabe-israelenses no seu próprio contexto, Gunnar Heinsohn compilou estatísticas para classificar todos conflitos ocorridos desde 1950, de acordo com o número de mortes ocorridas. Note como bem abaixo na lista encontra-se o lançamento das letras em negrito.

Conflitos desde 1950 com mais de 10.000 Fatalidades *

1	40.000.000	China Comunista, 1949-76 (matança total, escassez causada pelo homem, Gulag)
2	10.000.000	Bloco Soviético: final do Estalinismo, 1950-53; pós-Stalinismo, até 1987 (principalmente o Gulag)
3	4.000.000	000 Etiópia, 1962-92,: Comunistas, fome artificial, genocídios
4	3.800.000	Zaire (Congo-Quinshasa): 1967-68; 1977-78; 1992-95; 1998-até o presente
5	2.800.000	Guerra da Coréia, 1950-53
6	1.900.000	Sudão, 1955-72,; 1983-2006 (guerras civis, genocídios)
7	1.870.000	Camboja: Khmer Rouge 1975-79; guerra civil 1978-91
8	1.800.000	Guerra do Vietnã, 1954-75
9	1.800.000	Afganistão: Matanças Soviéticas mutuamente destrutivas e do Taliban 1980-2001
10	1.250.000	Massacres do Paquistão ocidental no Paquistão Oriental (Bangladesh 1971)
11	1.100.000	Nigéria, 1966-79 (Biafra); 1993até o presente
12	1.100.000	Moçambique, 1964-70 (30,000) + depois da retirada de Portugal 1976-92
13	1.000.000	Guerra Irã-Iraque 1980-88
14	900.000	Genocídio em Ruanda, 1994
15	875.000	Argélia: contra a França 1954-62 (675.000); entre islâmicos e o governo 1991-2006 (200.000)
16	850.000	Uganda, 1971-79; 1981-85; 1994 até o presente
17	650.000	Indonésia: Marxistas 1965-66 (450.000); Timor Oriental, Papua, Aceh etc, 1969 até o presente (200.000)
18	580.000	Angola: guerra contra Portugal 1961-72 (80.000); depois da retirada de Portugal (1972-2002)
19	500.000	Brasil contra os seus índios, até 1999
20	430.000	Vietnã, depois que a guerra terminou em 1975 (seu próprio povo; refugiados dos barcos)
21	400.000	Indochina: contra a França, 1945-54
22	400.000	Burundi, 1959-present (Tutsi/Hutu)
23	400.000	Somália, 1991 até o presente
24	400.000	Coréia do Norte até 2006 (seu próprio povo)
25	300.000	Curdos no Iraque, Irã, Turquia, anos 80 à 90
26	300.000	Iraque, 1970-2003 (Saddam contra as minorias)
27	240.000	Colômbia, 1946-58,; 1964 até o presente
28	200.000	Iugoslávia, regime de Tito, 1944-80
29	200.000	Guatemala, 1960-96
30	190.000	Laos, 1975-90
31	175.000	Serbia contra a Croácia, Bósnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, 1991-1999
32	150.000	Romênia, 1949-99 (seu próprio povo)
33	150.000	Libéria, 1989-97
34	140.000	Rússia contra a Chechênia, 1994 até o presente
35	150.000	Guerra civil do Líbano, 1975-90
36	140.000	Guerra do Kuwait, 1990-91
37	130.000	Filipinas: 1946-54 (10.000); 1972 até o presente (120.000)
38	130.000	Burma/Mianmar, 1948 até o presente
39	100.000	Iêmen do Norte, 1962-70
40	100.000	Serra Leoa, 1991 até o presente
41	100.000	Albânia, 1945-91 (próprio povo)
42	80.000	Irã, 1978-79 (revolução)
43	75.000	Iraque, 2003 até o presente (doméstico)
44	75.000	El Salvador, 1975-92
45	70.000	Eritréa contra a Etiópia, 1998-2000
46	68.000	Sri Lanka, 1997 até o presente
47	60.000	Zimbábue, 1966-79; 1980 até o presente
48	60.000	Nicarágua, 1972-91 (Marxistas/nativos etc...)
49	51.000	Conflito Árabe-Israelense 1950 até o presente
50	50.000	Vietnã do Norte, 1954-75 (próprio povo)
51	50.000	Tagiquistão, 1992-96 (secularistas contra Islâmicos)
52	50.000	Guiné equatorial, 1969-79
53	50.000	Peru, 1980-2000
54	50.000	Guiné, 1958-84
55	40.000	Chad, 1982-90
56	30.000	Bulgária, 1948-89 (próprio povo)
57	30.000	Rodésia, 1972-79
58	30.000	Argentina, 1976-83 (próprio povo)
59	27.000	Hungria, 1948-89 (seu próprio povo)
60	26.000	Independência da Cachemira, 1989 até o presente
61	25.000	Governo Jordaniano x Palestinos, 1970-71 (Setembro Negro)
62	22.000	Polônia, 1948-89 (seu próprio povo)
63	20.000	Síria, 1982 (contra islâmicos em Hama)
64	20.000	Guerra chinesa-vietnamita, 1979
65	19.000	Marrocos: Guerra contra a França, 1953-56 (3.000) e no Saara Ocidental, 1975 até o presente (16.000)
66	18.000	República do Congo, 1997-99
67	10.000	Iêmen Sul, 1986 (guerra civil)

*Todos os números foram arredondados.
Fontes: Z. Brzezinski, Out of Control: Global Turmoil on the Eve of the Twenty-first Century, 1993; S. Courtois, Le Livre Noir du Communism, 1997; G. Heinsohn, Lexikon der Völkermorde, 1999, 2^nd ed.; G. Heinsohn, Söhne und Weltmacht, 2006, 8th ed.; R. Rummel, Death by Government, 1994; M. Small and J.D. Singer, Resort to Arms: International and Civil Wars 1816-1980, 1982; M. White, "Death Tolls for the Major Wars and Atrocities of the Twentieth Century," 2003.


Este terrível inventário mostra que o número total de mortes em conflitos desde 1950 é de aproximadamente 85.000.000. Dessa soma, as mortes no conflito árabe-israelense desde 1950 incluem 32.000 mortes devido a ataques de estados árabes e 19.000 devido a ataques palestinos, ou seja: 51.000 ao todo. O número de árabes mortos é de aproximadamente 35.000, e os judeus israelenses 16.000.

Esses números mostram que, desde 1950, as mortes no conflito árabe-israelense representam apenas 0,06% do total de mortes em todos os conflitos no mesmo período, ou seja: só 1 a cada 1,700 mortos em conflitos desde 1950 morreram devido ao conflito árabe-israelense.

(Adicionando os 11.000 mortos na guerra da independência israelense, 1947-49, compostos de 5.000 árabes e de 6.000 israelenses, não se alteram estes números significativamente).

Numa perspectiva diferente, uns 11.000.000 de muçulmanos foram mortos violentamente desde 1948, dos quais 35.000 (ou 0,3 por cento) morreram durante os sessenta anos de lutas com Israel, ou seja: 1 a cada 315 fatalidades muçulmanas. Em contraste, mais de 90 por cento dos 11 milhões dos que pereceram foram mortos pelos próprios muçulmanos.

Comentários: (1) Apesar da relativa não-letalidade do conflito árabe-israelense, seu renome, notoriedade, complexidade, e centralidade diplomática provavelmente continuarão a lhe dar importância desproporcional na imaginação global. E a reputação de Israel continuará a pagar o preço. (2) Mesmo assim, isso ajuda a mostrar a estatística 1-em-1.700 como um corretivo, na esperança de que um dia, esta realidade exposta, permita ao conflito árabe-israelense tomar seu legítimo lugar, menos importante nas políticas mundiais.

Professor Heinsohn é o diretor do für de Raphael-Lemkin-Institut Xenophobie - und Genozidforschung da Universidade de Bremen.

Deir Yassin

Um dos versículos do missal anti-semita, exemplo prático de como uma mentira muitas vezes repetida acaba por se transformar em verdade oficial, é o “massacre” de Deir Yassin, episódio da guerra que os árabes moveram aos judeus logo após a aprovação do Plano de Partilha pela ONU.

Os anti-semitas, disfarçados de “anti-sionistas” e “apoiantes da causa palestiniana”, largam a designação “Deir Yassin”, com ar profundo e indignado e, embora não tenham uma ideia clara do que realmente aconteceu, fazem conta que sim e avançam alegremente pelo velhíssimo caminho da demonização do judeu.

Deir Yassin era uma aldeola árabe perto de Jerusalém, na estrada para Telaviv. Na primavera de 1948 os árabes tinham lançado a chamada “Guerra das Estradas” e a parte judaica de Jerusalém estava cercada excepto por essa estrada.

A 13 de Março de 1948, uma companhia árabe, constituída predominantemente por iraquianos tinha entrado na aldeia, com a intenção de fechar o garrote sobre Jerusalém.

Em 09 de Abril de 1948, uma companhia mista do Irgun e do Lehi atacou a aldeia a fim de a capturar e neutralizar os iraquianos.
Foram feitos avisos prévios à população de que devia abandonar a zona, agora transformada em objectivo militar, de facto a maioria da população saiu da aldeia.

Quando os paramilitares judaicos chegaram foram recebidos a tiro pelos iraquianos, muitos dos quais se tinham vestido de mulheres e se protegiam no meio delas, ardil que, como sabemos, continua a ser usado tanto no Líbano como em Gaza.
Os judeus responderam, e nos combates que se seguiram, a unidade do Irgun sofreu pesadas baixas (50 homens) mas conseguiu finalmente neutralizar os iraquianos, capturando alguns ainda vestidos de mulher.
Quando já se tinham rendido, um grupo deles voltou a fazer fogo com armas que mantinham escondidas debaixo das vestes. Muitos paramilitares do Irgun morreram e os restantes ripostaram, matando todos os prisioneiros.
Reacção normal… sem ir mais longe, em Aljubarrota os portugueses executaram centenas de prisioneiros gascões que se tinham rendido, quando a área dos trens foi atacada pelo Mestre de Alcântara.

Quando o Haganah chegou à aldeia encontrou os civis mortos e passou a ideia de que tinha havido um massacre. Alguns investigadores entendem que esta posição da Haganah foi pensada, uma vez que por um lado tinha interesse em fazer fugir os árabes de certas aldeias, espalhando rumores sobre a ferocidade dos judeus, e por outro, convinha-lhe isolar o Irgun, numa luta interna de ordem ideológica, já que a Haganah era de esquerda e o Irgun de direita.

A Cruz Vermelha foi chamada ao local e não encontrou prova de qualquer massacre, conclusão corroborada por um estudo feito em Julho de 1999, por investigadores árabes da Universidade de Birzeit, de Ramalah, segundo o qual não houve qualquer massacre mas sim um confronto militar no qual morreram 107 árabes (incluindo os iraquianos) em consequência do fogo cruzado. Ou sejam, o número de mortos é até inferior ao número de combatentes da companhia árabe que ocupou a aldeia.

De onde vem então a ideia do “massacre”?

Do mesmo local de onde vieram as ideias dos “massacres” de Jenin, e das manobras propagandísticas da ultima guerra com o Hezbolah: empolamento e distorção deliberadas para gerar indignação e estimular o ódio e a mobilização dos países árabes, neste caso a cargo da Rádio “Voz da Palestina”, cujo director, o Dr Hussein Khalidi afirmou que “nós temos o dever de capitalizar esta grande oportunidade”.

Na verdade foi com base na versão distorcida do Dr Hussein Khalidi que saiu um artigo no New York Times a divulgar ao mundo o “massacre” de Deir Yassin, suscitando várias declarações condenatórias das mais diversas personalidades, e basta recordar o que aconteceu no Verão passado com o “massacre” de Canaa, para se ter uma ideia das asneiras que as pessoas proferem, quando enfunadas pela ignorância convencida e pelas visões estrábicas do mundo.

Neste caso o tiro saiu aos árabes pela culatra porque a distorção dos factos lançou o pânico nos felas, contribuindo para engrossar o número de refugiados.
Isto foi confirmado num documentário da PBS (Os 50 anos de Guerra, 1993) que registou depoimentos de aldeões e protagonistas de Deir Yassin.

“Não houve violações. É tudo mentira. Não foram esventradas mulheres grávidas. Era propaganda, para que os árabes fugissem e os exércitos árabes pudessem invadir e expulsar os judeus”
(Mohammed Radwan, combatente árabe de Deir Yassin, , Middle East Times, 20 de Abril de 1998)

“A rádio árabe falou de mulheres a serem mortas e violadas, mas não é verdade…eu creio que a maior parte dos que morreram eram combatentes e mulheres e crianças que os ajudaram. Os lideres árabes cometeram um grande erro. Exagerando as atrocidades eles pretendiam encorajar as pessoas a lutar, mas acabaram por criar o pânico e as pessoas fugiram”
(Ayish Zeidan, aldeão de Deir Yassin,Daily Telegraph, 8Abril1998 )

Aliás Arafat, na sua biografia autorizada, refere expressamente que os exageros das histórias sobre Deir Yassin acabaram por provocar um efeito contrário aquele que se pretendia.

Deir Yassin não foi um massacre, tal como Jenin não foi um massacre, mas sim construções propagandísticas tendo em vista objectivos de guerra psicológica. Os muçulmanos fazem isto constantemente, procurando manipular as receptivas opiniões públicas ocidentais, jogando com os nossos interditos e tabus.
Os exemplos são vastos: usar escudos humanos, fazer explodir crianças, atacar deliberadamente alvos civis, transformar locais de culto, escolas e hospitais em posições de combate, louvar o culto da morte, etc.

Dias depois de Deir Yassin, deu-se um verdadeiro massacre que todavia está dentro do vasto recipiente de amnésia localizada ao dispor dos “apoiantes da causa palestiniana” (ódio a Israel, em português).Uma coluna médica do Hospital de Hadassah, foi atacada e metodicamente executados 77 médicos, enfermeiros e estudantes.
Mas destes não reza a história... eram meros "porcos judeus".

Jenin, o massacre que não houve

Foto aérea mostrando que apenas alguns prédios do campo de refugiados de Jenin foram destruídos na luta.





Jenin foi um dos 26 campos de refugiados nos territórios da Autoridade Palestina (18 na Judéia/Samaria e 8 na Faixa de Gaza) transformados nos últimos anos em fortalezas do terrorismo palestino. Desde o início da intifada de Al-Aksa, uma das células terroristas mais perigosas dos muçulmanos fanáticos funcionava em Jenin. Não foi por acaso que Jenin tornou-se conhecida como "fábrica do terror". "De todos os combatentes, nós éramos os mais bem preparados", disse o terrorista palestino Omar ao jornal egípcio Al-Ahram pouco após o término da luta em Jenin. "Nosso plano era criar uma armadilha para os soldados israelenses em Jenin, detonando cada um que entrasse no campo de refugiados".

Apesar das acusações contra Israel veiculadas em toda a mídia mundial, em que se chegou a falar de milhares de mortos entre a população civil, logo ficou claro que se tratava apenas de propaganda palestina. Israel evitou bombardear o campo de refugiados justamente para preservar a vida dos civis. Desse modo, os soldados israelenses tiveram que enfrentar uma dificílima luta no solo, o que resultou na morte de 23 deles. Dos 50 palestinos encontrados mortos nas ruínas, 45 estavam uniformizados e armados e apenas 5 eram civis.

Israel está sempre "na mira" da ONU
Muitos jornalistas divulgaram as alegações palestinas sobre centenas de cadáveres enterrados em valas comuns e sob os escombros das casas que teriam sido destruídas indiscriminadamente. O oficial israelense Joni Wolf, que combateu em Jenin, explica: "Os buldozeres eram chamados apenas quando víamos que um prédio estava ocupado por terroristas ou impedia o aceso a alguma posição importante. Além disso, duas vezes por dia havia um cessar-fogo e apelos eram feitos por alto-falantes para que os terroristas se entregassem, o que muitos fizeram. Mesmo depois disso, ainda esperávamos por algum tempo para ver se alguém mais sairia do prédio. Somente depois disso os buldozeres o demoliam".

"Mortos vivos" e "mortos mortos"
Para dar a impressão de que havia um maior número de vítimas em Jenin, os palestinos também encenaram sepultamentos para a mídia ocidental e para as organizações de defesa dos direitos humanos. Por exemplo, o exército israelense divulgou um filme mostrando que um palestino "morto" caiu da padiola em que estava sendo transportado e saiu correndo. Jornalistas israelenses também constataram que funcionários da AP tinham "abastecido" a vala comum dos "massacrados" com cadáveres retirados do cemitério de Jenin. Além disso, os habitantes foram ameaçados para não contarem aos investigadores nada a respeito da realidade da luta e das ações dos terroristas.




No escritório da UNWRA em Jenin um colete à prova de balas da ONU pendurado junto a quadros de "mártires" palestinos



A ONU administra os campos de refugiados
Antes que a ONU possa condenar Israel por um massacre que nunca aconteceu, ela deveria examinar a si mesma, procurando explicar como os campos de refugiados palestinos puderam se transformar em centros de terrorismo. No fogo cruzado das acusações contra Israel, esqueceu-se que os campos são administrados pela UNWRA (Agência de Socorro Para os Refugiados Palestinos), um organismo da ONU responsável pelos refugiados. "Aliás, há muitos anos perdura o escândalo da submissão da ONU à estratégia árabe de manter os campos de refugiados como abrigos temporários", diz o especialista israelense Dr. Shlomo Avineri. Ele explica a razão: "Apenas assim os palestinos e a UNWRA podem exigir a manutenção do status de refugiados. Dessa forma eles também podem continuar insistindo no direito de retorno dos refugiados a Israel". Por isso, a AP de Yasser Arafat nunca investiu no melhoramento da situação nos campos de refugiados, apesar de ter recebido apoio financeiro dos EUA e dos países da União Européia para essa finalidade. "Qualquer tentativa de reabilitação ou melhoramento das condições dos refugiados tem sido rejeitada pelos políticos árabes. Desse modo eles conservam conscientemente a miséria dos palestinos para não enfraquecerem suas exigências com relação a Israel", explica o Dr. Avineri.

12.500 palestinos são funcionários da ONU
O número elevado de palestinos que são funcionários da ONU (4.500 na Judéia/Samaria e 8.000 na Faixa de Gaza) causa estranheza. Os palestinos trabalham nas mais variadas atividades da ONU nos territórios (escolas, serviço social, escritórios) e são pagos por ela. Isso explica porque a ONU não fez nada contra a criação de centros de terrorismo nos campos de refugiados. Em outras palavras: os funcionários da ONU deixaram de observar conscientemente as atividades terroristas e até participaram delas.






A AP de Yasser Arafat nunca investiu na melhora da situação nos campos de refugiados, apesar de ter recebido apoio financeiro dos EUA e dos países da União Européia para essa finalidade.

A ONU sempre mostra compreensão pelo lado palestino, mas não pelo israelense. No mês de março (2002), terroristas palestinos assassinaram 130 israelenses e não se ouviu nenhuma crítica por parte da ONU. Na véspera da páscoa, 28 judeus perderam suas vidas no atentado contra o Hotel Park em Netania. A ONU condenou os palestinos por isso? "O derramamento de sangue de ambos os lados deve ser interrompido", disse, como sempre, o Secretário-Geral Kofi Annan. Mas, o que Israel pode esperar da ONU, se dos seus 189 países-membros 52 são nações muçulmanas e inúmeras outras são alinhadas com elas.

IDF investigation: Egyptians took part in attack near Eilat

Three of the Islamic terrorists who perpetrated the attack are not Palestinians but Egyptians. And they were aided not only by Bedouin Arabs in the Sinai, but also by Egyptian Army soldiers

The IDF did everything in its power to prevent Egyptian troops from getting hurt in last Thursday's multiple terror attacks near Eilat, inquiries conducted by both the IDF and the Egyptian army showed. The IDF also found that at least three of the terrorists were Egyptian citizens.

Head of the General Staff's Planning Branch Amir Eshel, who traveled to Cairo early this week to present to Egyptian officials the findings of the IDF's initial investigation, even brought photographic evidence to the fact.

Related stories:

• Report: Al-Qaeda group behind attack
• Egypt: Recalling our envoy was never an option
• Op-ed: Yes, apologize to Egypt
• Op-ed: No apology to Egypt
  

The evidence shows that contrary to Egyptian media reports, the IDF's attack helicopters avoided hitting Egyptian military vehicles and troops stationed at the border.

Car attacked by the terrorists who wore IDF uniforms (Photo: Defense Ministry)

Videos shot from the aircraft show that the troops intentionally diverted fire from the Egyptian all-terrain vehicles and soldiers towards open areas near the border base, from which the terrorist sniper fire originated.

The terrorists, who positioned themselves a few dozen meters from the Egyptian military post, launched an RPG rocket at one of the helicopters, and directed machine gun fire at it.

In addition, an examination of the bodies of the terrorists killed by the IDF clearly showed that at least three of them were Egyptian citizens. One was a member of a radical Egyptian group who was tried in the country.

From left: Maj.-Gen. Rousso, Defense Minister Barak and Chief of Staff Gantz at scene of attack (Photo: Defense Ministry)

He escaped from prison during the first days of the Egyptian revolution, when several Cairo prisons were broken into as hundreds of imprisoned Jihadist terrorists escaped to Sinai. Many had also reached the Gaza Strip and Egypt is demanding that Hamas extradite them.

The Egyptian terrorists joined Palestinian operatives from the Popular Resistance Committees and together they perpetrated the coordinated attacks. Israel also has further proof that joint Palestinian-Egyptian terror cells were in Sinai for weeks and were assisted by Bedouins in the region.

Egyptian ignored terrorists at first

Also according to the IDF investigation, the Egyptian troops noticed the presence of the terrorists even before the attack was launched, but did nothing about it. Only later that evening did an officer and a few soldiers leave their post, evidently to stop the ongoing sniper fire. The terrorists, who were wearing uniforms similar to those of the Egyptian army, resisted.

Possibly at this moment, when the troops and the operatives merged together, the Egyptian soldiers were shot. It remains unclear who fired the deadly shots, as the soldiers' bodies have yet to be autopsied by the Egyptian authorities.

Protesters in front of Israeli embassy in Cairo (Photo: AFP)

Israel has photographic evidence that GOC Southern Command Maj.Gen. Tal Russo personally ordered the forces fighting on the ground and in the air to be careful not to hit the Egyptian military post and its soldiers.

Israel was aware of these facts last week, but decided against releasing them in order to avoid embarrassing the Egyptian army and to dodge a media dispute over the versions of the events.

However, the information was submitted to Egypt's Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, which in turn invited an IDF representative, Maj.-Gen. Eshel, to present the findings in Cairo. Some of the findings were published in an Egyptian newspaper on Wednesday.

The Big Pharaoh and the average Egyptian

-- Mirror? What mirror?

-- Welcome suicide bombers!

Big Pharaoh (hat tip PJMedia) lives up to his reputation for straight shooting in his analysis of an Egyptian website poll showing that 49% of those who voted believe that the Mossad blew up Dahab — twice as many people as any other possibility. He discusses the response of a well educated friend:

“Israeli tourists don’t go to Eilat (a southern Israeli resort) anymore. Dahab and Sinai is much more cheaper and so they come to Egypt instead of spending their holidays in Israel” she explained.

“So you’re telling me Israel targeted a resort that is frequented by its own people and could have killed Israelis just to stop them from sunbathing in Sinai???” I asked.

“Yes. They could kill a few of their citizens to save the tourism industry there” she shot back.

Now this logic is particularly interesting since it concerns purely internal Israeli financial calculations. By this logic, Egyptians do not even figure in the calculus, it’s all about Israeli economic interests.

As students of conspiracy theory regularly point out, the way that people imagine the conspirators represents a projection that tells you about the way they think. Here a member of the Egyptian elite (on top of the prime divider) contemplates a government strategy that, for a minor economic advantage, kills a couple of dozen people (including “their own”) without a second thought. That’s not Islamic fanaticism, that’s classic aristocratic contempt for the rest of mankind.

Moreover, the sheer casualness of the analysis — of course Israelis would kill a few of their own civilians for an uptick in the Eilat tourist trade — gives a stark insight into one half of the Moebius strip of cognitive egocentrism. The Israelis are capable of any disgusting deed, including knocking off their own people for temporary economic gain to the owning class. Never mind that they will sacrifice their own soldiers’ lives to avoid casualties to the enemy’s civilians. No wonder Jenin must be a “massacre.” If it were seen for what it was, how could people go on with this kind of analysis. No wonder there can’t be peace between these people, when one side cannot begin to imagine what’s going on on the other side — and the two sides are not! the same.

I wanted to bang my head against a wall!

I have said countless times before that the root cause of the darkness we’re living in is our unwillingness to look in the mirror and start criticizing ourselves and the cult of death we allowed to infect our society. We don’t want to admit that many of our children are willing to kill themselves in order to massacre others. We don’t want to admit that religion needs renewal and reform to suit the year 2006 and not 1006. We don’t want to admit anything of that. Do you know why ladies and gentlemen we don’t want to do that? We’re just busy and in a constant state of denial. We’re busy hating America. We’re busy blaming Israel.

We are also living in a disgusting state of narcissism. We think we are the best nation handpicked by God. Our nations have the best religion approved by heaven. Nothing wrong can be in us, nothing wrong can be in our culture, and nothing wrong can be in our religious beliefs. It must be the evil “outsiders.”

This is a good example of “chosenness as privilege” rather than as “responsibility.” It gives an excellent view of the “normative” view of chosenness that historically has informed both Muslim and Christian supersessionist thinking — we are the new chosen people who replace the old (for Christians, Jews; for Muslims, Jews and Christians). When one then projects that envious and imperialist notion of chosenness back onto the Jews, one gets the widespread dislike of Jews for being so arrogant as to think of themselves as the chosen people.

There is no doubt whatsoever that all Egyptians condemned this terrorist attack and were shocked when it happened. Yet I am not really talking about this specific attack. I am referring to our general condition that gave birth to murderers from Bali to New York. Many are to blame here. Our repressive governments, the economic disaster they created, the humiliation millions of youth are feeling, and above all the deadly religious rhetoric that wants to draw us hundreds of years backward.

Allow me to add to your list, a media (both Arab and Western) so eager to believe the worst about the Israelis, so ready to forgive any excess from the Palestinians (chosen people of the left), that when the bombings first started many people — even good-hearted people — they found it relatively easy to say, “what choice do they have?” So in addition to your own cultural problems, Big Pharaoh, you have a supposedly enlightened West eagerly (if unconsciously) feeding your people’s own worst instincts. It’s hard to fight that.

I thought we’ll finally start looking in the mirror once we ourselves get bombed by terrorists. I thought that once we get torn into pieces by suicide bombers we’ll realize that the Palestinian suicide bomber will not end up in paradise but in the lowest pit of hell. Unfortunately, I was wrong. We’re still so busy to look in the mirror and see the ugly face there.

One could restate this in terms of a European lament: “Once the suicide terrorism has hit us, then we’ll rethink our championing of the Palestinians.” But Madrid and London, like 9-11, had mixed results. Many rushed to appease and self-criticize (really to blame the West), and only some people began to rethink the situation rather than to continue to slide into moral disorientation. Apparently there are too many psychological factors lying behind the demonization of Israel and the “chosenness” of the Palestinians for a mere suicide bombing or two of one’s own people to cause such a massive paradigm shift.

My condolences to you, your people, and your painful predicament, and my apologies for the unconscionable ways in which my culture’s supposed progressives contribute so irresponsibly to all our suffering, yours, ours, the Muslims who must live through this wave of fascist theocracy, and, perhaps in first place, the suffering of the Palestinian people.

Uh-Oh, A Foretaste of The New Democratic Egypt: Radical Nationalists and “Liberal Islamists”

by Barry Rubin

young child, posed by his father, stands amidst the crowds [Tahrir Square, Egypt] wearing a mock suicide vest and holding a mock 'katyusha' rocket

There is still confusion regarding some details of the terrorist assault by Gaza Palestinians affiliated with al-Qaida, from Egypt, into Israel, and then back into Egypt. Israeli survivors of the attack say the terrorists were wearing Egyptian army uniforms.

At one point, either confused or after the terrorists hid among a group of Egyptian soldiers dressed the same way, Israeli soldiers fired and reportedly killed three real Egyptian soldiers. Israel has apologized in line with international norms.

Amr Moussa, the man most likely to be Egypt’s next president and known for his hatred of Israel and strong dislike of the United States (a radical nationalist who opposes Islamism but might make a deal with the Brotherhood to get into power and to govern thereafter) gives a foretaste of his demagagic tendencies if elected. He tweeted:

“Israel has to realize that the days in which our sons are killed without an appropriate and strong reaction are forever gone.”

That sounds rather like a threat of war. Oh, he’ll be just fine running Egypt, right? For the record, let’s note that Egypt failed to guard its border, the shortcoming that made the whole shoot-out happen in the first place. Presumably Egypt won’t be apologizing to Israel. In fact, it has withdrawn its ambassador.

(A personal note. A couple of year ago, an Egyptian diplomat invited me to lunch in Tel Aviv. One of the things he said was that he had advised Israeli Arab citizens to reverse their policy of refusing to join Israel’ army. Then, he explained, they could get military training and have guns to use against Israel some day. They rejected the idea, he concluded. I’m not joking. That’s the way people really talk in the Middle East when they think it isn’t going to be reported. I should add that I never agreed on any confidentiality in that conversation.)

Nor will anyone in Egypt–not a single group, writer, or intellectual–publicly condemn the attack on Israel even though it was carried out by an al-Qaida affiliate that also wants an Islamist revolution in Egypt. Of course, the Egyptian military is attacking local al-Qaida revolutionaries within the country. But we are back to the pre-Sadat standard: Anything that kills Israelis is good.

What will happen when Hamas attacks Israel with rockets, mortars, and attempted cross-border attacks? Israel retaliates. President Moussa will again threaten war and while he probably would not go so far (“probably” does not make one feel secure), he would suspend the Egypt-Israel peace treaty or suspend the Israeli ambassador. Wouldn’t that make him a hero? And certainly Egypt would let money, Egyptian volunteers, and weapons flow freely into the Gaza Strip to help the “brothers” there confront “Zionist aggression.” The Arab world would cheer.

Here’s a good summary to remember this change: Hamas is to Egypt as to Hizballah is to Syria, a client and proxy terrorist group with which to hit Israel while avoiding direct confrontation. There are unconfirmed reports that Iran is cutting back on funding for Hamas–since Hamas wants Iran’s ally, the Syrian regime, to be overthrown. If that story is true, Egypt will be all the more important as Hamas’s new patron.

And what would President Obama do? One shudders to think but it might have something to do with playing golf.

Perhaps, though, Moussa won’t be president. Perhaps someone else will win the election. Either way, though, the president will have to deal with a strengthened parliament that will be around 40 percent radical Islamist, 10 percent far left, and much of the rest radical nationalist.

The New York Times has offered us, however, a definitional solution to the problem by creating a new political ideology. And I predict that we will be hearing a great deal about this new “movement” : the “liberal Islamist.”

“Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh, a liberal Islamist and former member of the Muslim Brotherhood, released a statement asking the ruling military council to deal with the incident as a matter of national security and demanded the expulsion of the Israeli ambassador as well as a halt of Egyptian gas shipments to Israel.”

Actually, though, Fotouh’s political role is not quite clear. He poses as a centrist nice guy who has split away from the Brotherhood. I rather suspect he is still a Brotherhood leader under cover. The Brotherhood promised not to run a candidate for president and Fotouh’s “split” give it a plausible deniability. But after all won’t the Brotherhood leaders and supporters be voting for Fotouh and reconcile with him immediately thereafter? Is there any real difference between Fotouh and the Brotherhood on substantive issues? Presumably “moderation” means going a bit slower in transforming Egypt into an Islamist state.

Of course Amr Moussa is more a representative of the old Egypt than anyone else in Egyptian politics today. But he is popular and demagoguery will make him more popular. Of course there are genuinely moderate people and parties that want to improve living standards, clean up corruption, and do other good things. The problem is, however, who will end up being in power.

If Amr Moussa is elected and the Brotherhood becomes the single biggest party in parliament we could well say “The revolution has been betrayed.” That would not be the first time in history that has happened. Others would say “The revolution has been fulfilled.” This is precisely what happened in Iran. Every day I hear from friends in Egypt how frightened or angry or upset or worried they are. I hope things will turn out well; as an analyst I must report what I see.

Incientally, even for a Middle East cynic like me the outpouring of Arab media support for the attack on Israel is surprising. After all, it is an al-Qaida operation and it would have been easy to pretend moderation, winning some brownie points in the West, by going tsk-tsk at the evil al-Qaida as opposed to the “wonderful” Hamas and Fatah.

Nope, even the official Palestinian Authority newspaper–rather than lay low to promote a nice image on the eve of the UN independence debate–praised the attack and cold-blooded murder of Israeli civilians. Presumably they don’t feel any need to pretend to be moderate since they know much of the Western media, academics, and even governments will give them a free pass no matter what they do or say.

Incidentally, NowLebanon, an excellent moderate source of news, estimates that almost 20,000 people have been killed in the “Arab Spring” (or as the Washington Post calls it, “Arab Transition,” disorders, mostly in Libya. The “Arab Spring” is not being followed by an Arab Summer, and next to come is the fall.

Arab Immigration into the Coastal Plains of Israel (the Sharon) During the British Mandate

According to the Arabic- Palestinian propaganda, the Palestinians are the indigenous people of the country called Judea in the past, then Palestina under the British Mandte.

This article and others in the future will prove this propaganda is an attempt to rewrite history in order to eliminate the Jewish state.

Ma’ayan Hess-Ashkenazi researched the Arabic immigration to the Sharon, and this is what he found:

The Sharon area lies between the Tanninim Creek in the north and the Yarkon stream in the south, and between the foot of the mountains of Samaria in the east and the Mediterranean Sea in the west. According to data published by the Mandate Government, the Arabic population in the Sharon increased more than three-fold during its time. At the beginning of the Mandate period there were about 10,000 Arabs (mostly Muslim) in the Sharon, and in 1944 there were more than 30,000. By the time the Mandate was ended, in 1947, more Arabs had moved to the Sharon.

Demographic sources for the British Mandate period in Israel include the 1922 and 1931 censuses and data on the rural population from 1945. In addition to the British sources researchers can access sources of the Jewish settlement during the Mandate period, including the Haganah archive, the Jewish press, and studies conducted during the period, as well as personal interviews with people from that era.

The total data published by the Mandate government show that the number of Arabs grew from 752,048 in 1914 to 1,294,000 in 1944. The Arabic population nearly doubled in 30 years.

Data on natural increase published by the Mandate government show a significant natural increase in the Arabic population. Among the Muslims, the natural increase rose from 10 children per 1000 population to 29.1 children per 1000 population. Among the Christians, the natural increase reached 30.1 children per 1000 population by the end of the British Mandate. The main reason for this increase was the decrease in mortality rate from 25-30 per 1000 to 20 per 1000.

Scholars are divided over the contribution of Arabic immigration into Israel to the increase in population during the Mandate period. According to data published by the Mandate government, the natural increase in Muslim population contributed 88% of the total increase, whereas immigration contributed 12%; and among the Christians, natural increase contributed 72% of the total population increase, whereas immigration contributed 28%.

An investigation of the statistical data of the Mandate government shows differences in the rates of increase of Arabic population between areas that enjoyed economic and demographic development, such as the Coastal Plains and the Sharon, and areas that did not enjoy such development, such as the district of Jennin. In Jennin, the average natural increase stood at 70%, while in the Coastal area and the Sharon it was several hundreds of percent.

The Mandate government data show that at the beginning of the period, there were about 10,000 Arabs living in the Sharon area, some nomads or semi-nomads, and most in permanent settlements. At the end of the Mandate period there were about 30,000 Arabs in the Sharon area, with some 20,000 living in permanent settlements and about 10,000 nomads.

A careful examination of the population growth in the Sharon concludes that there was a difference between the Mandate government’s rates of population increases for the whole country and those for the Sharon area. In the Sharon, immigration contributed significantly to the population increase. This study examined 35 Arabic villages and suburbs in cities of mixed population. In 1922, 9,892 Arabs were living in the villages and the suburbs, in 1931 their number grew to 14,261, and in 1944 to 25,930. Further growth between 1945 and 1948 must be added. According to these data, the population increase in these villages and suburbs between 1922 and 1931 ranged from 37% to 510%, while from 1931 to 1944, the population increase in these villages and suburbs ranged from 28% to 138%. It should be noted that there were more settlements where the population increased by 100% or more than by a lower percentage.

For example, in Abou Kashakh the population numbered 200 in 1922, and 1,007 in 1931, an increase by 400% .In 1931 it numbered 1,007 and in 1944 it was 2,400, an increase of 138%.. In the Faliq area, on the other hand, there were no Arabs until 1944, when 1,030 of them settled in the place. In Sheikh Mounis there were 664 residents in 1922, growing to 1,154 in 1931 and 1,930 in 1944, an increase of 67% in 13 years and 190% in 22 years.

The Causes for Immigration

Draining of the Sharon Swamps

The Jewish National Fund, together with the Mandate Health Department, began draining the Sharon swamps in the early 1920’s. The drainage checked the spread of malaria and decreased the mortality rate among the Arabs in the area. The drainage project required hundreds of workers, and Arabs work immigrants from the Arabic world who were employed in the works subsequently settled in the area.

The Development of the Citrus Industry

Planting and tending the orchards and the fruit created employment and attracted Arabs from the Arabic world to the area. The planted areas grew from 70,000 dounams (17,500 acres) in 1931 to 128,000 dounams (32,000 acres) in 1946.

Construction Works

The establishment of the Jewish towns of Binyamina, Kfar Sabba, Ra’anana, Herzeliya, Ramat Hasharon, Giv’at Shaul, and others, brought about a construction boom which created employment for hundreds of workers, attracting workers from the Arabic world. Coarse sand was one of the materials used in construction, attracting camel owning Bedouins to work in its transportation.

New Water Sources

The fourth factor which encouraged Arab immigration into the Sharon was the water drilling projects which improved the water supply and increased the area’s agricultural output and its population sustainment and absorption rate.

The Composition of the Arabic Workforce in the Sharon

Farmers

The workforce in the Sharon was comprised of Arabic farmers whose economic situation in the years 1926 – 1932 suffered from cattle diseases, low rainfall, low prices for agricultural produce, and locust attacks. The work places created by the Jewish National Fund, the Mandate government, the Citrus industry, and the construction boom saved them from certain hunger.

Bedouins

Documents of the Hagana Organisation indicate that members of Bedouin tribes from the Negev, the Sinai, and Trans-Jordan were employed in these works and ended up settling in the Sharon.

Horanni’s

Towards the end of the 1920’s, Arab workers from the Horan region in the south of Syria began arriving in the country, including the Sharon. According to the Syrian Governor they numbered between 30,000 and 35,000. The Hebrew newspaper “Davar” reported on 2 July 1934 that 25,000 Horanni’s “made Aliya [immigrated] into the country”.

Ten years after the Mandate was established, the Arabic population in the Sharon had grown by 50%. It is impossible to reasonably explain such increase by natural causes alone. The huge increase in Arabic population was even more remarkable in villages close to Jewish settlements, whose number grew from 25 to 77 during the Mandate period. In Bir Addas, for example, which is situated close to the Jewish town of Magdi-el, the population increased by 216%, with 40% of the village’s men working in neighbouring settlements.

In contrast, Bedouins and Arabic farmers from the mountainous region, which was hit by natural disasters, preferred to move to cities such as Jaffa and Haifa, where the living standards were higher.

During the Arabic Revolt, in 1936—1939, Arabic fighters from neighbouring Arabic countries arrived in Samaria, where they ended up settling following the suppression of the revolt by the Mandate government.

World War II hit the citrus industry hard when it brought an end to the exporting of citrus to Europe, but the British Army provided employment to the Arabs in the construction and maintenance of the bases it established in the Sharon. The British Army required food, and its demand for agricultural produce rescued the Arabic agriculture in the Sharon. The need for manpower in the British bases and camps attracted more Arab workers from the Arabic countries. The British brought with them in the 1940’s Arabic workers from Egypt who settled near Kfar Tzur south of Netanya, establishing a settlement that numbered hundreds of inhabitants. Bedouins, Egyptians, and Horanni’s, who worked in the British camps and in the industries that were established in Netanya after the war, settled in Um Haled near Netanya. In addition, during the war, villagers moved from the mountains and established settlements in the Sharon. Some were descended from Egyptians who were settled in the country by Mouhammad ‘Ali during his rule of the area (1832—1840). Data on the rural regions published by the Mandate Government in 1944/5 listed Bedouin tribes that settled in the Sharon, such as ‘Arab-a-nussirat, ‘Arab-al-marmara, and more.

The spread of Tel Aviv in the direction of Sheikh Mounis during the 1930’s and 1940’s, increased Arabic immigration to the village. Its population grew from 664 in 1922 to 1,930 in 1944. Many of these new residents were Bedouins who arrived from neighbouring countries and found employment in construction, sand transportation, and industry. Many of the village residents supplied agricultural produce to the markets in Tel Aviv.

Summary

Jewish settlement in the Sharon during the British Mandate period and development works by the government brought about the elimination of malaria and the provision of medical services which improved the health conditions in the Arabic villages, reduced the infant and adult mortality rates, and increased the longevity rate. New and varied industries created an abundance of work places, attracting Arabs and Bedouins to the Sharon, many of them from Egypt. During World War II, the British Army further created employment and increased demand for agricultural produce. The increase in sources for livelihood brought about an increase in the Arabic population in the Sharon, from 10,000 to 30,000 in less than 30 years.

more reading:

Kafar Canna was a Jewish town for almost 3,000 years DR.Rivka Shpak Lissak

Nazareth Was A Jewish Town for Hundreds of Years

Chapter 6 - The Population's Composition During the Crusaders' Period (1099 - 1260 ) Part Two / DR.Rivka Shpak Lissak

Chapter 3 - The Failure of Forced Conversion of Jews Under Christian - Byzantine Occupation (324 - 640 CE) DR.Rivka Shpak Lissak

Chapter 7 - The Population's Composition During the Mamluk Period (1260 - 1516 ):Elimination of the Christian Majority Part One

Jewish Bodies Found in Medieval Well in Norwich

Farhud Memories: Bagdad's 1941 Slaughter of the Jews / Sarah Ehrlich

Deir Hanna Was the Jewish Kfar Hanun(or Kfar Yohanna) / DR.Rivka Shpak Lissak

Chapter 7, Part Two - The Ethnic - Religous Composition of the Population During the Mamluk Period, 1260 - 1516/ DR.Rivka Shpak Lissak

Arabic Fassouta Was Once A Jewish Village /DR.Rivka Shpak Lissak