[net.religion.jewish] Pro-Arab Rhetoric vis a vis Egypt

abeles@mhuxm.UUCP (J. Abeles (Bellcore, Murray Hill, NJ)) (10/21/85)

> > Anyway, I am not going to apologize for the anti-US behavior of Egypt, as
> > you have virtually done.  If the Mubarak government feels that it cannot
> > act as the ally of the US that it is (receiving $2 billion in annual aid,
> > and relying on us to keep the Soviets out since 1971, not to mention 
> > keeping Israeli troops out of Cairo in 1973) I am not going to help them
> > pursue a self-serving opportunistic agenda.
> 
> Israel is a very close ally of the U.S. which has and continues to receive
> massive financial and military aid from the U.S. and still, the U.S. has
> to defend Egypt, another ally, against Israel? 
> Israel must be a very unusual ally.
>    Farzin Mokhtarian
>      
This is insidiously misleading.  Those who aren't well-informed on the
Israel-Arab wars stand to be manipulated by Mokhtarian's remarks.
First of all, while it is true that Israel could have reached Cairo
and Damascus (according to military analysts) in 1973, it is quite
a misrepresentation of the truth to suggest that and Arab country
needs to be defended against Israel.  While I will admit that that
may be the perception of some in the Arabist camp, I would like to
remind you that Israel had sought a peace treaty with the Arab
states from 1948 until 1978 (or 1979), when Egypt finally sat
down at the peace table.  Also, it was not the pre-state Israelis
who attacked the Arabs following the Partition in May 1947.  Rather,
the Arabs could not tolerate any Jewish state in the region, in
spite of the fact that there had always been large populations of
Jews in the Middle East in general and in Palestine in particular.
So it is the Arabs who have attacked Israel, and who have repeatedly
proclaimed their ambition of driving the Israelis "into the sea"
to the world, and most certainly not the Israelis who have aspired
to destroy any Arab state.

It is true that the U. S. also gives heavy financial support to
Israel.  However, Israel has acted quite differently towards the
U. S. than has Egypt as represented by the most recent events.
There have never been massive anti-U. S. demonstrations by
"students" in Israel as there were yesterday (October 20) in
Egypt.  Need I point out the dismaying similarity to events
in Iran preceding the establishment of the most backward
regime in the world?

There is, in fact, quite a bit of doubt over who benefits more
from this relationship, the U. S. or Israel.  One analysis
by Edward Teller (quoted yesterday on PBS's Firing Line
with William Buckley) has it that the U. S. could not hold
out from war with the Soviet Union over the Middle East for
more than five years following any (G-d forbid!) destruction
of Israel.  This is because without Israel, there is no
democracy in the Mideast which has the right to defend itself
against Soviet aggression.  Without Israel an "Exxon War"
would ensue as the Soviet Russians advance into the region.
You may not get the entire gist of this scenario from the
above, but there can be no disagreement with the conclusion
that Israel is the only democracy in the Mideast and therefore
the only democracy which can legitimately use military force
to oppose the Soviets should they threaten Israel.

By the way, Israel is probably the third most powerful military
force in the world, owing to the regretful need to mobilize
virtually the entire population to fight the Arabs.  Unfortunately
for them it is a fact of life because their neighbors have
repeatedly and viciously threatened them continuously with
destruction.  It is ridiculous to imagine that Israel and
Egypt are acting equally responsibly as allies of the U. S.
I would be willing to say, however, that Egypt as an Arab
state seems unable to act rationally because of the vicious
opposition it would face from its "allies," the other Arab
states.  But actually, based on such things as anti- U. S.
demonstrations by "university students" it appears more
likely that in Egypt, where peace is concerned, their hearts
just aren't in it.