European Misreading of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Finnish Foreign Minister Tuomioja – A Case Study (JCPA-JERUSALEM CENTER FOR PUBLIC AFFAIRS) Vol. 4, No. 27 Jerusalem Issue Brief by Efraim Karsh 07/12/05)
Source: http://www.jcpa.org/brief/brief004-27.htm
JCPA-Jerusalem Center Public Affairs
JCPA-Jerusalem Center Public Affairs Articles-Index-Top
Publishers-Index-Top
Next year Finland will assume the EU´s rotating presidency,
making Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja a player in the
organization´s Middle Eastern policy. Tuomioja´s views are
representative of a deeper undercurrent in contemporary European
criticism of Israel, one that combines factual ignorance and
misconceptions about the Arab-Israeli conflict with latent animosity
borne out of the Continent´s millenarian legacy of anti-Semitism.
There is no "wall" between Israel and the West Bank, but rather
a security fence not dissimilar to that existing along the Finnish-
Russian border. The security fence actually enhances the Roadmap´s
chances of success since it envisages the end of Palestinian
terrorism as a prerequisite for progress toward peace.
The pan-Arab invasion of the newly proclaimed State of Israel in
1948 had far less to do with winning independence for the indigenous
Palestinian population than with the desire of the Arab regimes for
territorial aggrandizement. Transjordan´s King Abdullah wanted to
incorporate substantial parts of mandatory Palestine; Egypt wanted
to lay its hands on southern Palestine. Neither Egypt nor Jordan
allowed Palestinian self-determination in the parts of Palestine
they had occupied.
Islamists inveigh against the Jewish State of Israel not out of
concern for a Palestinian right to national self-determination but
as part of a holy war to prevent the loss of a part of the "House of
Islam."
Islam´s war for world mastery is a traditional, indeed
venerable, quest, and is far from over. Within this grand scheme,
the struggle between Israel and the Palestinians is but a single
element, and one whose supposed centrality looms far greater in
Western than in Islamic eyes.
The analogy between Zionism and Nazism has never stood the most
basic historical test. How many Germans were murdered by Jewish
suicide bombers in Berlin´s cafes during the 1940s? How many
Palestinians were herded like cattle into trains and transported
into death camps where they were systematically exterminated in gas
chambers? None.
In an interview with the Finnish news magazine Suomen Kuvalehti on
June 3, 2005, Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja gave his prognosis of
the Middle East peace process based on a visit to Israel and the
Palestinian territories last April.
The interview is noteworthy for two main reasons. Next year Finland
will assume the EU´s rotating presidency, thus making Tuomioja a
player in the organization´s Middle Eastern policy at an important
juncture in the region´s history. In addition, Tuomioja´s views are
representative of a deeper undercurrent in contemporary European
criticism of Israel, one that combines factual ignorance and
misconceptions about the Arab-Israeli conflict with latent animosity
borne out of the Continent´s millenarian legacy of anti-Semitism.
In a previous interview with Suomen Kuvalehti in August 2001,
Tuomioja denounced Israel´s attempts to protect its citizens from
the terror war launched by Arafat´s Palestinian Authority in
September 2000, comparing Israeli defensive measures to the Nazi
persecution of European Jewry: "It is quite shocking that some
implement the same kind of policy toward the Palestinians which they
themselves were victims of in the 1930s."
In his latest interview, Tuomioja ignores altogether the Palestinian
terror war launched shortly after the PA was offered an independent
state in most of the West Bank and Gaza with its capital in
Jerusalem, painting a distorted and surrealistic picture of the
conflict.
Offering Erroneous and Misleading Information and Ignoring
Elementary Facts
Interview: "Months following Arafat´s death went by in a hopeful
atmosphere: the Palestinians elected a new president, Mahmoud Abbas,
in January. Yet now the situation is jammed in one place. According
to Tuomioja...´There are approximately as many roadblocks as before
and all political prisoners that were promised to be freed have not
been freed....There is a widespread suspicion on whether Israel
wishes to hold onto the peace plan at all.´"
Initial prisoner release: There are no political prisoners in
Israeli jails. All Palestinian prisoners whose release is demanded
by the PA are either convicted terrorists, or suspected terrorists
awaiting trial, or planners and perpetrators of other acts of
violence. Of these, 500 were released on February 21, 2005, while
another 400 were released four months later, on June 2, 2005.
Transfer of cities to the PA´s responsibility: All military
checkpoints, closures, and curfews were removed from Jericho on
March 15, 2005, and Tulkarm on March 21, 2005, despite the PA´s
failure to combat terrorism as required by the Roadmap.
Removing roadblocks to ease movement: In January 2004 there were
25 security crossings throughout the West Bank. The Israel Defense
Forces have removed 13 of these crossings and an additional 87
roadblocks, leaving today 12 security crossings and 66 roadblocks -
an over 50 percent decrease. In addition, Israel has introduced
advanced technological means at the crossings which allow for quick
and efficient security checks, and has also improved the conditions
at the crossings, adding roofs, clinics, and drinking stations.
Israel´s Security Fence
Interview: "Israel is also continuing the building of the wall and
is planning to expand settlements. Tuomioja points out that it is
completely against the peace plan, the so-called Roadmap, and makes
a viable Palestinian state impossible."
There is no "wall" between Israel and the West Bank, but rather a
security fence not dissimilar to that existing along the Finnish-
Russian border. Less than three percent of the planned 720-kilometer-
long anti-terrorist barrier (or a mere twenty kilometers) will be
constructed of concrete, designed not only to block terrorists from
infiltrating, but also to prevent them from shooting at Israeli
vehicles traveling on main highways, alongside the pre-1967 "green
line." The misnomer "wall" was introduced into the international
discourse by Palestinian propaganda, so as to delegitimize this anti-
terrorist measure by falsely associating it with such negative
symbols as the "Berlin Wall."
The sole reason for the security fence is the reduction of terrorist
attacks, whether in the form of explosive-rigged vehicles, or
shootings at Israeli vehicles, or suicide bombers seeking to enter
Israel with the intention of murdering innocent civilians.
The security fence actually enhances the Roadmap´s chances of
success since it envisages the end of Palestinian terrorism as a
prerequisite for progress toward peace. The fence has done more than
any other single factor to reduce this terrorism, with Israeli
fatalities dropping over a three-year period by 75 percent, largely
as a result of the fence.
Palestinian "Rage"
Interview: "Tuomioja believes that although, for instance, absolute
poverty creates conflicts, it carries less significance in creating
terrorism than humiliations, powerlessness, and rage. These are
channeled into support and understanding to extremist movements and
fanaticism."
In the entire two decades of Israeli occupation preceding the Oslo
accords, some 400 Israelis were murdered; since the conclusion of
that "peace" agreement, nearly four times as many have lost their
lives in terrorist attacks. If "humiliations, powerless, and rage"
were the causes of terrorism, why was terrorism sparse during the
years of actual occupation, why did it increase dramatically with
the prospect of the end of the occupation, and why did it escalate
into open war upon Israel´s most far-reaching concessions ever in
the July 2000 Camp David summit?
The bleak answer is that for Arafat and the Palestine Liberation
Organization (PLO) leadership, the Oslo process has always been a
strategic means not to a two-state solution - Israel and a
Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza - but to the
substitution of a Palestinian state for the State of Israel.
From the moment of his arrival in Gaza in July 1994, Arafat set out
to build an extensive terrorist infrastructure in flagrant violation
of the Oslo accords. Arafat refused to disarm the terrorist groups
Hamas and Islamic Jihad as required by the Oslo accords and tacitly
approved the murder of hundreds of Israelis by these groups. He
created a far larger Palestinian army (the so-called police force)
than was permitted by the accords. He reconstructed the PLO´s old
terrorist apparatus, mainly under the auspices of the Tanzim, which
is the military arm of Fatah (the PLO´s largest constituent
organization). He frantically acquired prohibited weapons with large
sums of money donated to the PA by the international community for
the benefit of the civilian Palestinian population; and he
eventually resorted to outright mass violence, first in September
1996 and then in September 2000 with the launch of his war of terror.
This was accompanied by systematic indoctrination of Palestinians,
and especially the youth, against the State of Israel, Jews, and
Judaism - all in flagrant violation of their obligations under Oslo.
Islam´s War for World Mastery
Interview: "Tuomioja does not wish to be quite as dramatic as the
former French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, who called the
Middle East conflict ´the mother of all the conflicts in the world.´
On the other hand, in his view Villepin hit the nail on the
head....´Of course it is reflected into the safety of the Finns as
well. Terrorism is a global phenomenon. All countries can be pulled
into it.´"
The perception of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict as the main
trigger of Arab and Islamic terrorism is conceptually and
historically misconceived. Violence was an integral part of Middle
Eastern political culture long before the advent of the Arab-Israeli
conflict, and physical force remains today the main, if not the
sole, instrument of regional political discourse. In addition, the
Arab states have never had any real stake in the "liberation of
Palestine." Though anti-Zionism has been the core principle of pan-
Arab solidarity since the mid-1930s - it is easier, after all, to
unite people through a common hatred than through a shared loyalty -
pan-Arabism has almost always served as an instrument for achieving
the self-interested ends of those who proclaim it.
Consider, for example, the pan-Arab invasion of the newly proclaimed
State of Israel in 1948. The invasion had far less to do with
winning independence for the indigenous Palestinian population than
with the desire of the Arab regimes for territorial aggrandizement.
Transjordan´s King Abdullah wanted to incorporate substantial parts
of mandatory Palestine; Egypt wanted to lay its hands on southern
Palestine. Syria and Lebanon sought to annex the Galilee, while Iraq
viewed the 1948 war as a stepping stone in its long-standing
ambition to bring the entire Fertile Crescent under its rule. Had
the Jewish state lost the war, its territory would not have fallen
to the Palestinians but would have been divided among the invading
Arab forces.
During the decades following the 1948 war, the Arab states
manipulated the Palestinian national cause to their own ends.
Neither Egypt nor Jordan allowed Palestinian self-determination in
the parts of Palestine they had occupied during the 1948 war.
Palestinian refugees were kept in squalid camps for decades as a
means of whipping Israel and stirring pan-Arab sentiments. "The
Palestinians are useful to the Arab states as they are," Egyptian
President Gamal Abdel Nasser told a Western reporter in 1956. "We
will always see that they do not become too powerful." As late as
1974, Syria´s Hafiz al-Assad referred to Palestine as being "not
only a part of the Arab homeland but a basic part of southern Syria."
The Islamic connection to the Palestinian problem is even more
tenuous. Islamists inveigh against the Jewish State of Israel not
out of concern for a Palestinian right to national self-
determination but as part of a holy war to prevent the loss of a
part of the "House of Islam." In the words of the Hamas
covenant: "The land of Palestine has been an Islamic trust (waqf)
throughout the generations and until the day of resurrection....When
our enemies usurp some Islamic lands, jihad becomes a duty binding
on all Muslims."
In this respect, there is no difference between Palestine and other
parts of the world conquered by the forces of Islam throughout
history. To this very day, Arabs and many Muslims unabashedly pine
for the restoration of Islamic Spain, and look upon their expulsion
from that country in 1492 as a grave historical injustice. As
illustrated by the overwhelming support for the 9/11 attacks
throughout the Arab and Islamic worlds, this vision is by no means
confined to a disillusioned and obscurantist fringe of Islam.
Islam´s war for world mastery is a traditional, indeed venerable,
quest, and is far from over. Within this grand scheme, the struggle
between Israel and the Palestinians is but a single element, and one
whose supposed centrality looms far greater in Western than in
Islamic eyes.
The Analogy between Israel and Nazi Germany
Interview: "Four years ago, Foreign Minister Tuomioja criticized
Israel´s oppression policy with harsh words. He stated in an SK
interview how ´certain people promote a policy similar to what they
themselves were victims of in the 1930s.´ The statement caused a
great fuss. This time Tuomioja is clearly more careful with his
words and does not wish to return to his old interview. ´I could
have avoided many unnecessary reactions with a different wording,
but the matter itself has not changed in any way,´ he nevertheless
states."
Viewing the Holocaust as the most powerful modern-day justification
for the existence of a Jewish state, Arabs and Palestinians have
gone out of their way since the mid-1940s to minimize the genocide,
if not deny it altogether. Mahmoud Abbas, the Oslo architect and
symbol of supposed Palestinian reconciliation, argued in a 1984 book
that less than a million Jews had been killed in the Holocaust and
that the Zionist movement was a partner to their slaughter.
At the same time, the Palestinians are portrayed as the Holocaust´s
real victims, having been made to pay for the West´s desire to atone
for the Holocaust through the establishment of a Jewish state. In
fact, the Holocaust triggered no worldwide wave of sympathy for the
Jewish predicament, least of all in Europe, where anti-Semitic
sentiments remained as pronounced as ever, especially in Eastern
Europe, which witnessed a few vicious pogroms shortly after the end
of World War II. Even in Germany Jews found themselves attacked and
abused in public, with 60 percent of Germans condoning overt acts of
violence against Jews. For their part, the British, who had ruled
Palestine under a League of Nations mandate since the early 1920s,
did their utmost to prevent the creation of a Jewish state and to
resettle the Holocaust survivors anywhere in the world except for
Palestine.
A far more insidious propaganda ploy used by the Palestinians and
their international champions is to equate the Jews with their Nazi
executioners. This perverted analogy was quickly adopted by Soviet
propaganda, from where it spread rapidly to become a staple of
Western intellectual discourse.
How many Germans were murdered by Jewish suicide bombers in Berlin´s
cafes during the 1940s? How many Palestinians were herded like
cattle into trains and transported into death camps where they were
systematically exterminated in gas chambers? None.
But then, the analogy between Zionism and Nazism has never stood the
most basic historical test. Far from seeking to systematically
exterminate the Palestinians, the Zionist movement accepted the two-
state solution - the partition of Palestine into Arab and Jewish
states - from the moment it was first proposed in 1937, and has
consistently striven for peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians
and the Arab states on this basis. This is in stark contrast to the
Arabs´ outspoken commitment to the destruction of the Jewish
national cause and their sustained and repeated efforts to achieve
that end since the early 1920s.
Nor has Israel´s control of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip been
remotely reminiscent of the Nazi occupation of Europe. From June
1967 until Israel passed control to the PA in the mid-1990s, life
expectancy had risen from 48 to 72 years (compared to 68 years for
all the countries of the Middle East and North Africa). Mortality
rates fell by more than two-thirds between 1970 and 1990, while
Israeli medical programs reduced the infant-mortality rate of 60 per
1,000 live births in 1968 to 15 per 1,000 in 2000 (in Iraq the rate
is 64, in Egypt 40, in Jordan 23, in Syria 22).
Per-capita GNP in the West Bank and Gaza expanded tenfold between
1968 and 1991, from $165 to $1,715 (compared with Jordan´s $1,050,
Egypt´s $600, Turkey´s $1,630, and Tunisia´s $1,440). By 1999,
Palestinian per-capita income was nearly double Syria´s, more than
four times Yemen´s, and 10 percent higher than Jordan´s.
The impressive social and economic progress made by the Palestinian
Arabs under Israeli "oppression" until control was passed to the PA
exposes the sheer mendacity of the "Israel equals Nazism" equation
made by enemies of the Jewish state.
Professor Efraim Karsh heads the Mediterranean Studies Program at
King´s College, University of London.
Return to Top
MATERIAL REPRODUCED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY
