Ediblog.com
Transfer Vs. Separation: Kahanist In
Reverse
By Ariel Natan Pasko
Yitzhak Rabin was a Kahanist. I said it in 1994 and 1995, and I'm saying it
again. You know terminology is a funny thing; you have to understand the
real meaning of what a person says, the words he uses, to truly understand
the ideas they intend to convey. So I repeat myself for clarity...
Rabin was a "Kahanist in Reverse" and so too is Ariel Sharon
today.
So are both Yossis, Yossi Sarid and Yossi Beilin, Peace Now and Gush Shalom,
they all want to get rid of the "Palestinians". After twenty
years, they've finally agreed with the "demographic threat" that
Rabbi Meir Kahane warned about. The only difference is that where Rabbi Meir
Kahane, his followers, and the current transferists on the Right, like Rabbi
Benny Elon and the Moledet/National Union Party want to "Transfer"
the Arabs out of the Land of Israel and "Transfer" full control of
the Land to the Jews; Yitzhak Rabin, his followers, and the current
separationists like the Labor Party, the both Yossis et al and their Yahad
Party and others on the Left, want to "Transfer" Jews out of parts
of the Land of Israel and "Transfer" parts of the Land to Arab
control.
Today we can add Sharon and parts of the Likud Party, along with - so-called
Centrist - Shinui, who want to "Transfer" Jews out of Gaza - they
call it "Disengagement" - to the list of "Kahanists in
Reverse".
It's a funny thing about terminology; Rabbi Meir Kahane never used the term
"Transfer". He always spoke of "Havdalah," that is
"Separation" between the Jews and the Arabs in the Land of Israel.
The Jews would stay. The Arabs would go, voluntarily or otherwise.
Interestingly, Rabbi Kahane always said he wished the Arabs a good life,
somewhere else, just not in "his" country.
Then he was banned from running in the 1988 Knesset elections.
But a new political party (Moledet-Homeland) was started by former
Palmachnik (like Rabin) reserve general Rechavam "Gandhi" Ze'evi.
Ze'evi revived an older terminology, not "Separation" but
"Transfer". Moledet's 1988 election campaign slogan was, "Us
here, them there." "Transfer M'Ratzon," i.e. voluntary
transfer, became the new terminology. Moledet wasn't banned from the
elections and they won one seat.
Gandhi effectively revived the concept of population transfer and injected
it back into Israeli politics. Population transfer had been used to solve
seemingly insurmountable national problems throughout the 20th century.
Poles and Germans were transferred after World War II. Muslims and Hindus
were transferred out of and into the new states of India and Pakistan in
1947-48. Many non-Jews and Jews had proposed population transfer as a
solution to the Arab problem in Mandatory Palestine before the State of
Israel's birth in 1948 (see Rabbi Dr. Chaim Simons' seminal work,
"International Proposals to Transfer Arabs from Palestine 1895-1947: A
Historical Survey" published by KTAV (1988), at: www.geocities.com/chaimsimons).
In 1990, an Arab terrorist murdered Rabbi Meir Kahane in NY. Effectively
ending the political life of the "Separation" idea. Or, at least,
that's the way it seemed.
Meanwhile, in 1990, after the Labor party withdrew from a national unity
government constructed by Ariel Sharon, and led by Yitzhak Shamir and Likud;
Gandhi and Moledet joined a right-wing government, bringing
"Transfer" to the heart of power. But nothing was done to
implement it.
Following the Gulf War against Iraq in 1991, Yitzhak Shamir led an Israeli
delegation to the Madrid Peace Conference. Thus began the Madrid
Process, which went nowhere. Pressure was mounting to find a solution to the
Arab-Israeli conflict and the "Palestinian Problem". Yitzhak
Rabin and the Left were elected in the 1992 Knesset elections promising a
change.
Rabin promised not to speak with the PLO, just as Shamir had before him. It
was still illegal to meet with members of a banned terrorist organization,
the PLO. But behind the scenes, Shimon Peres' protégé Yossi Beilin - once
called Peres' poodle by Rabin - was negotiating PLO recognition on the part
of Israel, a "Peace Process", and an eventual Palestinian State.
Whether Peres and Beilin foisted this "Process" on Rabin, or Rabin
joyously embraced the idea, is a mute point, better left for academics to
debate. But by September 13, 1993, Yitzhak Rabin found himself on the
Whitehouse lawn signing away parts of the Jews ancient homeland and shaking
hands with arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat. Gaza and Jericho first became the
new slogan.
Arafat returned to Gaza, the Palestinian Authority was established and
Arafat was firmly in control. But terrorism didn't abate as Rabin had
promised and soon Rabin began speaking of a new terminology, not
"Transfer", but '"Separation". By 1994
"Separation" was revived, but not the "Separation" of
Rabbi Kahane to remove the Arabs from the Land of Israel and end terror
attacks, but "Transfer" of the Jews from Yesha - Judea and Samaria
- the West Bank and Gaza, back into pre-1967 Israel, to "separate"
from the Arabs.
Rabin was a Kahanist in Reverse...
The situation continued to deteriorate. Rabin was murdered in 1995. Bus
bombings grew during Shimon Peres' short reign (1995-96). Binyamin Netanyahu
was elected Prime Minister in 1996. The "Peace Process"
tripped, fell, and with Ehud Barak's election as Prime Minister in 1999,
tried to stand up again. But Yasser Arafat shot it in the heart, in Sept.
2000. Rejecting Barak's overgenerous offer at Camp David II - one the
Palestinians will probably never get again - Arafat declared the Oslo War
against Israel in Sept. 2000. Soon after, Ariel Sharon was elected Prime
Minister of Israel, in Feb. 2001.
With the outbreak of the Oslo War, the murder of Tourism Minister and
Moledet leader Rechavam Ze'evi (Oct. 2001), and the increasing ferocity of
Suicide Bombings, ideas in the Israeli body politic have crystallized.
"Transfer" as a viable idea revived substantially, and
"Separation," when a security fence is added to it, gained new
momentum. And recently, Sharon too has adopted "Separation" as a
policy. The Oslo War continues and as they say, the rest is history.
After analyzing dozens of opinion polls over the last several years, the
picture that emerges is that there is an approximately equal amount of
support (high 30's- high 50's percent) both over time and with multiple ways
of wording the survey questions, to "Transfer" Arabs or Jews
(Separation-Disengagement) from parts of the Land of Israel. Temporary
variances all depend on the wording of the survey questions and what's
happening, in security terms, at any particular time. Both the Left and the
Right advocate their policy of "Transfer" for the "sake of
peace".
Those today who present "Separation" as a moderate centrist
position - or practical - are really obfuscating
"Transferists" - against Jews - and just as extreme as the
"Transferists" who want "Separation" from the Arabs, by
sending them somewhere else to live.
So I return again to my original claim. Rabin, Sharon, the Left and parts of
the Right are Kahanists, but in reverse!
A true "Centrist" position would probably advocate co-existence,
maybe even a bi-national state 'Isra-Stine' or 'Pala-Rael' or something.
People like Meron Benvenisti - researcher and former deputy mayor of
Jerusalem under Teddy Kollek - who was recently on Israel Television's
"Politica" voicing his opposition to Yossi Beilin's
"Geneva" plan. Why, you ask, because Benvenisti said he has moved
past solutions such as the Geneva Agreement. He said he now supports a
bi-national state, meaning, no more Israel. Benvenisti said in reality there
already is a bi-national state and since no agreement with the Palestinians
seems to be able to satisfy their needs...
Not too many people from the Israeli Left or Right see a "Peaceful and
Democratic" neighbor in the foreseeable future. And, with
anywhere from 40-80% of Palestinians (depending on the polls wording),
calling for continued violence against Jews, including suicide bombings;
Palestinians don't seem to be ready for peaceful co-existence yet. That's
why Sharon has begun pushing his "Disengagement" plan, i.e.
"Transfer" the Jews from Gaza.
But, "Separation" without uprooting "settlements" -
Jewish towns - as originally proposed, with only a fence, isn't real
separation between the two groups, Jews and Arabs. So Sharon has enlarged
the idea to include "Transfer" of Jews from their homes. And, what
about Israeli Arabs? If Jews aren't allowed to live in "Palestine"
- maybe they should be, if there were peace - shouldn't moral symmetry
demand that Arabs, presently Israeli citizens, be repatriated to their
homeland, the Palestinian State? Shouldn't Israeli Arabs be
"Transferred" to Palestine, for the "Separation" to be
complete? No Jews in Palestine, and no Arabs in Israel.
Partial "Transfer" - only against Jews - is a despicably racist
policy.
You know terminology is a funny thing; it has a way of confusing people or
covering up "true intent". Whether it is
"Transfer" or "Separation" or "Disengagement,"
used by the Left or by the Right, what seems clear to me is that no serious
centrist position exists today. Extremism rules the day, and it's mostly
against Jews.
So, I repeat myself. Rabin was a Kahanist in Reverse. So too is Sharon
today. And Rabbi Kahane, he was a "Separationist". Isn't
terminology funny?