Israeli Communist outlines Begin’s strategy Lebanon invasion key to Israeli expansion policy Emil Touma, a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of Israel is chief editor of the magazine Al Gaid (The New) and a prominent author. He was in Canada recently to attend a con- ference of the Arab-American University Graduates held in Montreal where he presented a paper on the impact of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon on the Arab communities under Israeli occupation. Touma was interviewed at the Tribune offices by Assistant Editor Tom Morris. * * * In my paper I made the distinction be- tween the Arabs in Israel who are citi- zens of the state and those who are in the occupied territories in the West Bank and Gaza. I spoke of the timing of Israel’s inva- sion of Lebanon, the conditions under which it took place and the impact it had on the Israeli public in general and on the Arab community in particular. Arab public figures in Israel, for example were able to form a committee against the war and act publicly, whereas ___ the Israeli occupation authorities in West Bank and Gaza banned every action. Despite the bans, however, demon- strations constantly took place which were brutally attacked. Three Basic Aims But to fully understand the back- ground of developments, it is necessary _ to outline the aims of Israel’s invasion of _ Lebanon. _ ‘There were three basic aims: The first was to destroy the national presence of the Palestinians in Lebanon; to destroy the Palestine Liberation Organization specifically, with the hope of intimidating the Arab people in the occupied lands, permitting Israel to impose its so-called “autonomy” policy which means to pre- pare the ground for the annexation of these territories. The thrust of the invasion coincided with the thrust against the Arab popula- tion in West Bank and Gaza. That is why before the invasion itself, Israeli aut hori- ties tried to terrorize and oppress the Palestinians and force them to accept the “autonomy” plan. There were demonstrations through- - out this period and in March, for exam- -ple, 17 people were killed by Israeli troops. When the invasion of Lebanon started, these demonstrations continued. Israel’s second aim was to crush the patriotic movement within Lebanon it- self and create the conditions for Falan- gist domination of the political scene. The third aim was to deal a mortal blow to the military forces of Syria and topple the present Syrian government. This, they hoped, would allow reaction- ary forces in Syria to install a govern- ment favorable to U.S. imperialism and Israel. There is no doubt that in pursuit of all three aims, the Israeli government was in collusion with Washington. Without full backing by the U.S. administration Israel could not have conducted this war. At the same time, Israel was objec- tively supported by reactionary Arab re- gimes. The Palestine Liberation Organ- ization had become a revolutionary catalyst in the Arab world and these re- gimes, in defence of their interests, were hoping the PLO would be destroyed. Timing is Key Why did Israel choose this time to at- tack? They have always wanted to achieve these aims and had been threatening for two years to invade Lebanon. Firstly, never before was the Arab world in such disarray. Iraq’s attack against Iran split the Arab world with the reactionary regimes supporting Iraq and the anti-imperialist forces backing Iran. The Steadfastness and Confrontation Front was not consolidated and, in fact, was practically non-existent. This Front, remember, was established to rebuff the Camp David agreements. There was no political agreement among the states which established the Front. Some, like Syria, Democratic Yeman and the PLO were willing to achieve a political solution to the Pales- tinian question based on the establish- ment of an independent Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza. Other Arab states with strong financial ties with the Western world refused to consolidate their forces to withstand the onslaught of the powerful U.S.-backed Israel war machine. These states did not mobilize their people because a mobilized people would not be in their interests internally, in fact, would pres- ent a threat to them. Another factor was that the Camp David agreements, having succeeded in removing Egypt from the struggle against Israeli expansion, were at a standstill. The war against Lebanon, it can be said, was a war to continue the Camp David process. At the same time, reactionary Arab states, to prevent the revolutionary pro- cess from continuing at home, appeared willing to come to terms with imperial- ism. All these factors were taken into account to determine the timing of Is- rael’s attack. Today not Yesterday To assess what has happened, perhaps we can compare the 1967 war with 1982 events. In 1967 Israel was able to defeat three state armies in six days. On the political level, Israel succeeded in convincing the world that it was threatened, that the Arab world wanted to throw Israel into the sea. That is why the United Nations could not pass a.resolution until five months later — and then it (Resolution 242) was passed which did not mention the na- tional rights of the Palestinian people. In 1982, Defence Minister — we call him War Minister — Sharon said he would finish with the Palestinians in 72 hours. He didn’t do it in three months. Moreover, he was unable to force the PLO and the Lebanese patriots to sur- render after 10 weeks of terrible siege. True, the PLO fighters left Beirut, but they withdrew under their banners and with their weapons. And the war is not over yet, operations continue in the south of Lebanon and the Bekka Valley. On the political level, from the first day,. resolution after resolution was passed by the United Nations Security Council and General Assembly condemning Israel and endorsing the legitimate national rights of the Palesti- nian people. The Palestinian question today holds centre stage in world events. That is why President Reagan pro- jected his new “‘peace initiative’ to im- pose a Pax Americana on the area. We reject Reagan’s plan, not because it’s American, but simply because it’s a bad plan. It does not recognize the rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to their own state. It does not recog- nize the PLO. It wants the Jordanian | “4 # israel’s aim was to destroy the Palestinians and the PLO and impose its “autonomy” plan. PACIFIC TRIBUNE—NOVEMBER 12, 1982—Page 8 MIKE PHILLIPS TOUMA: “There is no doubt that full backing by the United States t raeli government could not have ® ducted this war. It can be said the att? on Lebanon was a war to continu Camp David process...” king to become custodian of the tinian people. On the other hand, we suppo USSR’s six-point plan, not because! Soviet, but because we have fighting for these six points since 17 and they offer the real answers to Middle East problem. Inside Israel Today For the first time there was no gene e consensus among the Zionist parties this war. That is why there was a deme stration in Tel Aviv on the first day 0 invasion and activities every day that. The movement grew. From the ™ demonstration of 15,000 people, © 20,000, to 100,000 and finally to the m* sive 400,000-strong demonstration a! the massacres at Sabra and Shatila. Also for the first time, this anti-¥’ movement manifested itself in the al especially in the reserves. Two groul emerged: the first called itself ‘“The Limit” and issued a proclamation sig} by 400 officers and men announcing! will not serve in the occupied territ or in Lebanon. The second group, also reservists. ™ who served in Lebanon, called i selves ‘Soldiers Against Silence”. 1! were shocked at.what they saw in non and warned the people about W taking place. The-anti-war movement in general© led for a cessation of hostilities, em sized there is no military solution tO, Palestinian question, and dema negotiations begin. Within this force there were difft tiations — some felt there was not to Israel’s northern border, of wanted guarantees. There was no eral consensus on the partners to negotiations. Some simply spoke of between Israelis and Palestinial Others, including Israeli Commu” and democrats, who are aware of, st political realities, called for negotiall!” io! 1 with the PLO and solutions to be fou” based on the right of self-determif for the Palestinian people. Israeli Arabs took part in all th activities and played a special role: : f put the weight of the Arab masses be if this struggle they established a SP committee against the war ane Israeli-Arab peace. (Israeli number 600,000 — 16% of the cout population). This committee held various de™. strations, vigils and, after the mass@™. 4) called a general strike on Sept. 22 ¥! - was total. Workers stayed home, shor do municipal councils and schools ™ closed. pl : The government response was This committee, like the committe the Jewish sector is still active uf! continue as long as Israeli forces octh, southern Lebanon and a danger of newed war exists. , In fact it will continue after that cause withdrawal is not enough — must fight for a political solution real peace.