for din. Be negotiations has been ( Is Stated a Bteement On opening the Suez 1 Ie coking in the Knesset } Boyne Y 26, Golda Meir urged | S President Anwar Sadat Alcanth €t as equals.” And signi- Ue: s,.500N afterward, on William 2, U.S. State Secretary Washin Ogers called at a “ative 8ton press conference for Dt Negotiations between [ I and Israel,” emphasis ne with this renewed IS the 2 On direct negotiations the Cial Israeli rejection of PUN oo? ig’ or ck im the Sinai Penin- “of «this . ‘thi ‘ wn for tine Out” the popula- PSU the Sake of “security.” ep py reality it was part of a Atabe?: Process of clearing atea M order to poplate wcatly, a With Jews. Subse- Ong 3 Milar forced evacua- sre Citic estructions of homes tt a ae In the camps of ary 1972 more than th aes of land at the the d of the Gaza Strip adjanced Sinai area in Severan ah were fenced in. | tyjcbitants thousand Bedouin i ted, 3 Of these lands were ABS a nd their crops, dwel- iting, Vells were. destroyed. : €Xcuse was “secur- a Fe . | Sign sition to the obvious in- tit to re annex the Gaza Strip On with ace the Arab popula- ~ | Jews, Statements are In the name of “thinning out” the population for the sake of “security”, Arabs are being evicted from Israeli occupied territories in a step by step process. Roads, fences and other installations are being built in defiance of the United Nations. now heard to the effect that the Jordan River should become the actual border of Israel, not just a “security border.” All this is accompanied by growing govern- ment encouragement to invest- ment of Israeli capital in the oc- cupied territories and increasing economic integration.based on a colonial relationship in’ which these territories provide lucra- tive markets and a source of cheap labor. Attacks on the Arab Countries There is no question that the murders at Munich must be categorically condemned. Indivi- dual acts of terror divorced from mass struggle have no place in the fight against oppression. Such methods only react against those who employ them and do harm to the causes they profess to serve. They help only the for- ces of oppression. Moreover, there can be no cause, however just, which warrants resort to criminal attacks on civilians. But at the same time it must never be forgotten that these acts oc- cur within the context of a just struggle against the aggression and oppression of the Zionist rulers of Israel. The right to wage such a struggle cannot be denied, even through we may reject certain methods of strug- gle. Furthermore, if criminal acts like the Munich murders are to be condemned, the Israeli bombings of civilian popula- tions, which have included the use of napalm bombs, are even more reprehensible. The raids, which are accom- panied by new threats of full- scale invasion of Syria, are in fact offensive in character. The Israeli ruling circles have launch- ed on an extension of their ag- gression against the Arab states, whose aim is not only to destroy the guerrilla movement but to crush the liberation struggle of the Palestinian Arabs altogether. The Nixon administration is supporting naked annexation and is The Israeli rulers refuse to re- cognize even the existence of a Palestinian Arab people, let alone their right to self-determi- nation. Golda Meir has express- ed flat opposition to the estab- lishment of a Palestinian Arab state, claiming that such a state could only have the purpose of destroying the State of Israel. The Road to Disaster Where does all this lead? It is becoming only too clear that Israel’s situation is becoming in- creasingly precarious and that the present policies are fraught with grave danger for the future of the Israeli people. The aim, in collaboration with U.S. imperialism, of weakening or destroying the progressive governments in Arab countries has failed, On_ the contrary, these governments are becoming stronger and are making new advances politically and econo- mically. To be sure, the departure of Soviet personnel from Egypt was a negative step, a reaction by Sadat to pressure of Right- wing military, nationalist and religious elements in Egypt. But it has-gained Egypt nothing and Sadat has been compelled to move in the direction of mend- ing his fences and _ restoring closer relationships. The hopes of forcing Egypt into negotia- tions which the Meir regime has drawn from this situation are proving unfounded, It is plain that there will be no surrender to Israeli aggression; moreover, as time goes on the Arab states will become strong enough to combat the occupation militari- ly, if need be. At the same time, the present course means indefinite continu- ation of the arms race which is bankrupting Israel, causing growing sacrifice of economic and social needs, distorting the life of the country, fostering militarism and chauvinism and arming Israel for that purpose. Herein lies the heart of the war dan- ger in the Middle East. ee Y undermining democracy and mo- rality in the name of security. The present policy makes Is- rae increasingly dependent on U.S. imperialism. Such a policy cannot be- maintained for even a day without U.S. support and military assistance, and for this Israel’s rulers must pay the price exacted, namely, that Israel serve as a tool against the Arab liberation movement. In addi- tion, leading government figures like Meir and Dayan have ren- dered services to U.S. imperial- ism through their open support of the aggression in Indochina. And at a time when govern- ments of capitalist states were condemning the savage bomb- ing of North Vietnam, the Israeli government extended diplomatic recognition to the corrupt, hat- ed, puppet Thieu regime. Furth- er, the Meir government has be- come a leading spearhead of anti-Sovietism, a service of no small importance to the U.S. monopolists and a disservice to the Israeli people. In short, the fate of Israel is being increas- ingly tied to a most unreliable ally, whose policies are based not on the interests of the Israeli people, but the defense of the profits of the U.S. oil monopolies in the Middle East. The Role of U.S. Imperialism Within the past year the - Nixon Administration has mov- ed in the direction of increasing- ly open support for the aggres- sive policies of the Israeli gov- ernment. Long abandoned is any pretence of demanding Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories. Instead the State De- partment is backing the Meir overtures for negotiations to open the Suez Canal and is re- newing its proposals of ‘“‘proxim- ity talks” to be held between Israel and Egypt with a State Department representative as a go-between — that is, for nego- tiations without the UN resolu- tion, without Jarring, without consideration of withdrawal. In short, the Nixon Arminis- tration is giving undisguised support to the efforts of Israeli ruling circles to compel Egypt to give up a big part of the Sinai Peninsula. It is supporting their naked annexationism and is arm- ing Israel for that purpose. And herein lies the heart of the war danger in the Middle East. As Meir Vilner, general secretary of the Communist Party of Israel, puts it: ' “American imperialism is the chief factor in preventing an end to the occupation of Arab lands. It uses the Israeli occupa- tion to force the Arabs into concessions in home and foreign policies and to regain the lost imperialist positions in this area. The policy of the Israeli govern- ment and its American backers, which torpedoes all peace ef- forts, can result in another mili- tary explosion with all the con- sequences ensuring therefrom.” (Pravda, June 20, 1972.) The Fight for Peace In Israel, though the great majority. still support the gov- ernment position, there exists a growing opposition movement which gains in strength as the true nature of government pol- icy is exposed. Today the fiction that the 1967 war was a war of self-defense is being increasingly exposed. This fraud is now ad- mitted by people who were high- ranking military commanders in 1967. Says Major General Matat- yahu Peled: The thesis that in June 1967 danger threatened Israel, a danger of annihilation, and . that the State of Israel fought for its physical existence, is a bluff which was engendered, and was developed after the war. In May 1967 no danger whatever of extermination threatened Israel, neither as individuals nor in its entirety. (Ha’aretz, March 3, 1972.) Sections of the youth here ex- pressed opposition to the Meir policies. A number have refused induction in to the armed forces or have refused to serve. in the occupied territories and have suffered imprisonment. An or- ganized movement of peace fighters is taking shape. In its forefront is the Communist Par- ty of Israel, which has consist- ently opposed the 1967 war and the pro-imperialist, annexionist policies. of Israel’s rulers at all times. At its 17th Congress, held last June, the CPI called for the joining of these forces in a peace front based on the following program. e A peace without annexations; e Implementation of Security Council Resolution 242 in all its points, which include with- drawal from all the territories occupied in the June war; e Respecting the rights of the Palestinian Arab people; e Respecting the rights of all peoples and states in: our re- gion, including the State of Israel; e Against colonialist settling and creation of other accomplish- ed facts in the occupied terri- tories. The peace movement is as yet a decided minority but it is growing. And dents are appear- ing within the ruling circles themselves. Thus, Itzhak Ben- Aharon, secretary-general of the Histadrut, Israel’s labor organ- ization, has suggested unilateral withdrawal from some of the oc- cupied territories without wait- ing for negotiations. His state- ment. provoked a storm of vehe- ment protest in government and Labor Party circles, but the fact that it was made is significant. The present policy must be reversed; there is no other path toward peace in the Middle East and toward the security of Israel itself. Recognition of this is clearly growing among the Is- raeli people. This is a difficult, uphill battle. But so was the fight. against the aggression in Vietnam in its earlier stages. In the end, U.S. imperialism was forced to retreat in Vietnam, and this great victory for the people of the United States has demonstrated that it can be forced to retreat in the Middle East as well. PACIFIC TRIBUNE —+ FRIDAY} 4UNE 101973 —3PAGE 72110 5 | | ] |