Israel Resource Review 16th March, 1998


EGYPT: Former DM on Arab Strategy for the Future

The following are excerpts from articles which appeared in the Egyptian English weekly, "Al-Ahram" of Al-Ahram Weekly 5 - 11 March 1998

"A strategy for the future" by Amin Hewedy (former Minister of Defense and Chief of General Intelligence)

[Heading:] Whether or not they are the victims of overt military action, the Arabs are footing the bill.

When the major powers united their efforts in establishing the state of Israel, they did so in order to protect Western interests in the region. Israel would also serve as a means of dividing the Arab world, and as an obstacle to nascent national movements.

...The most important goal was to maintain a balance of power in Israel's benefit. Through the use of force, the state of Israel was established and through force it must continue to impose its presence.

...The arms deal with the Eastern bloc signed on 20 May 1955 and announced by President Nasser on 27 September, was tantamount to a breach of the Western monopoly on arms sales, as well as a shattering blow to Western plans for an unjust peace between the Arab countries and Israel.

...The Soviets were convinced that, if a global confrontation was going to take place, it would be a nuclear war. The emphasis on nuclear capabilities led to a further decline in the quality of conventional Soviet weaponry, so while allegations that the Soviets refused to supply the Arab countries with more effective weapons are untrue, the weapons they did provide had to be discredited on the battlefield. No attempt had been made to increase the potential of these weapons through creative management or sustained training.

...Despite the Arabs' ability to purchase weapons and technology, the capacity to absorb them was inadequate at different levels of training, specialization and leadership.

...Arab strategists and military commanders did not attempt to study the succession of direct confrontations to which their armies were subjected in order to determine and enhance their strong points, or define their weaknesses so as to minimise them. On the contrary, they transformed their defeat into false victory, and any victory into a glaring defeat.

Conflict among Arab decision-makers as to which countries may be regarded as allies is at the root of many military mistakes. The confusion has been the source of continual confrontations and, therefore, the constant draining of Arab resources and capital.

...Despite an abundance of different weapons, and the large portion of the budget devoted to defence, Arab national security is threatened from all sides. Yet the Arab armies are unable to confront these threats actively in battle or to engage in deterrence operations. This means that the escalating cost of defence does not avert the threats directed at us, yet still continues to erode resources that could have been allocated to raising the population's standard of living. Heavy arsenals and high technology do not necessarily imply improved combat capabilities.

...These problems have been further exacerbated by the US's attempts to further skew the balance of power -- and maximise profit-- by providing Israel with the most up-to-date military technology, while selling the Arabs defective or less effective arms. It also accepts that Israel possesses nuclear, biological and chemical capabilities while insisting that similar capabilities be destroyed if they are found in the possession of an Arab regime. Not that the Arab countries have shown any resistance in this respect: the destruction of the Iraqi arsenal was carried out with the knowledge and blessings of the Arab countries and the UN Security Council.

Once the US had neutralised Arab military capabilities effectively, it began to drain Arab resources. The Iraqi crisis is a good example. Whether or not a military strike is launched in the future, decimating both civilian and military targets, Iraq is crippled for decades to come. Kuwait and Saudi Arabia are still settling bills for US protection, depleting their financial resources. ... The blockade against Iran and Libya...grinds mercilessly on. Manipulation of world oil prices, devaluation of the US dollar from time to time, and the fomenting of unrest in order to encourage further arms purchases are all facets of US strategy.

At the end of the Cold War it was said that the Arabs and Muslims had replaced the Soviet Union as the West's primary enemy. Developments on the ground seem to confirm this fear. The threats to Arab potential in terms of military capabilities and economic resources are now striking at the very integrity of the Arab countries themselves.

The principal oil producing countries -- Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Libya and Algeria -- are either trembling on the verge of political disaster or emerging from a crisis: terrorist attacks, bloody civil wars.

...The US may threaten to launch a military strike on Iraq in order to paralyse its capabilities and destroy its arsenal. Its long-term objective is nothing less than the elimination of any resources the Arabs may still have. The US's strategy is aimed at depleting Arab capabilities, whether through the purchase of oil at prices dictated by the West, or through a military attack.

If the Arab leaders are unable to agree on their allies and enemies, they will remain incapable of achieving any measure of sustained success.

Return to Contents

Hebron Community Spokesman Noam Arnon?
by Aaron Lerner

IMRA interviewed Noam Arnon, Spokesman for the Hebron Jewish Community, in Hebrew, on March 15, 1998:

IMRA: Is the IDF doing anything in reaction to the Palestinian rioters and shooters?

Arnon: The IDF soldiers on the scene are working night and day to guard and are making efforts but that isn't the problem. The problem is that the Abu Sneinah hill has terrorists on it and the hill has been handed over to the Palestinian Authority along with the terrorists. The terrorists are there yet the IDF command does nothing about it and this is the problem. I have no complaints against soldiers here, my claim is against the policy of the army which is an ineffective and mistaken policy. The fact is that the terrorists are laughing at the army and shoot again and again from the same place and this isn't being solved.

Now the Hebron agreement provides for hot pursuit but in practice the army does not carry out hot pursuit. It is all a matter of policy. In the agreement there are buffer areas which protect the Jewish community but in practice there are no buffer areas and the terrorists reach the dividing line itself. The agreement also talks about special arrangements on the commanding high ground but in practice there is nothing.

There is a conceptual problem here.

IMRA: With regards to what happened on Friday night, when Jewish settlers went into the Arab H1 area in protest, how do you respond to the charge that this causes a disruption which hurts the IDF's ability to control the situation.

Arnon: This is a ridiculous claim. For four days the Arab disruptions took place. They attacked us with countless rocks, tens of fire bombs and explosive devices as well as gunfire coming down from the high ground in Abu Snenah. All of this was before Friday night. So the claim that the Israeli response was the cause of the situation is simply groundless.

Anyone who makes such a claim is assuming that his audience is stupid. The Jewish community of Hebron has been under many and various assaults - including gun fire - since the IDF withdrawal from out of Hebron. It has turned out that the Arabs who received the city, supposedly with peaceful intentions, actually want war. They use the area which they control to add to their war against us.

IMRA: Are we talking of something in waves?

Arnon: Yes, We are talking about waves, under the instruction of the Palestinian Authority. We are talking about something which happens every period of time or after a specific incident. First they promote the attacks and then they give out instructions to stop and reap the positive publicity for their hand in restoring order.

IMRA: If it is in waves so you know that it has an end...

Arnon: Yes, but it may end in dead. If a bomb drops in the yard of a kindergarten or if a fire bomb breaks inside a Jewish house, or rocks are thrown and hurt people, then it is an initiative of the Palestinian Authority to carry out terrorist and barbaric acts against the Jewish residents.

They received area as part of a peace agreement and instead use it in order to carry out a war. Therefore, the entire concept has to be changed. I am surprised that people who consider themselves open and reasonable should always identify themselves with the Arabs come what may. Even if the Jews are attacked they continue to identify themselves with the Arabs.

I would like also to mention that under the terms of the agreement, Jews are permitted to enter the Arab H1 area. This is explicitly written in the agreement. They prevent this, in violation of the agreement. So the side which is consistently violating the agreement is the Arab side.

IMRA: The claim heard is that yes, there are gunshots, but so far no one has been killed so what's the big deal?

Arnon: This is ridiculous. Should we wait for something worse to happen? What purpose is there for an army which doesn't take care of an enemy which shoots?

IMRA: If they respond with a massive response the outcome will be that this wave won't end and instead will get larger.

Arnon: I don't understand. When Katyushas rain down on communities in the North do they also decline to respond? I don't understand the approach which says that we have to accept the situation that they shoot at us as a normal situation and not respond.

If the Palestinian Authority controls the area from which the shooting is coming then it is guilty. And if the PA can't handle it then that's what the IDF is for. The situation cannot go on this way.

IMRA: This situation - of shooting. Are you saying that it was a pastoral situation before the PA entered the scene?

Arnon: It wasn't a pastoral situation but the IDF responded to attacks and dealt with terrorists. The area was given to the PA on the assumption that they would bring a peaceful situation. What has happened is the opposite. They don't honor the most basic elements of the agreement which they committed themselves to.

IMRA: There are more attacks today then before?

Arnon: There have been more firebombs thrown in Hebron in the last year than during the entire intifada period. There is no question that the takeover of most of Hebron by the PA did not bring peace. They don't talk of peace. They only talk of continuing the assault and continue with the violence. They themselves are responsible for the breakdown of the entire agreement.

Dr. Aaron Lerner,
Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
P.O.BOX 982 Kfar Sava
Tel: (+972-9) 760-4719
Fax: (+972-9) 741-1645

Return to Contents

The Israel Resource Review is brought to you by the Israel Resource, a media firm based at the Bet Agron Press Center in Jerusalem, and the Gaza Media Center under the juristdiction of the Palestine Authority.
You can contact us on

Back to the Behind the News in Israel home page Back to the israelVisit Home Page home page