Study history, study history…

By Yakov Faitelson

“It’s history, my friend, it’s not relevant for us because we are in the present time
now!” You can hear these words again and again from a majority of Israeli
journalists, political commentators and politicians, when one talks about the lessons
from history that could be helpful to avoid mistakes in Israel’s Government policy
and decisions.
Such a position is not new, and our ancestors tried to avoid it by insisting on learning
and repeating the lessons from Jewish History. “Remember Amalec and what he did
to you” – this is just one of the warnings our ancient wise men have left for us.
However, despite this tradition of learning, the story about the “four sons”, read
during every Passover Seder, remains as relevant today, as it was almost 3 thousand
years ago. There is always a son who does not want to learn it and thinks that he can
separate himself from his people and family.

"Study history, study history. In history lie all the secrets of statecraft", - said Sir
Winston Churchill. And he added: "The farther backward you can look, the farther
forward you are likely to see".

Indeed, the time is going on forward, and the geographical places and nationalities of
the players on the Stage of History could be various and different, but we can see how
the scenario of the play repeats itself.

If you examine the speech of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, given in the
British Parliament on October 3, 1938 and attached below, just replace
"Czechoslovakia" with “Israel”, “Sudetenland” with "Judea, Samaria and Gaza" and
“Anglo-French” with "Saudi Arabia and European Union proposals" - and you'll get
something very close to the recent speeches of the leaders of the Western World
regarding the solution of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Replace also the title of this speech ("Peace in our Time") by the modern Israeli
version – "Peace now" - and you'll see how History is repeating itself once again for
the people who don't want or are not able to learn from the past.

“Before I come to describe the Agreement which was signed at Munich (Oslo)…, I
would like to remind the House (Knesset) of two things which I think it very essential
not to forget when those terms are being considered. The first is this: We did not go
there to decide whether the predominantly German (Arab) areas in the Sudetenland
(Judea, Samaria and Gaza Strip) should be passed over to the German Reich (Arab
state). That had been decided already.

Czechoslovakia (Israel) had accepted the Anglo-French (Saudi Arabia-EU)

proposals. What we had to consider was the method, the conditions and the time of
the transfer of the territory.
The second point to remember is that time was one of the essential factors. All the
elements were present on the spot for the outbreak of a conflict which might have
precipitated the catastrophe. We had populations inflamed to a high degree; we had
extremists on both sides ready to work up and provoke incidents; we had considerable
quantities of arms which were by no means confined to regularly organized forces.

Therefore, it was essential that we should quickly reach a conclusion, so that this
painful and difficult operation of transfer might be carried out at the earliest possible
moment and concluded as soon as was consistent, with orderly procedure, in order
that we might avoid the possibility of something that might have rendered all our
attempts at peaceful solution useless….

"I believe, it is peace for our time" - Neville Chamberlain holds the paper signed by
him and Hitler, on his return to Great Britain as a hero who saved peace in Europe.
This document was later called a "scrap of paper" by Hitler.

I say in the name of this House and of the people of this country that Czechoslovakia
(Israel) has earned our admiration and respect for her restraint, for her dignity, for her
magnificent discipline in face of such a trial as few nations have ever been called
upon to meet.

The army, whose courage no man has ever questioned, has obeyed the order of their
president, as they would equally have obeyed him if he had told them to march into
the trenches. It is my hope and my belief, that under the new system of guarantees, the
new Czechoslovakia (Israel) will find a greater security than she has ever enjoyed in
the past. . .

Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the
pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities
which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and
bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia (Israel) is the latest and
perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be
possible to make further progress along the road to sanity”.

According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary "To appease means "to try to conciliate
or bribe (a potential aggressor) by making concessions, frequently with implication of
sacrifice of principles".

By signing the Oslo agreements, we chose the appeasement of terrorists in a desire to

stop the acts of terror. We were ready to give up the territory of our ancient
Homeland, liberated in a bloody war imposed on us by our enemies, for peace.

Yet, as a result, we got exactly what Sir Winston Churchill said about the British
Government after WWII started: "You chose disgrace in fear of war. You got disgrace
and war as well". We gave territory for appeasement and brought the war even closer
to our homes.

However, Neville Chamberlain was consistent in his principles, words and deeds. In
contrary to his behavior, one can see that in many Israeli Knesset elections it became
a routine of sacrificing principles and misleading the voters by conducting the actual
policy after elections that contradict to the declared promises.

It is an incredible fact that every one of the Israeli leaders who tried to achieve peace
with the Arabs following the policy titled “Territory for peace” and “Our strength in
self-restraint”, had finished his career with failure, disgrace and humiliation.

The recent situation during the ongoing “Protective Edge” operation (or as it was
named in Hebrew – “Powerful Cliff”) lead to endless discussions and comments by
former generals, journalists, analysts, politicians and activists from all spectrum of
Israeli political life. The majority of the opinions were formulated as quotes from the
speeches and opinions expressed in Great Britain and France before the Munich
Agreement.

It is interesting to find out that the British military chiefs had advised Chamberlain
that over one million people would be killed by bombing raids in just 60 days and that
mass graves would be needed, as there simply would not be enough wood for timber
coffins. In their opinion, it seemed right that a negotiated settlement with Hitler
should be tried.

As the BBC had informed regarding the number of people who were killed through all
6 years of the WW2: "The final toll of casualties caused by the various air raids on
Britain was over 60,000 civilians killed, (30,000 in London), and 90,000 admitted to
hospital (50,000 in London)". This number is very far from “one million killed by
bombing raids in just 60 days” as it was expected by the British High Command.

Going back to our times and situation, we can hear professional explanations that the
ground attack on Gaza Strip will bring to hundreds of Israeli casualties and that it will
not stop the terror actions against Israel. Actually, the same military advisors and
politicians told the same thing before IDF was forced to engage the terror activity in
Judea and Samaria during the operation “Defensive Shield” in March 29 – May 2,
2002.

The UN report on operation “Defensive Shield” says, "Combatants on both sides

conducted themselves in ways that, at times, placed civilians in harm's way. Much of
the fighting during Operation "Defensive Shield" occurred in areas heavily populated
by civilians and in many cases heavy weaponry was used”.

The territory of Judea and Samara is 16 fold larger than the territory of Gaza Strip.
Now, during 47 days of the “Protective Edge” operation, despite very limited ground
combat actions, 64 IDF soldiers were killed. It is two fold higher comparing with
Israeli losses, which totaled 30 soldiers killed and 127 wounded during the 35 days of
"Defensive Shield"- a full scale ground operation, while all the territory of Judea and
Samaria was re-occupied by IDF.

It seems that the IDF strategy for the “Protective Edge” operation that tried to
minimize losses of the soldiers by avoiding deep ground incursion and re-occupation
of the Gaza Strip has failed and brought to the opposite result. As Sir Winston
Churchill formulated it long ago: "However beautiful the strategy, you should
occasionally look at the results"...

In contrary to the opinion, so heavily promoted by Israeli advisers

and commentators, Sir Churchill warned that: ”One ought never to
turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it.
If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it
promptly and without flinching, you will reduce the danger by half.
Never run away from anything. Never!”

Sir Winston Churchill

Israel had always defeated the enemy following the main task and strategy also
defined by Sir Winston Churchill: “Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror,
victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no
survival”.

And, finally, here is another quote from Sir Churchill's sayings that would be worth
to keep in mind: "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after
they've tried everything else".