people. So will it be in the future."
The Lebanese daily Al Safit (Feb.12, 2000) published the question-and-answer session following Al-Shara's speech:
Q: How do you differentiate between "a settlement" and "peace"?
Al-Shara: I find the argument over terminology to be pointless. 'A settlement' means a solution to disagreements, while 'peace' has a deeper meaning. [And yet], peace can be everything and can be void of any meaning. Israel made peace with Egypt, but I don't see any peace between them. Israel does not respect the peace. In its view, peace means a handshake, embassies, a flag, etc. But does Israel respect Arab civilization and Arab culture? Does Israel show understanding to Arab feelings? Does Israel reconsider [its attitude] towards the crimes it committed against the Palestinians, the Lebanese, the Syrians, the Egyptians and the Arabs in general? If the new Israeli wants a real peace, he has to condemn all his crimes against the Arabs.
Q: You talked about replacing the military conflict with a cultural one. Does this not grant the Zionists a right in Palestine? Is it not contradictory to the principles of the Ba'ath party?
Al-Shara: This, I believe, is an important question, because even the Ba'ath party, to which I have the honor of being a member, understands that restoring Palestine in its entirety is a long term strategic goal, that cannot be achieved in one stage. I am talking about the party's [position], not about the negotiations. Even the Ba'ath party's ideology for more than thirty years now sets stages for the liberation [of Palestine]. The first stage is the stage of restoring the occupied lands [of 1967] and of guaranteeing the national inalienable right of the Palestinian Arab people.
The translation is courtesy of the Middle East Media and Research Institute.
Now Available from
Americans For a Safe Israel:
The Continuing Storm: Iraq, Poisonous Weapons,
and Deterrence - by Avigdor Haskelkorn - $21.00
The Jewish Wars
by Edward Alexander - $19.95
(non-members: $24.95)
A Matter of Priorities: Labor Zionism and the
Plight of Soviet Jewry, 1917-1996
by Geoffrey Martin & Natan Herzl - $4.95
Shimon Says: Shimon Peres in His Own Words
$3.95 (non-members: $4.95)
Should America "Guarantee" Israel's Safety?
by Dr. Irving Moskowitz - $3.95 (non-members: $4.95)
Order from:
Americans For a Safe Israel
1623 Third Ave., # 205
New York, N.Y. 10128
The megatrends in the Middle East provide Israel with a rare historic window of opportunity. The most dangerous process from a global perspective is the intensification of Islamic hegemony -- a nationalist civilization motivated by imperialist, religious aspirations and armed with weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them. Israel is, indeed, in the eye of the storm, but it is not alone. Turkey is concerned about Arab-Iranian subversion and its influence on the country's Moslem majority, which is liable to bring the Ataturk revolution and the secular government to an end. Syria is a common enemy, and Turkish-Israeli strategic cooperation clearly would neutralize the Syrian threat (as well as the long-term Iraqi threat). The common interest has created an intricate network of ties between the two countries on the basis of military cooperation, especially in the area of upgrading weapons systems, missiles, and military technology.
India is an additional, extremely important objective for military/economic cooperation with Israel. It is no secret that the large Moslem minority in India and Islamic subversion stand at the top of the list of priorities on the Indian subcontinent. Like Turkey, India is a potential market for Israeli military technology. Both India and Israel are among the world centers in the field of computers. Cooperation between the two in this area, with its high added economic value, could aid the Indian economy and indeed rescue it from the Third World status in which it is mired.
A strategic triangle of India, Israel, and
Turkey could create a very powerful center in the Middle
East that could contribute much to halting Islamic hegemony.
Strategic power centers naturally attract other
interested parties. Ethiopia, Nigeria and Kenya are natural
candidates. Halting Islam would have a salubrious effect
on democratic tendencies, weak and modest as they
may be, in the Arab countries themselves. So, for
example, the possibility that Iran, in which the processes of
recovery from Khomeinism are beginning, might join
the coalition in the future cannot be ruled out. The
process of liquidating minorities in the region, especially Chris-
[(Continued on p.8)]
February 2000 - 7 - Outpost