“Israel started Hamas”
P. Schultz
Have just
finished reading a very interesting book, Devil’s
Game, by Robert Dreyfuss, it would seem that the “war on terror” launched
by the U.S. at different times over the past few decades is more fiction than
fact. That is, while the U.S. has been targeting some “terrorists,” it and its
allies have been supporting others. As Dreyfuss writes: “’Israel started
Hamas,’ says Charles Freeman, the veteran diplomat and former U.S. ambassador
to Saudi Arabia. “It was a project of Shit Bet [the Israeli domestic
intelligence agency], which had a feeling that they could us it to hem in the
PLO.” [p. 191]
According
to Dreyfuss, the U.S. has been pursuing a flawed foreign policy of relying on
right wing Islamists since the Eisenhower administration, and doing to because
that administration feared that the nationalists who were active in the Middle
East were or would fall under the control of communists and the USSR. To wit:
“In the early 1950s, two nationalist leaders emerged in two
of the most powerful countries of the Middle East, Egypt and Iran. In Egypt,
Gamal Abdel Nasser’s Free Officers ousted the country’s dissolute king and
threatened to spark revolution in Saudi Arabia, the heart of the world’s energy
supply. In Iran, a freely elected democrat and socialist-inclined leader named
Mohammed Mossadegh successfully challenged the ruling shah of Iran, forced him
to flee, and asserted his country’s right to take over the oil industry from
Britain’s Anglo-Persian Oil Company.” [p. 94]
The U.S.
successfully overthrew Mossadegh, with Britain’s help, and tried but failed to
overthrow Nasser. In the latter case, the U.S. and Britain used the Muslim
Brotherhood, while in the former case, they “mobilized a group of ayatollahs
that included the ideological grandfather of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.” And
there is more insofar as these actions were “compounded by yet another massive
error: the U.S. decision to support Saudi Arabia as the counter pole to Arab
and Persian nationalism, and to tie itself to a worldwide network of Islamists
sponsored by the Saudis. It was a decision whose consequences led, indirectly,
to the rise of Ayatollah Khomeini’s theocracy, the destruction of Afghanistan,
and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist international.” [pp. 94-95]
Most
interestingly, even Israel played the same kind of game, creating the group
that eventually became Hamas – which means “zeal” – in order to try to defeat
the PLO. “In the wake of the 1967 war, and Israel’s occupation of Gaza and the
West Bank, the Islamists flourished with the support of both Israel and
Jordan.” [p. 192] As Dreyfuss puts it, it was thought that Hamas would be
“Israel’s trained zeal.” But, apparently, Hamas had and has other ideas.
It was
conservative Israelis, beginning with Menachem Begin’s Herat Party and the
Likud bloc that lent formal support to these Islamists. As Dreyfuss says, “It
was part of a full-court press against the PLO.” [p. 196] Begin was trying to
undermine the PLO, even to the point of giving paramilitary training to members
of the “so-called Village Leagues,” which were run by anti-PLO Palestinians.
“David Shipler, a former reporter for the New
York Times, cites the Israeli governor of Gaza as boasting that Israel
expressly financed the Islamist against the PLO.” [p. 196] In this regard,
Israel was aligned with Saudi Arabia, which also wanted to undermine the PLO
and, hence, helped to finance these Islamist groups in Gaza.
It is quite
true as is said frequently that politics makes for strange bedfellows. But
perhaps it is best not play with fire or fanatics. As one expert at the U.S.
State Department put it: “I didn’t realize they’d [the Israelis] end up
creating a monster. But I don’t think you ought to mess around with potential
fanatics.” [p.198] This might be a warning that should be heeded today.
No comments:
Post a Comment