Britannia Radio

= 

 

Weekly Commentary: Poorly Written International Guarantees Could Encourage Palestinian Violations

Dr. Aaron Lerner                   Date: 30 July 2009

"Israel, with her survival at stake, cannot afford to take chances.... The 
nature of the Israeli's situation is bound to influence their interpretation 
of ambiguous events. We, on the other hand, have an incentive to minimize 
such evidence, since the consequences of finding violations are so 
unpleasant. Violations force us to choose between doing something about them 
and thus risk the blowup of our initiative; or doing nothing and thus renege 
on our promises to Israel, posing the threat of her taking military action. 
Accordingly, we tend to lean over backwards to avoid the conclusion that the 
Arabs are violating the cease-fire unless the evidence is unambiguous."
Henry Kissinger you President Richard Nixon in 1970
[Henry Kissinger "White House Years", page 587]


“I wish to clarify that we are not talking about American or NATO soldiers 
defending us and doing the defense work of the State of Israel. We have 
never requested this, nor are we requesting it now. We are talking about an 
international guarantee, headed by the United States, for the 
demilitarization arrangements that we will establish. We wish them to make 
it clear that these arrangements will be completely legitimate, and that 
there will also be total legitimacy for any action deemed necessary to 
preserve them. The purpose of this guarantee is that it adds a layer of 
deterrence against the intentions of those who may, in the future, wish to 
invalidate, or violate the demilitarization arrangements.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addresses National Defense College 
graduates - July 28, 2009


Is Israel demanding a priori carte blanche from the world to be able to 
carry out whatever operations the Jewish State “deems necessary” inside 
Palestinian territory should Israel determine that the Palestinians have 
violated the demilitarization arrangements?

It would be useful for Prime Minister Netanyahu and his team to suggest what 
they have in mind.

Is Israel to determine there is a violation or some third party?


Historically, Arab violations are ignored by the world so if there is 
wording that Israel has the right to act if some third party determines that 
there is a violation then Israel will find itself in the situation that the 
third party  declines to recognize that in fact a violation has taken place.

Is Israel to determine that the violation has been resolved or some third 
party?

Even if Israel proved beyond the shadow of doubt that a violation took 
place, Palestinian claims that the violation was rectified might be accepted 
at face value by a third party.

What kind of “total legitimacy for any action deemed necessary to preserve 
them” are we talking about?

When one says “action deemed necessary” – who does the “deeming”?

Is Israel to sit around waiting for some committee to review its operational 
plans for approval (which they might leak to the Arabs – but let’s not 
digress)?

These are not idle concerns.

Only someone intentionally ignoring Israel’s experience over the years with 
various forms of third party observers could dismiss these very serious 
issues.

Would international guarantees “deter” violations?

That depends on what they are.

Ironically, improperly worded guarantees that ultimately prevent Israel from 
independently acting against Palestinian violations that it has 
independently identified could actually encourage violations.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis)
(Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava)
Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730
INTERNET ADDRESS: imra@netvision.net.il
Website: http://www.imra.org.il