Thoughts of transferring the Arab population from the country had been on the
minds of Zionist leaders since the very beginning of the state.
Salman Masalha
The Protocols of the Elders of Israel
It is common nowadays to attribute the policies of exclusion and
discrimination practiced against Arab citizens of Israel to what is known as
the Israeli right. It is true now more than ever, as a general election
approaches, that the nationalist, religious, and messianic right has gone very
far in adopting a racist ideology that rejects democratic reliance on elected
officials from Arab parties. However, it must be said that this racist right
exists and has long existed both in the current coalition and in the
opposition vying for power.
The authors of the
Declaration of Independence
knew how to articulate a vision of equality and promised that the State of
Israel “will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its
inhabitants… it will ensure complete equality of social and political rights
to all its inhabitants irrespective of religion, race or sex.” They even
appealed to the Arab citizens of Israel to “participate in the upbuilding of
the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in
all its provisional and permanent institutions,” but it seems that this entire
vision was merely lip service and for the sake of foreign relations.
The arguments being made against the right-wing government these days
sweep the bitter truth under the rug. For this right wing is following, step
for step, the Zionist ideology of old—the very ideology from which the
so-called “Zionist left,” which established the state, drew its
inspiration.
The “Good Old Days” of
Mapai:
It is worth taking a brief look back at the “good old days” days of Mapai’s
rule A classified document dated February 9, 1960, marked “Top Secret,”
reveals the innermost thoughts of those gathered at a forum discussing the
Arab minority in Israel. The meeting was convened at the Prime Minister’s
Office following a party forum at
Beit Berl, chaired by
Moshe Sharett, which
had discussed the issue of the Arab minority.
Teddy Kollek convened
a distinguished group that included
Shmuel Dibon, Amos Manor,
Yitzhak Navon,
Yosef Nahmias, A. Natan,
Shimon Peres,
Mishael Shaham, and Uri Lubrani. He
requested that the meeting be held at the Prime Minister’s Office to discuss
the issue at a government forum because, in his words: “This issue, which has
political and security aspects, is of national importance.”
This forum was convened in the wake of the results of the elections for
the Fourth Knesset. In those elections,
Maki (the
Communist Party of Israel) had suffered a crushing defeat, and its strength
was cut in half—from 6 out of 120 Knesset members in the Third Knesset to 3
Knesset members in the Fourth Knesset.
Divide and Rule:
Shmuel Dibon, head of the Arab Department at the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, who had previously served as the Prime Minister’s advisor on Arab
affairs from 1954 to 1965, opens the discussion and poses four key questions:
“Where do we stand, what are we doing, where are we headed, and how should we
prepare for what lies ahead?”
Dibon attributes Maki’s defeat
primarily to the conflict that had arisen between
Abdul Karim Qasim’s regime in Iraq and
Gamal Abdel Nasser’s regime in Egypt. The Nasserists in Maki began operating independently and
even published the newspaper “Al-Ard”. Dibon emphasizes that as it could lead to the organization of various
non-communist nationalist elements and expresses his fear: “If swift action is
not taken, it is not inconceivable that we will have Nasserist Knesset members
in the next Knesset.” He proposes several ways to address the situation:
coordinated security operations by security agencies, the government, the ״Shin Bet״, and the police; actions against Maki and nationalism; a communal policy
aimed at fostering the Druze community, cultivating a distinct identity among
Christian communities, and “melting the identity of the largest community—the
Muslim community.” In short, he seeks to encourage communal division among
Arabs and prevent nationwide organization, such as an association of local
council heads.
Urbanization of Arabs?
Unlike the concerns expressed in recent years by mayors regarding the
migration of Arab citizens to Jewish or mixed cities, in those days Dibon
actually proposed opening up mixed cities to the Arab population. Indeed, he
viewed the urbanization of the rural population as essential from both a
security and an economic standpoint. In his words: “It is better to have
5,000 Arabs settled in Haifa than 5,000 unemployed Arabs in the vicinity of
Nazareth,” Dibon told the secret forum, adding that the transition to urban
settlement is of great economic importance: “Settlement in cities must be
permanent in order to prevent funds from being drained from the national
economy’s cash flow.”
Another participant, A. Natan addressed the Arab
intellectual class and stated that the handling of the Arab minority must be
meticulously planned and coordinated. He points to a future danger that may
arise among this class, which, due to its lack of integration into the
economy, may find its way into the “Al-Ard family”. He notes: “The security
threat posed by the existence of a disaffected Arab intelligentsia is not so
serious today, since the educated are still young and inexperienced, but in
the future they are expected to pose a serious threat.”
Transfer:
The idea of expelling the Arab population that remained in Israel after 1948
also came up repeatedly in the “top-secret” discussions of those days. This is
evident in the remarks by Uri Lubrani, a Foreign Ministry official who had
also served as the Prime Minister’s advisor on Arab affairs in 1956.
Lubrani sought to highlight the question of “Judaization or development of the
Galilee,” showing that thoughts of Judaizing this region had already crossed
the minds of Zionist leaders across the political spectrum 65 years ago. He
added: “I believe there is room to seriously examine the possibility of
removing the Arabs from the country and transferring them to other countries.”
Thoughts of transferring the Arab population from the country had been
on the minds of Zionist leaders since the very beginning of the state.
Evidence of this can be found in a letter from August 1948, which
Yosef Weitz, one of
the leaders of the Jewish National Fund (KKL), addressed to Moshe Sharett
(Shertok), Israel’s first foreign minister: “Please allow me to remind you
that during our meeting with Ben-Gurion on Sunday, July 25, you told me that
from now on the initiative on the issue of ‘transfer’ would be in your hands
and that you would immediately call for consultation and action.” Weitz sought
to expedite the discussion of the matter, as he viewed the realization of the
transfer as “the crown of our victory in the War of Israel, and the sooner the
better.”
Against the Intelligentsia:
Mishael Shaham, the military governor-general, argues that the Arab population
cannot be integrated because it is “an inseparable part of the Arab nation in
neighboring countries.” At the same time, he adds: “If there is peace between
Israel and the Arab states, the Arab population—and especially the
intelligentsia—will emigrate from Israel to the Arab states,” which would
alleviate the severity of Israel’s demographic problem stemming from “the
enormous natural growth rate of the Arabs in the country.” Shaham declares
that he is opposed to encouraging Arab intellectuals in Israel. This position
does not stem from the difficulties involved in their integration into Israeli
society, “but rather because they must not be integrated,” he states
emphatically. Furthermore, he calls for measures to preserve the clan-based
structure among Arabs, noting that this structure is even preserved in the
local elections held in Arab villages. In Shaham’s view, the clan-based
structure is “a dam against unbridled tempests.”
Against Urbanization:
To conclude the discussion, Shimon Peres suggests not thinking too big, but
rather focusing efforts on raising awareness about Arab issues within Jewish
communities and encouraging consumption in the Arab sector. However, Peres
sees a great danger in the migration of Arabs to permanent settlement in mixed
cities: “Arab urbanization is a catastrophe of the first order because of the
danger of the Arabization of urban centers.” Instead, he concludes with an
immortal Zionist phrase: “The Galilee must be Judaized.”
Reading the “top-secret” minutes of the plots hatched by Israel’s elders
against the writer of these lines as far back as 1960, when he was only seven
years old, it becomes clear that there is nothing new under the sun of Zionist
ideology. Then as now, the racism rampant in the country regarding the
treatment of Arab citizens—from both the left and the right—is alive and
well.
Thus, these days I find myself compelled to demand, in no uncertain
terms, a public apology from the leadership of the Zionist state. I propose a
formula for an apology that is surely familiar to them from the Yom Kippur
prayerbook:“We have sinned, we have plundered, we have spoken slander, we have
wronged, we have oppressed, we have committed crimes, we have tormented, and
so on.” Otherwise, I will neither forgive nor forget.
For Hebrew, press here
Salman Masalha
