Category Archives: Israel

Update II: Comity Confirmed Between Israel & (Old) South Africa

Britain, History, Israel, Military, South-Africa, Trade

The Israel-hating West will begrudge the plucky Jewish State its close relationship with the Old South Africa, but not Barely a Blog and friends. It is common knowledge that Israel worked closely to help South Africa develop a nuclear arsenal. A new book confirms as factual what was previously presumed.

My own book most certainly does not tell “a troubling story of Cold War paranoia, moral compromises, and Israel’s estrangement from the left” (OMIGOD), to quote from the Random-House blurb about one Sasha Polakow-Suransky’s new book “revealing the previously classified details of countless arms deals conducted behind the backs of Israel’s own diplomatic corps and in violation of a United Nations arms embargo. Based on extensive archival research and exclusive interviews with former generals and high-level government officials in both countries.”

The South African documents obtained by Polakow-Suransky and published in today’s Guardian, include “top secret” South African minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries as well as direct negotiations in Zurich between Peres and Botha.

The Guardian:

The South African military chief of staff, Lieutenant General RF Armstrong, who attended the meetings, drew up a memo laying out the benefits of South Africa obtaining the Israeli missiles – but only if they were fitted with nuclear weapons.
Polakow-Suransky said the minutes record that at the meeting in Zurich on 4 June 1975, Botha asked Peres about obtaining Jericho missiles, codenamed Chalet, with nuclear warheads.

“Minister Botha expressed interest in a limited number of units of Chalet subject to the correct payload being available,” the minutes said. The document then records that: “Minister Peres said that the correct payload was available in three sizes”.

The use of a euphemism, the “correct payload”, reflects Israeli sensitivity over the nuclear issue. Armstrong’s memorandum makes clear the South Africans were interested in the Jericho missiles solely as a means of delivering nuclear weapons.
The use of euphemisms in a document that otherwise speaks openly about conventional weapons systems also points to the discussion of nuclear weapons.
In the end, South Africa did not buy nuclear warheads from Israel and eventually developed its own atom bomb.
The Israeli authorities tried to prevent South Africa’s post-apartheid government from declassifying the documents.

The documents declassified in The Unspoken Alliance: Israel’s Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa have galvanized the festering “international community” even more against Israel. Whereas to me these secret agreements actually demonstrate how responsible both countries were with their arsenal; perceptions differ among UN functionaries, most of whom are either entirely sympathetic to or of the undeveloped world.

Israel will be made to pay for being friend to the ostracized country, as it pretended to abide international boycotts on South Africa. In an attempt to distance the adored Yitzhak Rabin from the deals, the author even floats the theory that Shimon Peres, who brokered the deal, was his own agent, working alone. Darn, those Israelis!

Thanks to Myles Kantor for sending the story, as it appeared in YNetNews:

According to the Guardian report, the documents indicate that the two sides met on March 31, 1975. Polakow-Suransky [“the American academic who uncovered the documents while researching a book on the military and political relationship between the two countries”] wrote in his book, which was published in the United States this week, “Israel’s secret alliance with apartheid South Africa. At the talks Israeli officials formally offered to sell South Africa some of the nuclear-capable Jericho missiles in its arsenal.”
Among those who participated in the meeting was the South African military Chief of Staff, Lieutenant General RF Armstrong, who prepared a memorandum that lists the benefits of acquiring Jericho missiles, but only if they were fitted with nuclear weapons.
The memo, which was classified as “top secret” and dated the same day as the meeting with the Israeli officials, was exposed in the past, but its context was unclear, as it was unknown that it served as a basis for the Israeli offer made on the same day.
In the memo, Armstrong wrote:” In considering the merits of a weapon system such as the one being offered, certain assumptions have been made: That the missiles will be armed with nuclear warheads manufactured in RSA (Republic of South Africa) or acquired elsewhere.”

The documents published by the Guardian are of interest, although I find the greatest significance in this warm note Peres, who has always been a conservatively minded individual (most members of the Israeli Old Guard were tough and patriotic), pens to minister Eschel Mostert Rhoodie. In it Peres alludes to
the two countries’ shared determination to resist their enemies. He implies too that South Africa and Israel were both refusing to submit to the injustices against them.

This indeed is most revealing about the sympathy Israel harbored for South Africa. Having resided in both countries during those times, I can attest to the feelings of comity between the two countries.

Update I: Glisson is wrong (see Comments). The facts as they have emerged are significant—in as much as they cement what we know about a long-standing, close collaboration. Writes Jane Hunter, publisher of the monthly journal Israeli Foreign Affairs, in April of 1986:

“Essentially, the two nations pledged themselves to each other’s survival and freedom from foreign interference. Over the years this cooperation has taken on a symbiotic quality: from Israel South Africa gets advanced engineering, including military technology unobtainable elsewhere due to sanctions and embargoes; from South Africa Israel receives strategic raw materials and capital for a variety of purposes.”

Another “real event” ignored by our friend is the fact that, by the time this exchange occurred (1970s), Israel had already cobbled the weapons together. This is an infant country compared to the Afrikaner nation, which had settled the tip of the continent and forged an identity two hundred years prior.

Still, I must be one of the few Jews who’s proud of the fact that Israel, in the person of the tough, laconic Yitzhak Shamir (whom paleos are fond of calling a terrorist for fighting those wicked Britons—I bet a hate for the Brits was another Israeli and Afrikaner uniting factor), told the US it would take no part in its attempts to cripple South Africa:

Israel’s foreign minister, told a New York audience that Israel would not institute sanctions against South Africa. Instead, Shamir said, Israel would leave that task to the great powers and continue its “normal” relations with Pretoria.

Update II (May 26): Given Barbara’s prodigious knowledge and general fairness, I await a follow-up on what the Brits, not beloved by the Afrikaner and Israeli old guard, did to the Jews before they gained independence in Israel. Sink a ship with refugees from Nazi Europe? Quarantine them as the Americans did to the Japanese? Remove weapons intended for self-defense against Arab marauders? Have at it.

Devious Deployment Of The Apartheid Epithet Against Israel

Anti-Semitism, Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Race, South-Africa

Larry Auster on the meaning of the devious deployment of the apartheid epithet against Israel by “paleostinian conservatives” who, arguably, once were able to see separate development in South Africa as a desperate survival strategy by a besieged minority (now being ethnically cleansed by the majority):

“It wasn’t just paleos, but mainstream conservatives, who opposed the divestment strategy against South Africa. But such is the paleocons’ hatred of the Jewish state that they now adopt as a weapon against Israel that same left-wing policy which they themselves opposed when it was used against South Africa and which by their own estimation has led to the ruin of that country. There are no words to describe adequately the sickness and evil of the anti-Israel paleocons.”

Read “The Paleostinian Conservative calls for boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel.”

Updated: Begging For Muslim Sensitivity

IMMIGRATION, Islam, Israel, Jihad, Multiculturalism, Private Property, Religion

THE LATEST IN THE ANNALS OF DHIMMITUDE. The American Society for Muslim Advancement (very literally) plans to erect a “Mega-Mosque” at Ground Zero. They say (taqiyya anyone?) that this is a peace offering—a center intended to foster Muslim tolerance and temperance.

I agree with the apoplectic activists: this amounts to lording it over the dhimmis-in-training. It is a triumphant act of supremacy, as the erection of minarets and the mosques has been throughout the annals of Islam. This is a bitch slap to the subjugated population.

However, as much as I approve of the activists (and I do not mean to be cynical), theirs is nothing more than frenetic cry-baby Brownian motion. There is no intellectual force, much less real force, behind a demand for sensitivity from those you believe to be worse than insensitive.

Such activism reminds me of the victim impact statement in our Courts. How humiliating and futile is it to plead for contrition and kindness from entities incapable of such sentiment.

When you’re reduced to asking a cunning conqueror to be nice; you’ve been bitch slapped good. Besides, ask yourself, “Why the distrust of fellow Muslims?” The Muslims in question say they are sincere in their endeavor; why doubt them?

Activists are acting out of emotion and have failed to examine what they’re really saying and, then, say it out loud.

Restricting acquisitive property rights in a free society should never be entertained. I’ll fight you if you try! But what other course of action are these emotion-driven protests hoping for? Again: what the activists are ludicrously requesting is kindness and consideration from those they regard as conquistadors—for they refuse to go straight to the heart of the matter and address the only legitimate, if incremental, course of action:

I hope I don’t have to spell it out for you. See:

“Beck, Wilders, and His Boosters’ Blind Spot”
“Jews Jeopardized By Muslim Immigration”
“Minarets No More”

And much more (use the search facility on this site, and on IlanaMercer.com, please).

Update (May 17): Myron’s interesting comment down here seems to imply that unless the Ground-Zero controversy passes the Israel-parallels test, it is deserving of no more than a dismissive shrug. Well, I’m an American commentator, first; making sure that every American dilemma passes the fairness-to-Israel test is not the mandate I’ve accepted or will ever pursue. I’ll leave that “yente,” “boba,” neocon kvetching to others (my “Holocaustism” comment applies here).

The Dome of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa Mosque examples Myron brings support the point of historical conquest, plonked as they were on Jewish sacred sites. But because Americans don’t know or care about them, Myron dismisses the concerns expressed by misguided, hysterical activists, to which “Begging For Muslim Sensitivity” gives voice (but slams).

Again: We disagree about the Israel Test.

Moreover, building the Mosque on the site of an Islamic victory against the West is symbolic—and a harbinger of things dhimmi to come. There is something nihilistic, atomistic, and effete in dismissing, even accepting, what I believe is a bitch slap from Islam’s messengers. It is the hallmark of the liberal, Western man. Muslims are too macho to dismiss insults and one-upmanship from “our side.”

I more than approve of Myron’s refusal to turn “the Towers into the Beit Hamikdash (Temple of Jerusalem).” It fits right in with my anti-hysteria, anti- 9/12 projects sentiments—these are designed to sustain the state of heightened emotional arousal that arose in the aftermath of 9/11.

And emotional arousal does nothing for clear thinking (although it helps in bed).

Update II: Bibi Declines More Barack Boorishness (BHO Performs Miracles)

Barack Obama, Foreign Policy, Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, South-Africa, WMD

DEBKAfile: “Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s last-minute decision to cancel his attendance at the US-sponsored summit on nuclear terror, opening in Washington Monday, April 11” has made the White House furious. The Summit would invariably see the “Egyptian, Turkish and other Muslim rulers slam Israel for its presumed atomic arsenal.”

DEBKAfile’s Jerusalem sources say the prime minister acted out of two motives:

1. Israeli government circles were advised to read two reports leaked to US newspapers ( Washington Post: Obama weighs new peace plan for the Middle East and the New York Times: Should US design Mideast peace plan?) which appeared to herald the White House’s intention to impose a peace settlement on Israel.
Our sources in Washington and Jerusalem named National Security Adviser James Jones as the source of the leaks.
One senior source said the leaked reports were serious because “President Obama has his mind set on getting the borders of Israel and the future Palestinian state negotiated and settled in four months. This process leaves no room for any discussion on the security frontiers promised Israel for decades, yet the US president expects the Netanyahu government to accept Washington’s borders-cum-Palestinian state package without demur. His planners have shaped a Palestinian state within borders that make no provision for Israeli security. That is something the Netanyahu government will never accept.”
2. At the end of their stormy conversation in the White House, Obama handed Netanyahu a list of 11 issues on which he asked Jerusalem to respond. The prime minister continues to withhold his replies having been convinced from close study of the issues/queries that they were clever formulations designed to trick him into endorsing the new American plan for the Middle East.
Without answers to Obama’s eleven puzzles, Netanyahu does not feel his trip to Washington is necessary…

B. Hussein Obama has hatched a plan to impose “peace” on Israel.” Word has it that the “right of return” for Palestinian refugees is in the mix, as is the status of Jerusalem.

The Right of Return for any self-styled, United-Nations-Relief and Works-Agency-sponsored “Palestinian” agitator will entail absorbing millions of self-styled Arab refugees into Israel proper, and is, of course, a euphemism for the destruction of the Jewish State.

For obvious reasons, the One-State-Solution I call the “Final Solution to the Jewish State.”

Update I (April 12): BHO Honors Zuma. The farce continues. America’s president hangs with and honors (unjustly) the president of South Africa. Obama, who loves the futility, pomp and splendor of summits, “appeared with South African President Jacob Zuma in Washington.” This, after dissing Bibi Netanyahu.

Boorish Barack called South Africa a “‘moral leader’ on the nuclear issue, since it began — and then dismantled — a nuclear program during the apartheid era.”

The people being killed back home, the Afrikaners, founded the Pelindaba Nuclear Research Center, built a couple of bombs, and then disassembled them for the promise of peace on earth.

Now Zuma Zulu is being credited for the sacrifice.

Update II (April 13): BHO PERFORMS MIRACLES. “Obama: We’ve Made the World Safer.” Is there anything this guy can’t achieve? All it took was the power of His presence and a verbal agreement between the 47 nations which partook in His Nuclear Security Summit in Washington to make the miracle of nuclear disarmament materialize.

Wait a sec: “Pressed by CBS News’ Bill Plante, he also acknowledged that there was no enforcement mechanism to the communique that came out of the conference.”