There’s something that’s missing from the latest AP stories on the negotiations with Syria about the Golan Heights.
Israel captured the strategic plateau in the 1967 Mideast war and later annexed the area. Many Israelis are reluctant to relinquish the Golan, which overlooks northern Israel and borders the Sea of Galilee, a key source of drinking water.
No, that’s not it.
In the most recent talks, conducted by then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak, Israel reportedly offered to withdraw from the Golan, but the talks broke down because Syria wanted Israel to pull back several hundred yards more to the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee.
No, that’s not it.
Israel and Syria have fought three wars, their forces have clashed in Lebanon, and more recently, Syria has given support to Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas and Palestinian militant groups in the Gaza Strip. Israel is also concerned about Syria’s close ties to Iran.
No, that’s not it.
The Israeli public opposes giving up the Golan, home to a thriving tourism and wine industry. An opinion poll last week found that only 19 percent of Israelis are willing to cede the entire plateau – even in exchange for peace.
Nope. That’s not it, either. But hey, way to make Israelis look like warmongering, selfish scumbags, AP. No, Israelis don’t want to give back the Golan, even in exchange for peace. And by the way, how is that not an editorial statement? The “even” makes it seem that Israelis want war, no matter what. Nice little bit of yellow journalism there.
Perhaps we can find out why 81 percent of Israelis don’t want to give back the Golan. Maybe we can dig around a bit and see what the AP thinks is not important enough to mention about the Golan when describing why so many Israelis are reluctant to give the Heights back. In fact, we can find it in the AP factbox that was released on May 21st, so we know they had the ability to relay this information only five days ago:
Soldiers shelled northern Israel from the Golan Heights between 1948 and 1967. Israel captured the territory in the 1967 Mideast War and annexed it in 1981. No country recognized the annexation.
Ohhhhhh. Syria regularly bombarded Israeli communities from the Golan Heights for nineteen years. Say. I wonder if that has anything to do with why 81 percent of Israelis don’t want to give back the Golan.
The AP description above makes it seem like Israelis want to keep the Golan for their own personal pleasure and profit—not because it’s a strategically important plateau used to launch deadly attacks on civilian communities. (Gee, that sounds familiar. The Arab ways have not changed in sixty years.) The shelling stopped on June 10, 1967, when the IDF captured the Golan Heights.
After the 1948-49 War of Independence, the Syrians built extensive fortifications on the Heights, from where they systematically shelled civilian targets in Israel and launched terrorist attacks (in gross violation of Article III of the Israel-Syria Armistice Agreement of 20 July 1949). 140 Israelis were killed and many more were injured in these attacks between 1949 and 1967; heavy property damage was also inflicted. During the 1967 Six-Day War, the IDF captured the Golan Heights — in response to Syrian attacks — in just over 24 hours of intense fighting on 9-10 June. Nearly all of the Golan’s Arab inhabitants fled as a result of the war; four Druze villages remain, three on the slopes of Mt. Hermon and one in the northern Golan.
Funny how you never see mention of Syria being in violation of the Armistice Agreement—for nineteen years—by shelling northern Israel, and yet you always see drek like the AP boilerplate about how no one recognizes Israel’s annexation of the Golan.
Another sterling example of your objective media at work. Another example of why I’ll keep blogging, as long as the media keep on defaming Israel.
I’ll probably get in trouble with someone for saying this, but I think Israel is far behind on annexing. I’m not talking about a “Greater Israel” or any such, I just think she needs defensive depth. The Golan was a problem for Israel, and she made it an asset, a barrier against aggression. As far as I’m concerned she needs to create uninhabited zones outside of her borders that expand as the threat requires. She should start with the range of the Qassam rockets to start. If they get longer range missles, push ’em back even farther. They don’t need to be occupied zones either, I’m thinking more along the lines of uninhabitable zones, but hey, that’s just me.
Sounds good to me.
And if the Arabs don’t like it, they could…. Just stop trying to destroy Israel! Then the “safe” borders could be restored.
I don’t see a problem with the AP’s reporting. They are only following accepted journalistic practice, which is that cross-border attacks on Israel don’t count. See current reporting regarding Sderot for confirmation of this.