Subjects: Fundamentals of Israeli Security

What are the Facts Behind Jerusalem’s Two Terrible Hours

By

Begin discusses his frustration with the Government’s responses to a recent attack in Jerusalem. First Begin criticizes Pinchas Lavon, the Minister of Defense. He explains Lavon’s mistakes and what he could have done to prevent the surprise attack. Additionally, Begin speaks about Moshe Sharret’s leadership and how the Government is killing its own nation in a sovereign way. Then Begin shifts to address multiple opportune moments Israel could have liberated more of the Homeland and ended “senseless bloodshed.” Begin concludes by comparing Israel’s Government to the Greek character Calipides.

A Friendly Warning to Mr. Dulles

By

Begin compares and contrasts the America-Guatemala-Czech triangle to the Israel-Arab-American triangle. He first speaks about America’s active defense against Guatemala’s relationship with Czechoslovakia. When speaking about political asylum for a Guatemalan politician, he also shares that “Jewish opinion, both here and overseas, will not be able to remain indifferent if evil befalls [on] one of our people’s best friends.” Begin then speaks about the America-Guatemala-Czech and the Israel-Arab-American triangles in regards to weaponry, population differences, and possibility of attack. Begin speaks about communism verses capitalism. He shares that “Disraeli once said that nations are ruled either by force or by tradition.” His final point focuses on America’s role as a leader for the free world and that it is problematic for America to guide by force.

Who Will Act For Israel – If not Israel

By

Begin focuses on Moshe Sharett’s and the UN’s reactions to the murder at Scorpions’ Pass and the Jewish reprisal at Nahalin. After Scorpion’s Pass, Begin shares that Sharett indirectly approached the UN Security Council and ultimately the UN Security Council did not think the case was proven. Then Nahalin occurred and, while Begin condones the attack, the UN and Sharett condemned it. Begin continues to express why he does not condemn the attack and further explains the double standard the UN places on Israel. He explains that Israel must do what is best for itself, including stopping the spillage of Jewish blood. Begin shares that the Ha’aretz newspaper criticized his standpoints, however, after Nahalin, it deemed the event to be ‘cruel logic.’ In his conclusion Begin acknowledges that the Arab guerilla warfare will continue and no Israeli citizen is safe from these attacks. Begin argues that the warfare will stop once there is no more partition, once the entire Homeland is liberated.

The Only Way to Obtain Peace

By

In an interview with a correspondent from the news-magazine “Ha-olam Ha-ze,” Begin explains that there is currently a guerilla war being conducted by Israel’s enemies and Begin says it is crucial to think about how to end this war. The conversation shifts to talk about an ‘opportune moment.’ He provides examples of these moments, a current one being Arabs not feeling strong enough to attack Israel in a general war. By using force at this point in time, it will stop the guerilla war and end the conversation about destroying Israel. However, the Government will not act in this ‘opportune moment.’ Begin later explains that it is problematic that Israel has no allies. It is also discussed how other countries would respond to Israel partaking in military action. If military action took place and Israel gained land West of Israel (Transjordan), Begin explains that this would bring peace. He argues that real peace does not mean a peace treaty, but means a stoppage of bloodshed.

The Irresponsible Conduct of Mr. Sharet

By

Begin writes about the Kibiya operation and his disagreement about Moshe Sharett’s response. He first mentions that unlike other nations fighting to retain independence, if Israel loses independence it will not only be a national disaster, it will mean annihilation of its citizens. He shifts to address Sharett’s comment about Arab States partaking in a cold war against Israel. Begin explains that because there is bloodshed, it is actually a hot war. Begin explains that Sharett’s response about Kibiya was irresponsible for multiple of reasons. He mentions that Diaspora Jewry did not react the same negative way Knesset members reacted, even though their news sources made it seem like the Kibiya operation sprung out from nowhere. He also brings up irresponsible actions of Jewish leaders in the midst of Israel’s independence. Begin concludes that Sharett’s comments about Kibiya are problematic because he did not mention the Jewish bloodshed.