Subjects: Golda Meir

You Have No Right to Partition Eretz Israel’

By

This article summarizes and quotes Begin in his speech that explains why Gahal put forward a motion of no confidence in the Government. He explains how Golda Meir’s interview with the London Times suggests that she believes in partitioning Israel. Begin argues that she did not get approval from the Government or the Knesset. In the interview, Meir made a distinction between the Golan Heights and Judea and Samaria. Begin argues that in both cases “we paid in causalities.” Additionally, he argues against her decision to praise Anwar Sadat for being the first Egyptian leader to consider peace with Israel. He concludes that if the Government does not want to resign, then it should go to the polls to see if Israelis support their actions.

Israel Diplomacy is Moving in Circles

By

Begin explains that based on Anwar Sadat’s words and actions, it is delusional of Israel to believe that peace will come from the Rogers Plan. In a speech, Sadat says that Egypt’s goals of war are to force Israel back into the pre-Six-Day War borders and to safeguard Palestinian rights. Furthermore, Sadat threatens to end the ceasefire if Israel does not begin to withdrawal from the east bank of the Suez Canal. Begin understands that the meaning of these goals is to destroy Israel. His response is that Israel needs to answer strongly to show that threats will not weaken Israel. Begin believes that people are delusional if they support withdrawal and therefore, trust international forces to secure Israel. Begin does not trust the current peace agreements. In the end, he argues that peace agreements need to through direct negotiations and that Jews have an unconditional right to Israel.

Israel Must Rid Itself of the Jarring Debacle

By

Begin focuses on the actions of the Israeli Government, which caused Gahal to leave the Government. In regard to Rogers initiative, the Government at first rejected it, and then later accepted it. Begin mentions that the U.S. State Department ignored the Government’s amendments and claimed that Israel had accepted the original Rogers initiative. This original led to Resolution 242. Even though the Israeli Government had previously rejected some of the notions in the Rogers initiative, they paradoxically made the decision to work towards accomplishing this resolution. Begin explains that Gahal could not be part of a Government that accepted such initiative because it completely went against both Gahal’s platform for “no partition” and the accepted Government policy of peace treaties being achieved through direct negotiations. In the conclusion, Begin focuses on the danger Israel faces from its neighbors as a result of the Government accepting the Rogers initiative.

Our Right and Security

By

Begin discusses the importance of keeping the land Israel gained in the Six-Day War. Begin explains the difference between negative and positive zealotry. He argues that Gahal has positive zealotry, and says that such zealotry helped establish Israel and encourage love for the Jewish Nation and its Motherland. Begin then talks about the importance of protecting the Motherland. He argues that the idea to agree to go back to the green line will threaten Israel because of the Ketyusha rockets, amongst other weapons Israel’s enemies have. Begin quotes statements made my individuals and international documents to prove that since Israel acted out of self-defense during the Six-Day War, it has a right to remain in the land gained. He states that Israel’s Government’s illusion of peace will result in bloodshed. He concludes by describing Judaea’s loss of Jerusalem and how two generations later, they fought back and returned to the land.

In Israel There Must Be a Sobering-Up

By

Begin focuses on his disagreements with the Jarring Mission. First, he talks about the Israeli Government, which Gahal is no longer part of. He talks about how it was a problematic for the Government to use the word “withdrawal” when wanting peace with Arab neighbors. Such words led to Jarring’s two principles for permanent peace which lead to the UN Resolution 242. Begin believes that the Government put themselves in this situation. Regardless, Begin also believes that Jarring’s principles do not give the Arab nations any obligations. He believes that although they will claim that they already have acknowledged the sovereignty, the integrity, and the independence of Israel, their actions do not show it. Because of the 3 no’s, Arab nations insisted to meet separately and to not have direct negotiations. Jarring agreed to this. Begin hopes that Jarring and others will realize that the Arab nations are bluffing when saying they want peace with Israel.