In my book Modern Political Terrorism, I attempt to explain that there are usually three parties involved in domestic or political abuse (Published by Richard Altschuler & Associates 2007).
Since Israel was established as a sovereign State in 1948, despite continuous boycotts and sanctions from the U.N., Europe and many of the African and Muslim States, it was always able to look to the United States as its lone reliable source of support, emotionally, diplomatically, and materially.
Throughout the Jewish exile, protection of the Jewish nation by a benevolent Super-Power provided a certain respite after so many centuries of relentless persecution.
Unlike Russia and China, after winning wars, the United States never attempted to convert, assert authority over, or impose its culture or religious beliefs over anyone.
Not only did West Germany, Japan, and Western Europe thrive after WWII, but the United States also took it upon itself, at an enormous cost, to defend these countries against future threats.
Furthermore, after the Korean War, she took a pledge to defend South Korea, in addition to her Defense Pact with Japan and Taiwan, to defend them against the threats posed by North Korea, a puppet state of China, and even China itself.
South Korea would be swallowed up by North Korea and China were it not for the protection of the “Benevolent Superpower”- America
Israel also fell under this umbrella of “specially favored nation” status.
The main point of this is that American goodwill, by and large, has provide a rare instance in contemporary history of good caretaker functioning.
Considering the growing menace of communism by Russia and China,
American caretaking of its weaker democratic allies required a lot of posturing, military innovation, and clever diplomacy in order to contain the Soviet threat.
What ensued for a half-century of the Post WW11 period was called “the Cold War”, testimony to the success that the dreaded WWIII never happened.
Despite the common belief that America was “always there” for the Jewish nation, I will cite two instances illustrating this to be somewhat of an illusion.
One can begin by examining existing historical archives, such as the minutes of diplomatic exchanges leading to the summit held in Bermuda in 1942.
December 17th, 1942 saw the announcement in the British House of Commons, the United Nations, and a declaration broadcast in 23 languages to all Nazi-occupied Europe announcing that the systematic extermination of European Jews had already claimed the lives of two million Jews.
However, as thousands continued to be gassed each day using the poison Zyklon-B, London and Washington responded with a thundering silence. (“The Final Solution: The attempt to exterminate the Jews of Europe, 1939-1945”, by Gerald Reitlinger, New York, 1961).
This had in fact become policy; that neither the State Department nor the London Foreign Office, wanted to carry the burden of a “Jewish Refugee Problem”.
Nor did the West want to antagonize Arab communities by allowing Jewish flight from genocide to refuge in Palestine.
As a result, at least 500,000 lives could have been saved just in the last 8 months of the War, when it was already obvious that Hitler had lost.
This historical fact exposes the pathetic rationale of “not wanting to divert from our military objective” as a legitimate excuse used by the Allied Forces for not bombing the railroad to Auschwitz.
This appears not to have escaped Netanyahu’s attention when he spoke at a gathering on Holocaust Commemoration day at Auschwitz.
He noted “that just a tilt of the wing” of Allied Bombers could easily have taken out the railways to the death camps.
At a deeper level, Netanyahu was noting that this “negligence of inaction” during the holocaust did not go unnoticed.
In Golda Meir’ s Autobiography (Futura Publications, 1975), it is apparent that the message communicated by Netanyahu was lost to her.
For several weeks prior to the Yom Kippur War, Meir had become concerned about the continuous build-up of Syrian troops on the Northern Front and the rapid evacuations of Russian advisers. However, former Chiefs of Staff, Moshe Dayan and Chaim Bar-Lev, as well as the Americans, reassured her that the chances of a sneak-attack were far from certain.
Her suspicions remained so high however that she called an emergency meeting of the War Cabinet on Friday October 5.
By eight o` clock on Yom Kippur night the meeting began.
David Elazar, Chief of Staff, recommended mobilization of the entire airforce and four divisions.
Moshe Dayan recommended a more limited call-up, arguing that a full mobilization before a shot was fired would provide the world with an excuse to call Israel the aggressors.
Meir recounts that she would follow Dayan’ s approach of considering world opinion and showing restraint.
“If we strike first we will get no help from anyone”. She then called in the U.S. Ambassador, Kenneth Keating, for a meeting.
I told him two things:
1) According to our Intelligence, the enemy attacks would start late in afternoon
2) Since making a pre-emptive strike would antagonize the U.S. perhaps some form of U.S. intervention could avert a war.
While they were still in the meeting, the military secretary burst into the room with the news that the shooting had started.
On October 7th, a day after Israel was attacked, General Dayan returned from one of his tours to inform the Prime Minister that the situation in the south was so bad that there should be a substantial pull-back”.
“The Egyptians had crossed the Suez Canal, and our forces in the Sinai had been battered”.
The Syrians had also deeply penetrated the Golan Heights.
“On both fronts casualties were very high. There was also the burning question as to whether we should tell the nation how bad the situation really was”.
Golda Meir continues her biography:
“I was calling Ambassador Simcha Dinitz in Washington throughout the day and night”.
“Where was the airlift? Why was it not underway?”
Adds Meir: “The story has already been published of that delay. Of the U.S. Defense Department’s initial reluctance to send military supplies-when all the time huge transports of Soviet aid were being brought by sea and air to Egypt and Syria”.
Israeli aircraft were being rapidly depleted, “not in air battles but to Soviet missiles”.
Two British authors, Andrew and Leslie Cockburn, in “Dangerous Liaison”, (New York: Harper Collins 1991), also explain what happened, but based on confidential information obtained from retired American and British intelligence sources.
As a former prosecutor with the U.S. Justice Department’s Nazi-hunting unit, John Loftus had unprecedented access to top-secret CIA and NATO archives.
In their National Bestseller “The Secret War against the Jews” (John Loftus and Mark Aarons, 1994, St Martin’s Griffin, 1994), the authors inform us of the extent of a shadowy sub-narrative.
I have extracted a small sample of this as it pertains to the 1974 Yom Kippur War:
The Arabs were oversupplied with weapons from the soviets, while the United States sat on their hands until it should have been too late”.
Meir states later in the memoirs in her memoirs that “Today I know what I should have done”.
The Investigative report by Loftus and Aarons based on the acquisition and decoding of top-secret documents, and twelve years of interviews with over five hundred former spies and Intelligence agents is difficult to refute.
In fact, the failure to respond to Israel’s needs at a time of mortal crisis during WWII was played out once again during the Yom Kippur War, and is more evident today than ever before.
It corresponds well with Golda Meir’s autobiography.
Moreover, it serves as an illustration of how inadequate leadership by Israeli leaders (the nation’s caretakers) during a time of crises placed the Jewish nation in peril.
Golda Meir’ s failure to act decisively makes more sense when looking at the picture through the database of decoded U.S. Intelligence.
To return to Aarons and Loftus:
According to confidential interviews with former employees at the National Security Agency (NSA), the Soviet Ambassador in Cairo was told by the Egyptians on October 3rd of Egypt’s intentions to violate the (1967) ceasefire.
According to these sources, the Soviet Consulate’s cables to Moscow were immediately deciphered by the NSA.
Furthermore, according to former intelligence officers, the Nixon White House ordered the NSA to sit on the information. “We knew it (the sneak attack) was coming. We knew when. We knew where. We were told to shut up and let it happen.”
According to Loftus and Aarons, while front-line Israeli units were being crushed, Kissinger was conveniently absent, sitting incommunicado at the Waldorf Astoria in New York.
On October 12, oil companies sent a letter to Nixon that military aid to Israel would have a critically adverse effect on our relations with moderate oil producing Arab countries.
While the oil talks dragged on, Israelis were being slaughtered and the White House dithered. When the Jews begged for the spare parts they had been promised, they were told that no American Airline was willing to fly to a war zone.
By the third day of the war, the American games had cost Israel heavily. Several thousand soldiers had died, and over 500 Israeli tanks destroyed, while Soviet SAM missiles continued to cripple the Israeli Airforce.
At this point (October 8th), Commanders of the Israeli Army reported that in another four days their guns would fall silent.
Moshe Dayan is reported to have said, “Everything is lost” (Hersh, “The Sampson option”, Random House 1991 pg 223) and plans were made for Meir and her friends to commit suicide (Dan Reviv and Yossi Melman, “The Complete History of Israel’s Intelligence Community”, 1989, pg 211).
The Soviets, who had completely penetrated Israeli communications, were relaying to the Arabs the despair within the inner circle of Golda Meir’ s advisers. They were now encouraging the Arabs to press on for a knockout blow.
The relevance of this narrative is to illustrate the extent of Caretaker failure regarding Israel and that her leaders were more willing to commit suicide than save their nation – since it involved upsetting the gentiles.
In the Yom Kippur War, Israel was saved by the actions of Divine providence, primarily through the insubordination of a Righteous Gentile.
According to former U.S. Intelligence Agents, White House Chief of Staff Alexander Haig, who had served in a Relief Camp in West Germany as a young officer following the liberation of Hitler’s Death Camps, was sickened by what he saw.
When Kissinger and Defense Secretary Schlesinger waited until October 10th to begin shipping supplies to Israel to commence on the 14th, Haig realized that Israel would be crushed before emergency military supplies ever reached the battlefront.
As a result, he began making policy behind Kissinger’s back.
The U.S Army had just developed a tube-launched, optically tracked wire-guided missile known as the T.O.W. Fired from a foxhole it could it could destroy a moving tank three kilometers away. The kill-ratio for the TOW was 97%.
The information obtained by Loftus and Aarons continues that
“While Kissinger and Schlesinger were playing games with Israel, Haig was stripping every TOW Missile off the eastern seaboard of the United States, and shipping them to Israel via Germany”.
Authorizing the release and distribution of Tows on October 14th could have cost Haig his career, since it was in total defiance of U.S. policy.
As the Arabs opened their final assault on Israel, the TOWS were deployed for the first time by a country on the verge of annihilation.
The unexpected reversal in this final onslaught was a key element in changing the outcome in Israel’s favor.
Based on interviews with former Israeli Intelligence members and military attaches, Seymour Hersh concludes:
“There was widespread rage toward the White-house, aimed especially at Henry Kissinger–over what was correctly perceived as a strategy to delay the resupply so as to let the Arabs win…. territory, self-respect, and a platform for serious land-bargaining” (The Sampson option).
The blueprint that Israel needs to make painful territorial concessions in order to earn American goodwill has remained the remained the dominant template guiding the United States’ relationship with Israel to this day.
Political Scientists and military strategists are welcome to comment on the results of the accumulative effects to date emanating from all of the Accords, beginning with Camp David, through Oslo, Taba, the Wye Accords, and a liturgy of other concessions culminating in the evacuation of Gaza.
This background history check shows a continued pattern of collective predatorial attacks followed by threats, demands, and further demonizing of the Jewish State.
This Ideological Terrorism now seen unfolding against the Jewish State can be characterized as the acting-out of a collective unconscious genocidal wish.
I would like to apply the model of Caretaker collusion and betrayal to the policy which lures the victim into territorial and strategic concessions via a unified international threat of isolation.
This form of blackmail is already in effect in the form of diplomatic isolation, scientific, academic, and military isolation, as well as economic boycotts (B.D.S.).
Despite endless land-concessions, prisoner – releases, and the dismantlement of security outposts, the world today stands unified in its collective moral support for Islamic terrorists.
From the perspective of the relationship-dynamics underlying trauma, the State of Israel appears to continue its belief in the United States as the good Caretaker to the extent that it is once again willing to place itself in mortal danger.
Once again she stands on the brink, preferring to use a soft approach to endear itself to the West and its Middle-Eastern proxies.
This is reminiscent of the Stockholm syndrome in which the hostage is willing to adopt the belief-system of his captor in exchange for whatever life the captor bestows him.
Tags: Israel and the U.N., political terrorism, Stockholm Syndrome, Yom Kippur War