MIDDLE EAST The method to the Zionist madness THE SHOCK waves are still reverberating of the savage Israeli bombing of a PLO camp near Tunis and the arrogant approval of it by the US government. Why did the zionists undertake an action in such flagrant disregard of international law and opinion on the territory of a moderate Arab state, and why did the US show such contempt for Arab public opinion? Gerry Foley asked Michel Warshawsky, a leader of the section of the Fourth International in the rulers by the proposals for a political settlement?
A. In fact, the Tunis operation is a clear response to the divisions caused by King Hussein's speech to the United Nations. After this speech, the Israeli government was complete. ly confused. Hussein appealed clearly for immediate and unconditional talks between Israel and Jordan. Peres said that this was a very positive move. Shamir, the deputy premier, said that it was nothing new. Weizman said that it was a tremendous advance toward achieving peace. Sharir, a Likud minister, said that it was even a step backward. So, the Tunis operation was needed in order to give a clearer and more united response to King Hussein's speech.
Q. But why did Washington support the Tunis provocation, since it was aimed against a political settlement?
A. I think that their initial statement was an error. They changed later from saying that they supported to saying that they "understood it." But there is not a total contradiction between this action and the American objectives. They need a deal with some kind of Palestinian force. But they also have an interest in seeing the Palestinian movement as broken and demoralized as possible in order to have to pay a minimal price.
Q. If the bombing united the politicians, can it also unite the Israeli population? Have the Larnaca attack and the killings of Israelis on the West Bank recreated Zionist unity?
A. No, I don't think that the government will be able to recreate the mass hysteria, the mass feeling of national unity. This is gone. For the same reason, you cannot create an atmosphere of mass mourning when people are killed in operations. This is very artificial, superficial; in a couple of days everyone forgets about it. This is a big change from the past. Formerly, when someone was killed, the whole society mourned. There was a feeling of being one family.
Today, this feeling is gone. We are seeing a kind of breakdown in Israeli society. The government wanted to use this operation to rebuild unity. But I don't think it will have much effect. I think we will see more hailing of this operation in the European and American press than in the Israeli one. I think that it will be much more acceptable to criticize it than it was in the case of the Entebbe operation or the bombing of the Iraqi nuclear center. O
Israeli state, in Paris on October 3.
Question. What was the purpose of this bombing?
Answer. As Le Monde's correspondent in Jerusalem said after the operation, no one should have been surprised by it. It was prepared a long time ago, and they were only looking for the opportunity to make a strike like this, either in Tunis or in Amman. The Larnaca attack [in which Palestinian commandos killed three Israeli hostages] was only a pretext.
You don't have to be a supporter of Yasser Arafat or his line to say that this operation was aimed against his policy. We are now in a process where the Americans are trying to use the new relationship of forces after the Palestinian defeat to achieve some kind of political settlement. The key for such a settlement is the agreement of Israel to deal with the Palestinian leadership. Arafat said clearly that he was ready for this. Israel said no less clearly that it was not.
Q. Why should the proposals of Arafat, made in conjunction with the pro-imperialist Arab states constitute any threat to Israel?
A. Because a political settlement would have to involve some concessions to the Palestinians. Israel would have to give them some territory. And any idea of even a partial withdrawal from the West Bank territories and the Gaza Strip could split Israeli society and put it on the brink of a very violent confrontation. I am convinced of it.
Q. You think the differences between the liberal and the rightist Zionists are as deep as that?
A. We have had a process of de facto annexation of the occupied territories. Cutting off any part of these territories will now be seen as cutting into the very body of the state of Israel. Although formally these territories are not part of the state, economically, socially, and in the minds of the Israeli rulers and population they have become part of Israel.
Thus, any loss of these lands would be a catastrophic defeat for Israel, even if the reactionary forces operating in the area might consider this part of a positive solution that would weaken the Palestinian movement and stabilise the status quo. So, I think any peaceful withdrawal by Israel from the occupied territories is out of the question. Nothing short of an Israeli defeat in another war can produce this.
The best example of the Israeli attitude is their reaction to proposals from Jordan for a six month freeze on the construction of Jewish settlements on the West Bank. This is really nothing, its only value would be to give Hussein something to show for his peace overtures, something that he could point to as offering hope for the future. But the Israelis have not even given this, despite many American requests. The ignoring of these requests shows, moreover, how much US pressure would be needed to get the Israelis to make any concessions. A new settlement has just been inaugurated by the deputy premier, who is from the Likud. But this was an official settlement, authorized by the government, which is now headed by the Labor Party.
It is a serious illusion to believe that any deal can be made involving a peaceful Israeli withdrawal, and this is disorienting some Palestinian currents, which have their eyes set on opposing a deal. This attitude is an obstacle to unity here and now against Zionist repression and the occupation.
Q. Can you cite any examples of divisions caused among the Israeli