Crime Should Not Pay
by Moshe Arens
Crime should not
pay - that is a maxim of all civilized societies. This is why the law provides
punishment for criminals, which should also serve as a deterrent to others who
may be contemplating criminal acts. A world in which crime goes unpunished leads
directly to the jungle and anarchy. This is equally true for individuals who
have committed crimes, as it is for nations that have committed crimes against
their neighbors or other nations.
Aggression should
not be rewarded, it should be punished.
It is to be hoped
that Saddam Hussein and his admirers have by now learned that lesson. The
accepted rule of international behavior is that a nation committing aggression
not be "rewarded" after being defeated, by the return of territories it lost as
a result of the war it had started. Violation of this rule is nothing less than
an invitation to further aggression.
Nor is it
acceptable for the defeated aggressor to make return of the territories it lost
a condition for putting an end to the war it started, in other words, demanding
"territories for peace." Today's Germany is not demanding the return of
territories it lost to Poland in the last world war. Nor is Japan demanding the
return of Korea or Manchuria to Japanese control. Only the case of Israel and
its Arab neighbors seems to be different.
Egypt attacked
Israel four times - in 1948, 1957, 1967 and 1973 - and was defeated four times.
Yet it insisted that the Sinai peninsula it lost during these wars of aggression
be returned to Egypt. That was Egypt's condition for ending a war Egypt had
started. And Israel accepted that condition! No heed was paid to the moral
implications of letting the aggressor go unpunished, of rewarding the aggressor.
The future implications of setting such a precedent were disregarded.
If Prime Minister
Begin hoped that the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty would remain in the history
books as "the exception that proves the rule" that an aggressor should receive
the well-deserved punishment for his crimes, he was mistaken. The mantra of
"territories for peace" and "return to the 1967 borders" was born at Camp David
in 1977, and has haunted Israel ever since.
Now along comes
Syria, which attacked Israel three times: in 1948, 1967 and again in 1973. It
was unsuccessful in 1948, and was defeated in 1967 and 1973, losing control of
the Golan Heights. For many years now, Syria has been encouraging the Hezbollah
terrorists to attack Israel and has harbored Palestinian terrorists in Damascus.
Nevertheless, following in Egypt's footsteps, Syria demands control of
territories it lost in wars of aggression, and demands that Israel "return to
the 1967 borders."
The doctrine of
"territories for peace" has by now embedded itself so deeply in the thoughts of
people around the world, including many Israelis, that this outrageous demand
seems almost reasonable and natural. People tend to forget that this nonsensical
formula has in the past been used by Hitler in 1939, when he declared that he
would leave Europe in peace if territories in Poland that Germany lost in World
War I were ceded to Germany.
The Syrians make
no such demands of the Turks, who in a "land grab" in 1937 annexed the Syrian
port of Alexandretta, now Iskanderun, to Turkey. They know only too well what
the Turkish response would be. But Israel is known to be a "soft touch." Having
given in to Egypt, why should it not also give in to Syria? In the Golan
Heights, just as was the case in the Sinai peninsula, there are no "demographic
considerations" to be thrown in our faces.
Common sense and
the accepted rules of international behavior should determine Israel's response
to Bashar Assad's overtures. Sure, we are prepared to negotiate a peace treaty
with Syria. But forget about the Golan Heights, and consider yourself lucky if
you are not presented with a bill for economic reparations for the damage your
aggressive behavior has caused Israel and its citizens over the past 56 years.
If you understand that, we shall be happy to sit down and talk. And don't
forget, crime does not pay!
FREEMAN CENTER
BROADCAST - JANUARY 21, 2004Haaretz - January 20, 2004 |