.png)
From taha's book 1967!
Note: This document is written in 1967! It's history now
The following document is written by Taha in 1967, weeks after the Middle East War between Arabs and Israel.
Excerpts from Taha's 'The Middle East Problem'These excerpts reflect Taha's critical view on external influences shaping Arab policies and highlight his foresight into the consequences of these strategies.
On the Benefits of Recognizing Israel for Arabs: Taha argues that Arab recognition of Israel is Israel's greatest wish, as it would alleviate the state of fear, tension, and financial burden Israel faces. He suggests that in pursuit of this recognition, Israel might be willing to make significant concessions, such as allowing the return of refugees, compensating them for lost properties, and even retreating to the borders set by the original 1947 UN partition plan.
On Soviet Influence and Misdirection: Taha criticizes the Soviet Union for misleading the Arabs, convincing them to adopt extreme positions that undermine the potential effectiveness of the United Nations. He describes how the Soviet Union has historically supported the partition of Palestine and the establishment of Israel but now supports Arab opposition to Israel's existence for its strategic interests. This, according to Taha, has resulted in lost opportunities for the Arabs and a squandering of their diplomatic leverage. Recognizing Israel is in the Arabs' Interest
Recognition of Israel has always been, and still is, Israel's dearest wish, because it saves them from the state of fear, tension, and anxiety that has troubled their nights and occupied their days. It also saves them the effort and money, and for this recognition, they could compromise to a far extent, not stopping at the point of returning refugees to their homes and compensating them for their properties, nor at the point of withdrawing from the Arab lands occupied on June 5, but going back to the borders defined by the original partition resolution made by the United Nations on November 29, 1947. These are borders that Israel has since surpassed and expanded upon after every battle fought between them and the Arabs since May 15, 1948. However, the Arabs refuse this recognition of the State of Israel, and they, if you want accuracy, only refuse it formally and verbally... But in substance and in action, they do not refuse it... This is one of the most regrettable matters, and at the same time, one of the clearest signs of the ignorance of Arab leaderships and their lack of shrewdness. During the period of insistence on not recognizing it, Israel has strengthened and continues to strengthen, militarily, politically, diplomatically, economically, and demographically... Then it will achieve full recognition after imposing it and after the Arabs, as it is now clear, have offered it in installments, and after it has thus lost the bargaining value it once and still enjoys... So it seems that Israel will achieve recognition from the Arabs without the Arabs receiving any price for this recognition... And the Arabs’ refusal to recognize Israel is based on false pride!! How can they sit down to negotiate at the same table with those who usurped their land??
Have you heard the latest news? Then listen!! King Hussein stated in Washington that he agrees with President Gamal Abdel Nasser that the Arabs are ready to end the state of war with Israel, and recognize its right to innocent passage through both the Gulf of Aqaba and the Suez Canal. The veracity of what was attributed to King Hussein is supported by what was stated before by the British Labour leader Sir Duncan Foot and published by The Observer in London, and translated and published by the newspaper Al-Ayyam in its issue on Tuesday 17/10/1967. Sir Duncan Foot's statement was an article titled "Nasser Told Me" in which he said: "President Abdel Nasser is ready to begin talks between Egypt and Israel under the auspices of the United Nations even before the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Sinai... and this could happen – according to President Nasser – within the framework of the 1949 Armistice Agreement...("He is also prepared to accept an end to the state of war with Israel... but he insists that no settlement – including the reopening of the Suez Canal – can take place as long as Israeli forces remain on Egyptian territory...("He also links the passage of Israeli ships through the Suez Canal to the problem of Palestinian Arab refugees.. according to United Nations resolutions that call for their return or compensation") (perhaps their return and compensation). This is what was attributed to Mr. Jamal, and it supports the accuracy of what was attributed to King Hussein in Washington... So what remains of the recognition of the State of Israel other than the courage to face it?? And about this recognition, we are further informed by what was attributed to Mr. Mohamed El-Zayat, the Egyptian Media Director, they claimed that he said the 1949 Armistice Agreement between Israel, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan gives the State of Israel practical recognition.."
Why don't the Arabs face their problem with courage?
Why the nepotism? Why don't we face our problems with the courage of men? Nepotism has caused us great harm before, and has made us appear as minors being discussed by guardians.. and malicious guardians at that. When this notorious defeat occurred, the Soviet Union spoke on behalf of the Arabs as mentioned earlier in this book, and Mr. Alexei Kosygin advanced in a speech he delivered at the special emergency session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, with demands summarized in four points, and he proposed to the United Nations that:First: Firmly condemn Israel's aggressive acts and the ongoing occupation by the latter of parts of the territory of the United Arab Republic, Syria, and Jordan, which constitutes an act considered aggression.Second: Demand that Israel immediately and unconditionally withdraw all its forces from the territories of the mentioned states to their positions behind the lines set by the general armistice agreements, and to respect the status of the demilitarized zones, as stipulated by these armistice agreements.Third: Also demand that Israel fully compensate, in the shortest possible time, for all the damages incurred by the United Arab Republic, Syria, and Jordan, and their citizens, as a result of its aggression.. and to return to them all the properties and other material values that it has usurped.Fourth: Call on the Security Council to take effective and urgent measures to eliminate all the results of the aggression committed by Israel.These demands are so extreme and exaggerated that it is impossible to achieve the required consensus on them, and even if a sufficient number of countries support them, their implementation becomes a difficult test for the United Nations. The Soviet Union must know this, but it presented them, not to be a solution, but to be a source of embarrassment for what it calls "imperialism", and it presented them to keep the Arabs attached to points that make a settlement impossible, or at the very least, a matter that takes a long time. It is a grave mistake to think that the Soviet Union - wants the problems facing Western countries to be settled - the problem of Vietnam, or the problem of the Middle East, because the lack of settlement shows the impotence of Western countries, and because it increases the global public opinion's hatred for them, and because it puts the afflicted peoples, and peoples in general, in a state of anxiety seeking glimpses of reassurance on the horizon, and the Soviet Union is always tasked with raising its flags, fluttering in the distant horizon, promising these peoples friendship, prosperity, and peace..The news reported that Mr. Leonid Brezhnev, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, inaugurated the golden jubilee celebrations of the revolution with a speech in which he reviewed the foreign and domestic policies of the Soviet Union, and in front of six thousand people representing delegations from ninety-five countries, gathered in the conference hall of the Kremlin Palace, Brezhnev said: "The balance of power in the world has changed radically in favor of the working class, all forces of progress, democracy, and socialism" and he obviously means by these terms the communist states, and especially the Soviet Union.. and "the balance of power in the world" is what we talked about at the beginning of this book and said that it is all that concerns the Eastern Bloc, and the Western Bloc - not the interests of small states - and Brezhnev spoke about the foreign policy of the Soviet Union saying: "The main task of the foreign policy of the Soviet Union is to thwart the imperialist conspiracies against socialism, and he added that our relations with all countries follow the democratic principle, which is the recognition of the practice of equality among all states, large and small"..Such deception, and such blatant lies cannot be digested by the peoples in their normal states.. but in the difficult situations that dominate the atmosphere of crises, defeats, and the fear accompanying a situation like the current one in the Middle East, misleading the peoples becomes one of the easiest things..
The translation of the provided Arabic text to English is as follows:
"The Russians Mislead the Arabs
The Russians do not say what they know, or what they ought to know. When Alexei Kosygin, on behalf of the Arabs, demanded in the global organization a condemnation of the Israeli aggression, he knew that the Arabs' breach of the 1949 truce (which Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser referred to in his conversation with Mr. Duncan Foot as a recognition) allowed fighters from the Palestine Liberation Organization to infiltrate from Syrian territory across the Israeli border, constituting an act of aggression by the Arabs against Israel. He could have advised his Arab friends about this, but he did not.
Kosygin, who demands the condemnation of Israeli aggression against the Arabs, knew that Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser's action to block the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli navigation after it had been open for ten years, would be considered an aggressive act by Israel, and would garner more global public sympathy than Egypt received. He could have advised his Arab friends about this, but he did not.
Kosygin and the Soviet leaders with him, and those before him, knew that the declared Arab policy is to throw the state of Israel into the sea, and these Soviet leaders were among the first to support the plan to partition Palestine and were among the first to recognize the state of Israel. They continued to exchange diplomatic representation with it, and they continue to recognize its right to exist. However, they also continued to agree with the Arabs on this policy, and their newspapers encouraged the Arabs and incited them to continue what they cunningly call "securing their sovereignty over their lands."
These days, Egypt, through its permanent representative to the United Nations, Mr. Mohamed Awad El-Qouni, asked the President of the Security Council, who in this session is the representative of Mali, Mr. Mahmoud Kante, to hold a special urgent session to study the serious situation in the Middle East. In this special session of the Council, held at 5:30 PM on Thursday, November 9, 1967, there were two proposals: the American project and the project presented by the Afro-Asian countries, namely India, Mali, and Nigeria. This latter project "affirms the right of every country to live in peace, security, respect for its sovereignty, territorial unity, and political independence, calls for an end to the state of war, demands a fair settlement of the Palestinian refugee problem, calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Arab lands occupied during the fighting that began on June 5, and also calls for sending a special UN envoy to coordinate efforts to implement the proposed project, to report back to the Security Council within 30 days."
The American project calls for a complete settlement of the crisis on the basis of imposing peace between the Arabs and Israel, based on the five principles announced by President Johnson in a speech before the General Assembly, following the aggression. Johnson clarified that his proposals for peace in the Middle East are: the necessity of recognizing that every country has a political right to live in peace, and a legal right to innocent passage in all waterways. He said the responsibility for the war in the Middle East rests on the dangerous, arbitrary action, marked by folly, evident in the closing of the Gulf of Aqaba. Johnson called for an end to the arms race between the Arab states and Israel and said that establishing peace requires solving the refugee problem, and that the concerned states should reach a direct agreement in this regard. At that point, Israeli forces should withdraw from the Arab lands they occupied. His proposal for direct agreements between the concerned states was insisted upon by Israel for recognition and direct negotiations between them and the Arabs. His view on the responsibility for the war led the United States to reject the Soviet Union's first point calling for the General Assembly to condemn Israel for aggression against Arab states. This was also the case with the second proposal submitted by the neutral countries, as it omitted the demand to condemn Israel for aggression, after their first project was based on four points, the first of which was to condemn the aggression. This American project aligns with the Afro-Asian countries' project on the necessity of sending a UN envoy, but differs in defining this envoy's mission, with this difference arising from the difference between the two projects themselves.
The news says that neither the American project nor the Afro-Asian project is expected to receive the nine votes needed to succeed in the Security Council, which includes fifteen countries. This is because the United States and its allies oppose the Afro-Asian project because it prioritizes the withdrawal of Israeli forces and leaves the matter of a full settlement for the future; they want it first, and as a condition precedent to withdrawal. On the other hand, the Soviet Union and its allies oppose the American project because it prioritizes a permanent settlement in the region, linking the withdrawal of 'aggressor' forces with peace between the Arabs and Israel.
This position held by the Soviet Union is the one that pleases the Arabs, and the Arabs have some excuse for this. For they believed that in this fallacy and this bickering, wounds to their dignity, which found itself practically recognizing Israel after building its reputation on non-recognition, could be healed. There is nothing left but to mislead and bicker. This we might understand for the Arabs, though we regret it. But what excuse does the Soviet Union have when it holds this position while recognizing the state of Israel, having contributed to the project to partition Palestine for the purpose of establishing the state of Israel? Do you want to know the Soviet Union's motive for this position? Then listen!! The Soviet Union does not want the Middle East problem to be settled!! Why? Because not settling it creates an atmosphere of fear, confusion, and anxiety, which suits the Communist plan to drive the Arab peoples and governments into the communist fold, because the state of war increases the enmity of the Arab peoples and governments towards the Western countries, particularly the United States, and because the war drains America's energy, especially if added to the ongoing war in Vietnam, which the Soviet Union also does not want to be settled – and it can be said that regional wars, at the level of the Vietnam War and the Middle East War, give the Soviet Union an opportunity to test its new weapons in a striking and propagandistic manner. Indeed, the Soviet 'Kumar' missiles, used in sinking the Israeli destroyer 'Eilat', gained a significant military reputation, and this diplomatic impact is what matters to the Russians, primarily because it achieves a shift in the balance of power in their favor against the Western bloc, and they did!! We have brought you Brezhnev's speech on the occasion of the golden anniversary of the Communist revolution where he said: 'The balance of power in the world has changed radically in favor of the working class,' by which, of course, he means in favor of the communist states.. And this is a known matter, and also a matter that does not please any sensible person concerned with the fate of humanity on this planet."
The United Nations and the Middle East Problem
Despite all its shortcomings, the United Nations remains humanity's only hope for resolving problems through negotiation rather than warfare. It represents the culmination of centuries of human effort to avoid wars. Especially for smaller nations, it offers an opportunity that must be cherished and held onto at all costs. Efforts must be made to develop this organization into a more efficient body with executive authority - the authority to make decisions and the ability to implement them. However, unfortunately, the Soviet Union, pursuing its global strategy, has managed to mislead the Arabs into embracing demands in the Middle East issue, which have greatly tarnished this magnificent institution and continue to jeopardize its reputation. Didn't the Sudanese Foreign Minister, speaking on behalf of the Arab states, say that the Arab states would reconsider their membership in the United Nations??
As we have mentioned before, the Soviet Union, along with the majority of the members of the General Assembly, made the decision to partition the land of Palestine with the intention of establishing the state of Israel, recognizing this state's right to exist. However, currently, for the sake of its ulterior motives, it supports the Arabs in their stance opposing Israel's right to exist. It opposes the American proposal to solve this problem, why? "Because it prioritizes a permanent settlement in the region and links the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Arab territories to peace between the Arabs and Israel." Have people ever heard such logic from a responsible person? Doesn't the United Nations Charter require such a settlement if we think honestly and impartially?
The Arabs have fallen into the trap set by international communism, becoming entangled with it anew every morning. Although the falseness of international communism is apparent, the enmity the Arabs bear toward colonial states, and their inability to rise above this enmity, have clouded their vision.
In an article published by the Beirut magazine "Al-Jadid" on November 10, it stated, "One knowledgeable insider summarized the situation regarding war or peace as follows: 'America is pushing Egypt towards suicide. It wants from it either an immediate military suicide at the front, or a political suicide through imposing peace. Egypt's policy is to avoid reaching the brink of suicide.'" The magazine continues, "On the other hand, Egypt's military preparations are fully underway, and the official instructions to the military are 'war, war, war at any moment.' There is a conviction in some Egyptian circles that the Suez front will be the only front capable of combat, or that it will bear the brunt - as was the case in the June War - and that the most renowned specialists in defense warfare and rapid tactical warfare in the Soviet Union are putting all their weight into assisting and supporting the Egyptian military."
Truly, smaller nations must be cautious of America, but they should not be panicked in the manner described by the magazine's well-informed source. Neither America nor any other responsible nation wants Egypt to commit military or political suicide. However, it is Egypt, through its poor thinking and political ignorance, that has pursued military and political suicide, and continues to do so vigorously, unable to heed the advice of a faithful adviser.
The Soviet Union's misleading of Egypt's leader has reached a point that calls for the utmost pity. Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser is now enabling Russian experts within the Egyptian military, as we learn from "Al-Jadid" magazine in the snippet we've provided. Read again: "And the most renowned specialists in defense warfare and rapid tactical warfare in the Soviet Union are putting all their weight into assisting and supporting the Egyptian military."
Some political observers say that the media in Egypt is in the hands of the communists, and the army in the hands of Abdel Nasser, and now the army is beginning to be in the hands of the communists, under the pretext of the indispensable expertise of Soviet experts. And under the pretext of removing officers belonging to capitalist and feudal families, because they, according to those advising Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser, were the cause of the disastrous military defeat. The number of dismissed officers, according to some knowledgeable sources, exceeds a thousand, and they are of brigadier general rank and above. "And following this, second-tier officers, namely the majors and below, move up to the front lines, most of whom were trained in the Soviet Union."
The Soviet Union, which seeks to tighten its grip on the Arab peoples by misleading their policies towards the Western bloc, aided by the ignorance of Arab leaders and the arrogance of Arab dictatorships, will attempt to drag Egypt and the Arab states behind it into a fourth confrontation, resulting in the Arabs' final defeat at the hands of the Western bloc, leading them to a complete break with the Western bloc and a total settlement in the tents of the Eastern bloc. And this is the secret behind the Soviet Union's opposition to the American project, which "prioritizes a permanent settlement in the region and links the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Arab ...to be continued
On the Benefits of Recognizing Israel for Arabs: Taha argues that Arab recognition of Israel is Israel's greatest wish, as it would alleviate the state of fear, tension, and financial burden Israel faces. He suggests that in pursuit of this recognition, Israel might be willing to make significant concessions, such as allowing the return of refugees, compensating them for lost properties, and even retreating to the borders set by the original 1947 UN partition plan.
On Soviet Influence and Misdirection: Taha criticizes the Soviet Union for misleading the Arabs, convincing them to adopt extreme positions that undermine the potential effectiveness of the United Nations. He describes how the Soviet Union has historically supported the partition of Palestine and the establishment of Israel but now supports Arab opposition to Israel's existence for its strategic interests. This, according to Taha, has resulted in lost opportunities for the Arabs and a squandering of their diplomatic leverage. Recognizing Israel is in the Arabs' Interest
Recognition of Israel has always been, and still is, Israel's dearest wish, because it saves them from the state of fear, tension, and anxiety that has troubled their nights and occupied their days. It also saves them the effort and money, and for this recognition, they could compromise to a far extent, not stopping at the point of returning refugees to their homes and compensating them for their properties, nor at the point of withdrawing from the Arab lands occupied on June 5, but going back to the borders defined by the original partition resolution made by the United Nations on November 29, 1947. These are borders that Israel has since surpassed and expanded upon after every battle fought between them and the Arabs since May 15, 1948. However, the Arabs refuse this recognition of the State of Israel, and they, if you want accuracy, only refuse it formally and verbally... But in substance and in action, they do not refuse it... This is one of the most regrettable matters, and at the same time, one of the clearest signs of the ignorance of Arab leaderships and their lack of shrewdness. During the period of insistence on not recognizing it, Israel has strengthened and continues to strengthen, militarily, politically, diplomatically, economically, and demographically... Then it will achieve full recognition after imposing it and after the Arabs, as it is now clear, have offered it in installments, and after it has thus lost the bargaining value it once and still enjoys... So it seems that Israel will achieve recognition from the Arabs without the Arabs receiving any price for this recognition... And the Arabs’ refusal to recognize Israel is based on false pride!! How can they sit down to negotiate at the same table with those who usurped their land??
Have you heard the latest news? Then listen!! King Hussein stated in Washington that he agrees with President Gamal Abdel Nasser that the Arabs are ready to end the state of war with Israel, and recognize its right to innocent passage through both the Gulf of Aqaba and the Suez Canal. The veracity of what was attributed to King Hussein is supported by what was stated before by the British Labour leader Sir Duncan Foot and published by The Observer in London, and translated and published by the newspaper Al-Ayyam in its issue on Tuesday 17/10/1967. Sir Duncan Foot's statement was an article titled "Nasser Told Me" in which he said: "President Abdel Nasser is ready to begin talks between Egypt and Israel under the auspices of the United Nations even before the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Sinai... and this could happen – according to President Nasser – within the framework of the 1949 Armistice Agreement...("He is also prepared to accept an end to the state of war with Israel... but he insists that no settlement – including the reopening of the Suez Canal – can take place as long as Israeli forces remain on Egyptian territory...("He also links the passage of Israeli ships through the Suez Canal to the problem of Palestinian Arab refugees.. according to United Nations resolutions that call for their return or compensation") (perhaps their return and compensation). This is what was attributed to Mr. Jamal, and it supports the accuracy of what was attributed to King Hussein in Washington... So what remains of the recognition of the State of Israel other than the courage to face it?? And about this recognition, we are further informed by what was attributed to Mr. Mohamed El-Zayat, the Egyptian Media Director, they claimed that he said the 1949 Armistice Agreement between Israel, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan gives the State of Israel practical recognition.."
Why don't the Arabs face their problem with courage?
Why the nepotism? Why don't we face our problems with the courage of men? Nepotism has caused us great harm before, and has made us appear as minors being discussed by guardians.. and malicious guardians at that. When this notorious defeat occurred, the Soviet Union spoke on behalf of the Arabs as mentioned earlier in this book, and Mr. Alexei Kosygin advanced in a speech he delivered at the special emergency session of the General Assembly of the United Nations, with demands summarized in four points, and he proposed to the United Nations that:First: Firmly condemn Israel's aggressive acts and the ongoing occupation by the latter of parts of the territory of the United Arab Republic, Syria, and Jordan, which constitutes an act considered aggression.Second: Demand that Israel immediately and unconditionally withdraw all its forces from the territories of the mentioned states to their positions behind the lines set by the general armistice agreements, and to respect the status of the demilitarized zones, as stipulated by these armistice agreements.Third: Also demand that Israel fully compensate, in the shortest possible time, for all the damages incurred by the United Arab Republic, Syria, and Jordan, and their citizens, as a result of its aggression.. and to return to them all the properties and other material values that it has usurped.Fourth: Call on the Security Council to take effective and urgent measures to eliminate all the results of the aggression committed by Israel.These demands are so extreme and exaggerated that it is impossible to achieve the required consensus on them, and even if a sufficient number of countries support them, their implementation becomes a difficult test for the United Nations. The Soviet Union must know this, but it presented them, not to be a solution, but to be a source of embarrassment for what it calls "imperialism", and it presented them to keep the Arabs attached to points that make a settlement impossible, or at the very least, a matter that takes a long time. It is a grave mistake to think that the Soviet Union - wants the problems facing Western countries to be settled - the problem of Vietnam, or the problem of the Middle East, because the lack of settlement shows the impotence of Western countries, and because it increases the global public opinion's hatred for them, and because it puts the afflicted peoples, and peoples in general, in a state of anxiety seeking glimpses of reassurance on the horizon, and the Soviet Union is always tasked with raising its flags, fluttering in the distant horizon, promising these peoples friendship, prosperity, and peace..The news reported that Mr. Leonid Brezhnev, the General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, inaugurated the golden jubilee celebrations of the revolution with a speech in which he reviewed the foreign and domestic policies of the Soviet Union, and in front of six thousand people representing delegations from ninety-five countries, gathered in the conference hall of the Kremlin Palace, Brezhnev said: "The balance of power in the world has changed radically in favor of the working class, all forces of progress, democracy, and socialism" and he obviously means by these terms the communist states, and especially the Soviet Union.. and "the balance of power in the world" is what we talked about at the beginning of this book and said that it is all that concerns the Eastern Bloc, and the Western Bloc - not the interests of small states - and Brezhnev spoke about the foreign policy of the Soviet Union saying: "The main task of the foreign policy of the Soviet Union is to thwart the imperialist conspiracies against socialism, and he added that our relations with all countries follow the democratic principle, which is the recognition of the practice of equality among all states, large and small"..Such deception, and such blatant lies cannot be digested by the peoples in their normal states.. but in the difficult situations that dominate the atmosphere of crises, defeats, and the fear accompanying a situation like the current one in the Middle East, misleading the peoples becomes one of the easiest things..
The translation of the provided Arabic text to English is as follows:
"The Russians Mislead the Arabs
The Russians do not say what they know, or what they ought to know. When Alexei Kosygin, on behalf of the Arabs, demanded in the global organization a condemnation of the Israeli aggression, he knew that the Arabs' breach of the 1949 truce (which Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser referred to in his conversation with Mr. Duncan Foot as a recognition) allowed fighters from the Palestine Liberation Organization to infiltrate from Syrian territory across the Israeli border, constituting an act of aggression by the Arabs against Israel. He could have advised his Arab friends about this, but he did not.
Kosygin, who demands the condemnation of Israeli aggression against the Arabs, knew that Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser's action to block the Gulf of Aqaba to Israeli navigation after it had been open for ten years, would be considered an aggressive act by Israel, and would garner more global public sympathy than Egypt received. He could have advised his Arab friends about this, but he did not.
Kosygin and the Soviet leaders with him, and those before him, knew that the declared Arab policy is to throw the state of Israel into the sea, and these Soviet leaders were among the first to support the plan to partition Palestine and were among the first to recognize the state of Israel. They continued to exchange diplomatic representation with it, and they continue to recognize its right to exist. However, they also continued to agree with the Arabs on this policy, and their newspapers encouraged the Arabs and incited them to continue what they cunningly call "securing their sovereignty over their lands."
These days, Egypt, through its permanent representative to the United Nations, Mr. Mohamed Awad El-Qouni, asked the President of the Security Council, who in this session is the representative of Mali, Mr. Mahmoud Kante, to hold a special urgent session to study the serious situation in the Middle East. In this special session of the Council, held at 5:30 PM on Thursday, November 9, 1967, there were two proposals: the American project and the project presented by the Afro-Asian countries, namely India, Mali, and Nigeria. This latter project "affirms the right of every country to live in peace, security, respect for its sovereignty, territorial unity, and political independence, calls for an end to the state of war, demands a fair settlement of the Palestinian refugee problem, calls for the withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Arab lands occupied during the fighting that began on June 5, and also calls for sending a special UN envoy to coordinate efforts to implement the proposed project, to report back to the Security Council within 30 days."
The American project calls for a complete settlement of the crisis on the basis of imposing peace between the Arabs and Israel, based on the five principles announced by President Johnson in a speech before the General Assembly, following the aggression. Johnson clarified that his proposals for peace in the Middle East are: the necessity of recognizing that every country has a political right to live in peace, and a legal right to innocent passage in all waterways. He said the responsibility for the war in the Middle East rests on the dangerous, arbitrary action, marked by folly, evident in the closing of the Gulf of Aqaba. Johnson called for an end to the arms race between the Arab states and Israel and said that establishing peace requires solving the refugee problem, and that the concerned states should reach a direct agreement in this regard. At that point, Israeli forces should withdraw from the Arab lands they occupied. His proposal for direct agreements between the concerned states was insisted upon by Israel for recognition and direct negotiations between them and the Arabs. His view on the responsibility for the war led the United States to reject the Soviet Union's first point calling for the General Assembly to condemn Israel for aggression against Arab states. This was also the case with the second proposal submitted by the neutral countries, as it omitted the demand to condemn Israel for aggression, after their first project was based on four points, the first of which was to condemn the aggression. This American project aligns with the Afro-Asian countries' project on the necessity of sending a UN envoy, but differs in defining this envoy's mission, with this difference arising from the difference between the two projects themselves.
The news says that neither the American project nor the Afro-Asian project is expected to receive the nine votes needed to succeed in the Security Council, which includes fifteen countries. This is because the United States and its allies oppose the Afro-Asian project because it prioritizes the withdrawal of Israeli forces and leaves the matter of a full settlement for the future; they want it first, and as a condition precedent to withdrawal. On the other hand, the Soviet Union and its allies oppose the American project because it prioritizes a permanent settlement in the region, linking the withdrawal of 'aggressor' forces with peace between the Arabs and Israel.
This position held by the Soviet Union is the one that pleases the Arabs, and the Arabs have some excuse for this. For they believed that in this fallacy and this bickering, wounds to their dignity, which found itself practically recognizing Israel after building its reputation on non-recognition, could be healed. There is nothing left but to mislead and bicker. This we might understand for the Arabs, though we regret it. But what excuse does the Soviet Union have when it holds this position while recognizing the state of Israel, having contributed to the project to partition Palestine for the purpose of establishing the state of Israel? Do you want to know the Soviet Union's motive for this position? Then listen!! The Soviet Union does not want the Middle East problem to be settled!! Why? Because not settling it creates an atmosphere of fear, confusion, and anxiety, which suits the Communist plan to drive the Arab peoples and governments into the communist fold, because the state of war increases the enmity of the Arab peoples and governments towards the Western countries, particularly the United States, and because the war drains America's energy, especially if added to the ongoing war in Vietnam, which the Soviet Union also does not want to be settled – and it can be said that regional wars, at the level of the Vietnam War and the Middle East War, give the Soviet Union an opportunity to test its new weapons in a striking and propagandistic manner. Indeed, the Soviet 'Kumar' missiles, used in sinking the Israeli destroyer 'Eilat', gained a significant military reputation, and this diplomatic impact is what matters to the Russians, primarily because it achieves a shift in the balance of power in their favor against the Western bloc, and they did!! We have brought you Brezhnev's speech on the occasion of the golden anniversary of the Communist revolution where he said: 'The balance of power in the world has changed radically in favor of the working class,' by which, of course, he means in favor of the communist states.. And this is a known matter, and also a matter that does not please any sensible person concerned with the fate of humanity on this planet."
The United Nations and the Middle East Problem
Despite all its shortcomings, the United Nations remains humanity's only hope for resolving problems through negotiation rather than warfare. It represents the culmination of centuries of human effort to avoid wars. Especially for smaller nations, it offers an opportunity that must be cherished and held onto at all costs. Efforts must be made to develop this organization into a more efficient body with executive authority - the authority to make decisions and the ability to implement them. However, unfortunately, the Soviet Union, pursuing its global strategy, has managed to mislead the Arabs into embracing demands in the Middle East issue, which have greatly tarnished this magnificent institution and continue to jeopardize its reputation. Didn't the Sudanese Foreign Minister, speaking on behalf of the Arab states, say that the Arab states would reconsider their membership in the United Nations??
As we have mentioned before, the Soviet Union, along with the majority of the members of the General Assembly, made the decision to partition the land of Palestine with the intention of establishing the state of Israel, recognizing this state's right to exist. However, currently, for the sake of its ulterior motives, it supports the Arabs in their stance opposing Israel's right to exist. It opposes the American proposal to solve this problem, why? "Because it prioritizes a permanent settlement in the region and links the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Arab territories to peace between the Arabs and Israel." Have people ever heard such logic from a responsible person? Doesn't the United Nations Charter require such a settlement if we think honestly and impartially?
The Arabs have fallen into the trap set by international communism, becoming entangled with it anew every morning. Although the falseness of international communism is apparent, the enmity the Arabs bear toward colonial states, and their inability to rise above this enmity, have clouded their vision.
In an article published by the Beirut magazine "Al-Jadid" on November 10, it stated, "One knowledgeable insider summarized the situation regarding war or peace as follows: 'America is pushing Egypt towards suicide. It wants from it either an immediate military suicide at the front, or a political suicide through imposing peace. Egypt's policy is to avoid reaching the brink of suicide.'" The magazine continues, "On the other hand, Egypt's military preparations are fully underway, and the official instructions to the military are 'war, war, war at any moment.' There is a conviction in some Egyptian circles that the Suez front will be the only front capable of combat, or that it will bear the brunt - as was the case in the June War - and that the most renowned specialists in defense warfare and rapid tactical warfare in the Soviet Union are putting all their weight into assisting and supporting the Egyptian military."
Truly, smaller nations must be cautious of America, but they should not be panicked in the manner described by the magazine's well-informed source. Neither America nor any other responsible nation wants Egypt to commit military or political suicide. However, it is Egypt, through its poor thinking and political ignorance, that has pursued military and political suicide, and continues to do so vigorously, unable to heed the advice of a faithful adviser.
The Soviet Union's misleading of Egypt's leader has reached a point that calls for the utmost pity. Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser is now enabling Russian experts within the Egyptian military, as we learn from "Al-Jadid" magazine in the snippet we've provided. Read again: "And the most renowned specialists in defense warfare and rapid tactical warfare in the Soviet Union are putting all their weight into assisting and supporting the Egyptian military."
Some political observers say that the media in Egypt is in the hands of the communists, and the army in the hands of Abdel Nasser, and now the army is beginning to be in the hands of the communists, under the pretext of the indispensable expertise of Soviet experts. And under the pretext of removing officers belonging to capitalist and feudal families, because they, according to those advising Mr. Gamal Abdel Nasser, were the cause of the disastrous military defeat. The number of dismissed officers, according to some knowledgeable sources, exceeds a thousand, and they are of brigadier general rank and above. "And following this, second-tier officers, namely the majors and below, move up to the front lines, most of whom were trained in the Soviet Union."
The Soviet Union, which seeks to tighten its grip on the Arab peoples by misleading their policies towards the Western bloc, aided by the ignorance of Arab leaders and the arrogance of Arab dictatorships, will attempt to drag Egypt and the Arab states behind it into a fourth confrontation, resulting in the Arabs' final defeat at the hands of the Western bloc, leading them to a complete break with the Western bloc and a total settlement in the tents of the Eastern bloc. And this is the secret behind the Soviet Union's opposition to the American project, which "prioritizes a permanent settlement in the region and links the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Arab ...to be continued