The Yugoslav “transfer” shocked television viewers, so much so thatKnesset members of the “National Unity” list decided tocontribute 1,000 shekels each for the refugees. There is aparticular significance to this election gimmick, since two membersof this party are official believers in the concept of “transfer.”The leader of the list, Benny Begin, did not insist that these twomembers denounce this concept.
But one spokesman for the extreme Right admitted that the idea of thetransfer is dead. With the exception of a few communists and proponentsof the extreme Right, the Israeli public has risen against theperpetrators of these atrocities, without any “counter-balances.” Itwould be very difficult to imagine that any Israeli government would everattempt a similar campaign in full view of international television.
But what about the past? Didn’t we ourselves commit 51 years agoacts not much different from these? Isn’t Milosevic imitatingBen-Gurion? A few persons of conscience have already voiced thisclaim. Let us examine it with honesty.
In some respects there is a great deal of similarity between the twocampaigns. In the 1948 war, 700,000 Arab Palestinians — more thanhalf of the Arab Palestinian population at the time — were uprootedfrom their homes, lands, towns and villages. Now the Serbs haveexpelled half the Kosovar population from their homes.
At the end of our war, the refugees were not allowed to return. 51 yearslater, they and their offspring — by now close to three millionpeople — remain in exile, most in refugee camps, in deplorableconditions. (Because of their extremely high birthrate, thePalestinians double their numbers every 18 years.) The same fateawaits the Kosovars, should NATO fail to impose by force their rightof repatriation. The UN had already decided in 1948 that thePalestinians had the right to choose between repatriation andmonetary compensation.
Israel has always claimed that the responsibility falls on the Arab statesto rehabilitate the refugees in their states. Using the same logic,Milosevic maintains that Albania and the NATO states should absorb theKosovars.
Some of the Palestinian refugees had been forced out in horrendousconditions. The expulsion from Lod and Ramleh was documented by thevictims, and Yitzhak Rabin, then the local commander, acknowledgedas much. The 1967 expulsion of residents from the three villages inthe Latrun region was documented by an eyewitness, a reserve soldier,the writer Amos Kenan. Shocking tales, reminiscent of the currentevents. The population remaining in Jaffa after the end of thefighting there was loaded onto trucks and forced to cross thefront line. This scenario was repeated in numerous areas. Only backthen there was no such thing as TV.
Most of the property of those 700,000 Palestinians was looted. In theexclusive sections of Jerusalem, Jaffa, Haifa and othercities, Israelis looted rugs, furniture, refrigerators and allmerchandise in stores, valued at hundreds of millions of dollars, inaddition to the houses and lands worth billions, confiscated by thestate. And now it is happening in Kosovo.
Ben-Gurion and Milosevic sprung from the same tree — that of thenarrow nationalism of Eastern Europe, with its multiple nationalities thathate each other with deadly passion. Much has been said of the similaritybetween the Jewish and Serbian nationalists — the clinging to thememories of wrongs done hundreds of years ago, the Kosovo/Jerusalemequation and other myths that prefer the past to the future.
So much for the similarity. But there are differences as well.
The main difference is that we had to establish a state, whereas the Serbshad an existing and secure state already. The Palestinians were expelledafter war had broken out, while in Kosovo the war broke out after — andbecause of — the expulsion. It wasn’t our side that started the war butthe other side, whereas in Kosovo Milosevic had been planning thisgenocide for a long time, while playing diplomatic games in order to coverup the preparations and enable the campaign.
In the first months of 1948, the expulsions were a military necessity, andboth sides engaged in it. We were honestly convinced that we werefighting with our backs to the sea, that this was a fight for our veryexistence and for the very lives of our families. The words “There’s nochoice” were not an empty slogan; we were all living it. The memories ofthe holocaust were still very fresh. In retrospect, it became clear thatthe balance of power was different. The Jewish population,while small, was very well organized and superbly led, facing a largebut disorganized and poorly-led Palestinian population lacking almostentirely in weaponry. When the Arab states entered the war, theircorrupt leaders fought one another more than us. We were not “a fewagainst the many.” But the objective truth, if there is such athing, as it appears today, is not relevant. What matters is how wefelt then and what we knew then – and at that time we felt that itwas a fight for our survival.
The question of intent also matters. No one can know what was in themind of Ben-Gurion at the start of the war. It is clear that he didnot intend to accept the borders of the UN partition resolution ofNovember 29, 1947, and that he intended to grab every opportunity toexpand those borders (which is why the Declaration of Independencedoes not mention borders). It may be that he had decided in advanceto “cleanse” the conquered territory of its non-Jewish population asmuch as possible. But I think that there is no proof of that. Inthe first months of the war, the expulsion was a simple militarynecessity. But from August 1948, after the wheel of fortune hadturned in our favor and we were winning, Ben-Gurion pursued acalculated policy of expulsion.
This commentary is not intended to justify anything. It comes to explain,remind and warn: Without a reasonable and humane resolution of the refugeeproblem, there will not be peace. Not in the Balkans and not in theMiddle East. I believe that such a resolution is possible.