Will Israel Hang Onto the Golan Heights?
Israeli-Syrian talks may be resuming today, but residents of the Golan Heights aren't packing their bags just yet.
In a new strip mall built of dark pinkish stone in the city of Katzrin, a brand new $5 million Golan Heights visitors center sells the surrounding landscape as simply too beautiful for Israel to ever hand over to the Syrians.
It’s part of a new message Israeli residents of the Golan are trying hard to promote especially now as Israel and Syria have resumed peace talks, this time indirectly through Turkey with a return of the territory as a presumed condition of a deal. The sides sat down Monday morning, continuing the discussions recently revealed to have been going on secretly for the past year. The centerpiece of the visitor center’s publicity efforts is a 20-minute film that opens to a thumping beat as a plane soars skyward and then swoops down giving a bird’s eye view of the rushing waters of the Jordan River, cows grazing in a verdant pasture, sun-kissed vineyards, passengers waving from jeep tours, and a snow-topped Mt. Hermon.
The words “Discover a New World” roll over fields of wild purple irises and cowboys gallop through a golden sunset before the special effects are released: a light spritz of mist falls on the audience as artfully shot fat rain drops fall slow-motion onto Golan ground. It looks more Montana than Israel and this is a point that resonates with the majority of Israelis who do not see Jewish settlement of the Golan Heights, annexed from Syria following the 1967 Mideast War, in the same controversial light as they view their countrymen who have settled in other territory captured at the same time like the West Bank.
The Golan, with a population of about 20,000 Jews and 18,000 Druze has been thoroughly embraced by Israelis who have made it a popular destination for hiking and holidays, beloved for the natural beauty of its open spaces, a respite from the crowded sun-parched center of the country.
A poll of 600 Israelis by the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research found that 67 percent of Israelis oppose signing a peace deal with Syria that would involve handing over the Golan Heights. And 60.5 percent were not particularly troubled by the lack of peace between the two countries saying that prospects of war seemed unlikely and the status quo of no deal suited them just fine.
Its residents like to say it’s the safest place in the country, removed from tensions with the Palestinians and point out that its border with Syria is the quietest one Israel knows, despite the lack of a peace deal.
Ori Zecharia, 52, a jeep tour operator with graying curls, said the news of talks with Syria felt like being hit “with a hammer on the head.”
“The land here has great historic and strategic importance and it’s our right to live here,” said Zecharia, who moved here from the center of the country thirty years ago. “Every compromise we make shows weakness and invites more attacks.”
Daniella Levkowitz, 33, who grew up in the Golan says she can imagine no other home.
“It’s a quiet border. I feel safe here. This is my home, in my heart I don’t see myself anywhere else,” said Levkowitz, a social worker, her baby daughter in her lap.
She says once she believed in peace, but after so many disappointments with Israel’s neighbors she said, she no longer feels that handing over territory will lead to a secure future.
Like other residents here she also is not too concerned anything will come of this most recent round of peace efforts. Two previous rounds of talks broke down in the 1990s. They also point to the political woes Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is steeped in and are counting on him to be too weak to push something as momentous – and controversial – as the return of the Golan in exchange for an agreement with Syria.
Meanwhile Syria is seen to be using the talks as part of a bid to gain international public acceptance, specifically American support, after being shunned for aiding Hezbollah and Hamas. Trying perhaps to deflect backlash in the Arab world against the contacts with Israel, Syrian officials are now trying to downplay the likelihood of direct talks with the Jewish state anytime soon.
Syria’s continued arming of Hezbollah despite the talks also does not bode well.
But Israeli analyst Amnon Abramovich gave a bleak assessment of Israel’s options in a recent Channel Two news broadcast: “If there is no peace agreement with Syria, then there’ll be war with Syria. War with Syria means rockets on Givatayim, Hod HaSharon, Holon and Bat Yam,” he said citing Israeli towns in the center of the country. “A thousand dead – children, women and so forth – towns destroyed. Israel will win, but where will they start the negotiations then and what will they negotiate about?
“There’ll be a ceasefire, if, God forbid, there is a war, and the negotiations will be over the Golan. It’s better to hold the negotiations before the war than after it.”
Dina Kraft is a Tel Aviv-based journalist.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
22 Comments
1. Ken Besig:Oh please, not again, not another media frenzy over “peace” talks between Israel and another Arab dictatorship which mean almost nothing and will amount to the same. Does anyone realize just how often this same silly and useless “peace” ritual, with it’s empty photo ops and the inane and often insane speculation about the endless possibilities by every “expert” under the sun? Or the dozens of worthless polls carried out with exactly the same empty results every time? If insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result every time, then surely the Israel/Arab, Israeli/Syrian or the Israeli/Palestinian “peace negotiations” certainly qualify as madness. The reason why the current round of negotiations with the Syrians, or the Palestinians, or the Arab world in general will fail, for the thousandth time, is the fact that the Arab side will only accept negotiations which will explicitly result in the total destruction of the Jewish State of Israel and the murder or expulsion of our Jewish citizens. Most Jewish Israelis, even the most hard core Leftist Peace Now Israelis balk at that. But really the oddest and most disturbing aspect of all this is how few Israelis and Westerners realize this important existential fact, and how even fewer Westerners realize that the Arab plan for the destruction of Israel is their blueprint for the entire Judeo Christian West.
Jun 16, 2008 - 4:30 am 2. idov:What an idiotic commentary by Amnon Abramovitch. Unless Syria joins forces with Egypt and Iran, their chances of even surviving the next war with Israel are zero. In 1982, when they had the backing of the Soviets, the last time the air forces fought, we shot down all the planes they sent up. They tried to sneak through a nuclear bomb plant. We knocked out their radar last year and destroyed it. Germany no longer has Prussia because it waged aggressive war and lost. Syria attacked Israel three times and there’s a price to pay, in their case, the Golan Heights. What they gain from a peace treaty is an opening to the western world, which would benefit their people in every conceivable way, and regional co-operation with Israel. Any proposed treaty, and this lame-duck discredited prime minister will not be bringing one, will have to put to referendum and the chances of it passing are zero. Talking never hurts, but that’s all this is.
Jun 16, 2008 - 5:23 am 3. Don:Think of the repercussions if Syria made a back door deal with Israel and at the same time neutralized (within Syria) the greatest danger the Syrians face; Iran and it’s proxy Hezbollah. Frankly the Syrians have nothing to lose in such a circumstance (and everything to win). The fact that such a dialogue is taking place at all signifies the discomfort the Syrians are feeling with their “Allies”. Assad must know that if he gives too much of his country over to the Iranians his rule will last only as long as Iran feels he has usefulness. Nasrallah is a tool of the Pasdaran, he has not had an independent thought (or act) since the Beruit Marine bombing, (and we should have taken him out then).
Jun 16, 2008 - 8:22 am 4. David P:Golan must remain in Israeli hands forever, the countries security and water are dependent upon it. If Syria wants peace it will be without the return of Golan which Israel must permanently annex along with Judea & Samara.
Jun 16, 2008 - 8:58 am 5. lgkikc:Golan heights are beautiful, Golan heights have water, Golan heights are high, etc. etc. But hey they don’t belong to Israelis. There are many things that your neighbor has and you wished they were yours but at the end of the day you have to live with the fact that they are your neighbors not yours. If you are more powerful and take your neighbor’s things by force, then be prepared to get hurt because your neighbor may resort to all kinds of solutions in order to get back what belongs to him.
Jun 16, 2008 - 9:53 am 6. GW:igkikc:
Very nice analogy! But if you neighbor tries to take something from you by force every other week, and if each time that happens, you pledge that no repercussions will be imposed upon poor him, then he will (rightly) take you for a fool and keep trying, especially when you know for a fact that all he is reading all day is how evil you are, and how he should have all your possessions, etc. The only way you are going to survive in that tough neighborhood is to carry around a big stick and make sure that each time he tries to take something from you, you take two from him.
Time to do away with the old formula: “Land for Peace”. In with the new formula: Peace for Peace!”
–
Jun 16, 2008 - 10:39 am 7. Achillea:GW
If you are more powerful and take your neighbor’s things by force, then be prepared to get hurt because your neighbor may resort to all kinds of solutions in order to get back what belongs to him.
Advice Syria should have taken before repeatedly attacking Israel. Now the Golan Heights no longer belongs to Syria. Quit whining and blustering and deal with it.
Jun 16, 2008 - 11:11 am 8. Cletus:Igkikc:
Golan Heights DO belong to Israel, along with Gaza and West bank. If the Various arabs, whether Syrian or Palestinian or Jordinian or Egyptian, wanted to keep the previously mentioned land, they should have thought about that before waging and losing numerous wars with the intention of pushing the Jews into the sea. They lost all the fights, they lost the land, it is their own fault, and they only way they will ever get it back is by waging another war, and winning, which will not happen.
Jun 16, 2008 - 11:51 am 9. Yehudit:I’m glad they are emphasising how lovely the golan is. I visited there twice in the last 2 years and it’s my favorite place in Israel after Jerusalem. And Gamla is a major Jewish historical site as well as a nature preserve for raptors, I can’t see that in the hands of anyone but Jews.
The residents are not going anywhere. As someone pointed out, this would have to be put to a referendum, and just like dividing Jerusalem, if a deal was made secretly and then revealed the least that would happen is the government would finally fall.
Anyway, Syria reneges on every “deal” it makes.
Jun 16, 2008 - 12:55 pm 10. Michael Volpe:The Golan Heights is its own de facto peace plan with Syria. That’s because its strategic value in any conflict ensures that Israel would win. If Israel were to ever give up the Golan Heights for a useless piece of paper, it would also spell its own destruction. I can’t believe anyone anywhere would ever suggest that Israel give up the Golan Heights. Here is how I explained the strategic value.
http://theeprovocateur.blogspot.com/2008/04/strategic-value-of-golan-heights.html
Jun 16, 2008 - 2:01 pm 11. lgkick:Cletus,
International law prohibits acquiring territory by war. The US and Israel are isolated on this issue and even the US feels nervous about Israel’s lack of respect for the international consensus and the continuation of settlements in West bank.
Another war is very unlikely to happen because the US is terribly stuck in Iraq and cannot afford opening new fronts right now. Israel by herself cannot win the next war as the Lebanon war of 2006 proved. In fact there will be no need for a direct involvement of Iran or Syria; Hamas and Hizbullah are capable of making things really bad for Israel.
Jun 16, 2008 - 6:52 pm 12. DJ:interesting
Jun 16, 2008 - 7:03 pm 13. Cletus:Lebanon only proved Israel can’t win if they hold back to try and please the whole world. The only reason they had to pull out was because of the lies and propaganda such as the Qana ambulance strike. And Israel did not capture the territory in a war of aggression. It captured it in a defensive war. And if there is another war, it won’t be initiated by Israel or the U.S, it will be initiated by an Arab or Muslim country.
Let me ask you, do you support hezbollah and hamas? and do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
Jun 16, 2008 - 8:54 pm 14. lgkick:Cletus,
Of course I support Israel’s right to exist but within the pre-1967 internationally recognized borders. The international law does not care the war is defensive or aggressive.
A country cannot annex other people’s territories to its own through war, period. The reason for this is that it can be debatable whether a war is defensive or aggressive. Different sides have different opinions on who started the war. One side can easily agitate the other side to fire the first shot or stage a fake attack and then use that as a legal basis to go to war. For example Germany justified its invasion of Poland by staging a fake Polish attack (known as Gleiwitz incident). If you have all the world’s media on your side, you can justify every action you take.
Why do we go far. The US attack on Iraq was based on false intelligence and unproved links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. The majority of American people fell for it! This shows how dreadful it can be to ignore the international law and agencies, in particular the UN. At the end, it is to the best interest of the world that we resolve conflicts through negotiations and peacefully rather than through war and military might.
Jun 16, 2008 - 9:36 pm 15. idov:“lgkick:Of course I support Israel’s right to exist but within the pre-1967 internationally recognized borders”
What nonsense is this. The only “internationally recognized” borders of Israel are those fixed by the 1947 partition of mandated Palestine.
The Palestinian leader, the Mufti, who had been a Waffen SS commander, rejected the partition and called in five Arab armies to finish the work of annihilation of Jews he had participated in the Balkans with his Muslim troops. It was the last war that Nazi soldiers, formerly under the Mufti’s command and called in from Europe, fought for their cause.
That war ended with ceasefire lines, not borders. In 1967 the Arabs got the green light from Kosygin to destroy the Jews when the Americans indicated to Kosygin they would look the other way, but the Jews struck first and the old ceasefire lines were replaced with new ceasefire lines.
Settlement by Jews within all the disputed territories, namely Judea and Samaria, is sanctioned in international law by Article 80 of the UN Charter, the constitution of that organization, and any resolution to the contrary is unconstitutional and therefore illegal. Article 80 affirms the League of Nation ratification of the Balfour Declaration which says “Jews may settle anywhere in Palestine,” as defined in the declaration.
Get some facts before you shoot off your mouth about “borders” and “international law.” No one is going back to 1947. For starters that would mean abandoning Jerusalem.
Jun 17, 2008 - 7:32 am 16. David P:Igkick
Jun 17, 2008 - 8:37 am 17. Bobby McGill:YOU SIR HAVE BEEN MISINFORMED!!!! Kings are killed, Lands are conquered, Populations shift & migrate. Throughout history nations have evolved & dissolved based upon the natural consequences of war. Holding Israel to a double standard will allow anyone to make an argument for its demise. The reality on the ground speaks volumes for Israel’s need to maintain a strategic advantage, less they risk their entire existence as a nation.
I love it when they place preconditions on negotiations that never seem to get anywhere. I would venture to guess that if the Israelis offered to give in to all requests that the offer would still be rejected.
Bobby
Jun 17, 2008 - 8:44 am 18. Cletus:idlewordship.com
I was going to say something else, but David and Idov covered it all pretty well already.
There is no contention that the Arabs started the war. It is plain historical fact. This isn’t a discussion about the Iraq war, so I don’t see why you bring it up.
The Palestinians had a chance to make their territory (which was much more expansive than that of the Jews) lush and thriving like the Jews did. Instead they chose perpetual victimhood and war. Whose fault is that? Certainly not Israel’s.
Jun 17, 2008 - 10:38 am 19. BK:Igkick:
You are dealing with people who are drunk with their power. There will never be a solution if it will be based on the current balance of power verses international law. Israel did not withdraw from Lebanon if it was not for the daily attacks they were under, and will never withdraw from the Golan hights till the balance of powers changes. Funny enough Israel is the biggest opponent to regime change in Syria because the “Dictator” is Syria is making sure that there is no act of violence in the Golan against Israel.
Jun 17, 2008 - 1:24 pm 20. David P:BK & Igkick
Naive is a weakness, not an asset, “drunk with power,” or “balance of power,” to whom are you referring? I can think of 22 nations who for the past 60 years have done everything to physically, diplomatically & socially isolate, condemn & attack the tiny Jewish nation.
Israel is surrounded by a majority of people that do not share, have exposure to, nor a model for the same western values shared by N. Americans & Europeans. The country is the size of less then 1/10 of 1% of the entire middle east. A fifth of the worlds population, a billion strong have obsessively waged a campaign of intolerance against her. Oil, a primary commodity has supplied this ideology with infinite financing. A plague of misinformation against Israel spreads with impunity to media outlets, universities and countless other movements.
Make no mistake, if syria/hezbollah/iran regains Golan & Sheeba Farms, they will surely exploit it. True, if attacked from Golan after peace signed, Israel could launch simple air strikes, destroying the 150 dams throughout Syria flooding half the country. If this is true why was Lebanon 2 a failure? Certain covert restrictions & barriers confined Israel’s ability to execute a successful assault.
World opinion didn’t fall in Israel’s favor during its previous wars, why would they assume it would in the future when hezbollah begins firing rockets from Golan? What if the attacks are spontaneous and random, like from Gaza, sporadically killing & maiming? What’s Israel to do then, recapture Golan? flood Damascus? or should they launch limited, ineffective air strikes with equally ineffective minor ground incursions? What would the ‘oil educated’ world approve of publicly?
Jun 17, 2008 - 6:28 pm 21. Javelin:Under international law Israel’s possession of the Golan Heights is wrong. Under international law the Arab/Muslim block’s incessant demonizing and marginalizing of Israel is even worse. Unless there is a major sea change in the coalition of various backwards and reactionary excuses for Muslim and Arab countreis attitudes towards Israel, Jews and human rights in general, I suggest Israel hangs on to the Golan, cause her neighbors are bullies.
Jun 17, 2008 - 7:38 pm 22. Barnett:Under International Law the Golan is Israel’s.So is Jerusalem and what is the West Bank.It was taken in a defensive war.The West Bank and Gaza were occupied illegally by Jordan and Egypt.Period.All of the Arab, UN, and EU propaganda and wishing does not change any of these facts.The Shaaba Farms was recently reaffirmed in the UN as belonging to Israel.
Jun 19, 2008 - 1:24 amIsrael should do a complete about face.Not one inch belongs to an Arab Palestinian group that made up these claims.Their persistent terrorizing negates every agreement .They haven’t any ground on which to stand.Bush is pushing now for Shaba Farms and Jerusalem and the West Bank ,probably, because of the Saudis.Too bad.Israel is a sovereign nation.Period.It basically stands alone, again.It cannot trust anyone.It cannot chance it.Now, the US needs Israel for many reasons.It should tell the US to back off.It cannot trade out Israel for oil and for the Saudi terrorist insurgents to cease killing our troops in Iraq.That was probably the deal made.Bush had started out as the best friend the Jews ever had, but he has utterly made a 180, which imperils the US and every sovereign democratic nation.The world will pay the price if Israel doesn’t make a firm stand.It is the frontline of the Jihadists’ and/or Islamists’
aims.Yet,Iran is the serious problem not the Palestinians.Bush acknowledged this in “The Observer” interview last week.