The Morality of Occupation

Flickr_-_Israel_Defense_Forces_-_The_IDF_Honors_Its_ReservistsThe occupation of West Germany by the United States, Great Britain and France lasted a full decade, whereas East Germany essentially remained a Soviet satellite throughout the Cold War. Only in 1990, with the momentous fall of the Berlin Wall and reunification of the country on October 3rd of that year, did the occupation of Germany formally end.

During World War II, the Nazis laid siege to much of the globe, resulting in tens of millions dead, including the mass extermination of much of European Jewry. Nazi ideology posed a barbarian threat to the civilized world, which had first to be crushed on the battle field and thereafter contained.

The occupation of Germany post-1945 was thus unequivocally necessary, and indisputably moral.

Israel’s occupation of the West Bank is analogously moral, rooted profoundly in a defensive necessity, juxtaposed to the need to contain a doctrine equally toxic to Nazism.

Israel has been devastated by Palestinian terror and continues to face an existential threat from a hostile population, which, on the whole, inculcates its youth with a rabid strain of anti-Semitism; a potent mixture of Islamic fundamentalism and Nazism, originally expounded by the Palestinian “godfather,” Grand Mufti of Jerusalem during WWII and Hitler collaborator Haj Amin al-Husseini.

Seven decades later, the demagoguery of this ideology continues to inform and permeate the foundation of Palestinian nationalism.

Nonetheless, Israel’s occupation is demonized incessantly.

This is attributable to the concerted — and heretofore successful — propaganda war of the Jewish state’s detractors aimed at distorting Israel’s implementation of legitimate security measures in the West Bank — measures that would be employed by any other nation under similar circumstances — thereby attempting to turn Israel into an international pariah.

Nor has Israel adequately defended its own cause by having already ceded various territories captured in 1967, all the while expressing a willingness to forfeit additional areas to the Palestinians. This has effectively undermined Israel’s rightful presence in territories legally acquired in a defensive war, and to which the Jewish People held title to in accordance with the British Mandate.

Most significantly, Israel’s retreat has transformed what should be universally regarded as a moral issue into a geo-political one, a process which has eroded the “high ground” enjoyed by the country in the immediate aftermath of the Six Day War.

The deterioration of Israel’s standing has been fueled by the misrepresentation of another of its policies in the West Bank; namely, settlement construction.

Most of the international community vilifies Israeli building across the Green Line (commonly referred to as the “1967 border,” but which in fact constitutes the 1949 armistice line that marked an end to the fighting during Israel’s War of Independence)  as a form of expansionism, reflective of a morally-corrupt occupation. The reality, however, is that the construction of settlements was implemented as a security policy following the 1967 war; and, then, only after Israeli peace overtures were rebuffed by the Arab world.

Israel attempted to return the territories captured in 1967 to those very Arab nations which had just attempted to destroy her. The Arab response came in the form of the now-infamous Khartoum Resolution, commonly referred to as the “three NOs”: “No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.”

Only when it was apparent that the West Bank and Gaza would remain under its control, did Israel’s left-of-center government begin constructing settlements, with the primary aim of buffering the country’s main population centers from future attack.

Security, not “land-grabbing,” was the impetus for building.

While construction across the Green Line has since become increasingly driven by ideological factors, Israeli governments have consistently shown a readiness to uproot settlements in the pursuit of peace; both from the Sinai as part of the 1979 treaty with Egypt and unilaterally from the Gaza Strip in 2005.

For his part, Binyamin Netanyahu agreed, during his first premiership, to relinquish control over Hebron, burial place of the Jewish Patriarchs, to the Palestinians. His implementation in 2010 of a 10-month construction moratorium in the West Bank, as well as the current de facto building freeze in East Jerusalem, proves his commitment to peace trumps ideology.

The global fixation on settlements has obscured the fact that the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) would nevertheless be required to maintain a presence across the Green Line even in the absence of Jewish communities there.

Memory is short, and the regularity with which, barely a decade ago, hundreds of Israeli civilians were blown to pieces simply while riding the bus to work or sipping coffee in a Tel Aviv cafe has faded from international discourse, and hence from public consciousness.

It was not until Operation Defensive Shield in 2002 that the IDF, out of sheer necessity, dismantled the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank, from which the bloodbath had been spawned. In conjunction with the construction of the security barrier, the Palestinian suicide bomber is now, for all intents and purposes, quiescent; a relative calm that prevails as the direct result of Israel’s ongoing measures of control and containment. As Palestinian society has not moderated since the Second Intifada, any IDF withdrawal to the indefensible pre-1967 lines would undoubtedly see the immediate resumption of the terror of yesteryear.

The precedents are Lebanon (Hezbollah), Gaza (Hamas), and, increasingly, the Sinai (al Qaeda-linked jihadists) too.

Further retreat would thus spell a death sentence for Israelis-men, women and children alike-who would invariably find themselves under renewed attack. The implementation of such a policy would therefore be inherently amoral. And while the occupation does indeed restrict Palestinians, it is an ethically superior recourse than the alternative; namely, the deaths of innocents.

In the interim, Palestinians maintain sufficient autonomy, if they so desired, to foster a new culture of tolerance that preaches and nurtures co-existence, as well as benefit from ample international aid to allow for the creation of basic institutions of state; together which, constitute prerequisites to ending the conflict, and, by corollary, the occupation.

It is imperative that the international community be reminded of the underlying reason for Israel’s ongoing military presence across the Green Line. This is especially important now, given the absence of a Palestinian negotiating partner, amidst increasing calls for further unilateral Israeli withdrawals.

The argument is sound, rational and unequivocally defensible: The occupation is a moral imperative that saves lives.

  • Eric Anderson

    Truly said, at the time of world war there was a problem in each European countries. People were unemployed and they were not having any source of income to earn.


    Consign of the times

  • Poupic

    Two major points missing from this otherwise good article. 1)For thousands of years everybody knew where Judea and Samaria were because those names were on the maps. In 1948 John Glub made a land grab for Abdullah who always wanted to add to his made up kingdom of Transjordan Syria and Palestine. Now having a piece of his dream the name Transjordan was non-longer factual since he own both side of the Jordan river. He called his Kingdom the logical name Jordan and his land grab The West Bank to signify his ownership on the land. He owned the land for 19 years and doesn’t anymore ever since he attacked the Jewish state in 1967 and lost his land grab. It is non-longer logical to call the land by it’s land grab name is it?

    Then there is a little detail no one talks about. All the Jews were cleansed out of the land grab by Transjordan of 1948. The 1967 liberation of Judea and Samaria was not followed with a similar cleansing out of all Arabs from the liberated land grab. Why is nobody talking about it?

  • 1Indioviejo1

    In this lucid post we get the legitimacy of the IDF occupation in certain areas, yet we also see that even Netanyahu fails to grasp the fact that Israel has no peace partners and never will. Land for peace never got them peace and Muslims are an intractable bunch of S** and S***. Change the strategy, ignore the barking dogs in the west who acquiesce to the Muslim thugs.


    -ISRAEL- should use it’s nuclear stockpile on every muslim country in the world and this would solve all their problems……LOL…..

    • Moa

      The Israelis would never do such a thing. They are far too moral. They spent a great deal of money developing the Delilah missile so they could prevent casualties among the Palestinian civilians (the Israelis care more about Palestinian citizens than Hamas does; Hamas loves their own civilians to be killed as “involuntary martyrs” for propaganda purposes).

      It is a good thing that the genocidal Islamists don’t realise that the Israelis probably could not bring themselves to use nuclear weapons on the civilian cities of their enemies – except perhaps, as the “Samson Option”.


        I hope and pray that you are wrong….

  • Urbane_Gorilla

    Israel is purposely exterminating the Palestinians to land grab it and they do so with the Billions that we US taxpayers give them each year. All else is BS.

    • defcon 4

      Your damned, dumb lies might play in your madrassa, mosque or any islamo-nazi state but they won’t play here Ahmed.

      • Urbane_Gorilla

        Actually, I’m an Irish extraction American and my opinions are very well considered. Your silly name calling indicates your low IQ.

        • defcon 4

          Irish extraction by way of what? The Mid-East and an Irish pig?

          • Urbane_Gorilla

            Oooohhh… Good one… jackass.

          • iluvisrael

            Israel is here to stay loser – happy eternal nakba!

          • Urbane_Gorilla

            Congratulations.. You’re a pig.

          • Gee

            See defcon4 – he states that you are wrong – that he is a jackass. Dang should have guessed it

        • Moa

          “Actually, I’m an Irish extraction American and my opinions are very well considered.”

          Your opinions may be well considered by other idiots who also don’t know that they should be writing “Irish-American” or “American of Irish extraction”.

          You do have a high opinion of yourself, don’t you? please go and Google hubris.

          “Your silly name calling indicates your low IQ.”

          Your inability to form coherent sentences marks you are poorly educated. Your clear ignorance of the facts of Middle East history marks you as very poorly educated. I can’t speak about your IQ, but those with high IQs don’t need to put others down. Hence, the balance of probabilities puts your IQ as low as your social skills.

          If you stop being horrid to other posters then the rest of the reasonable readers might overlook your bad manners and general ignorance. Deal?

          • Urbane_Gorilla

            My ‘name calling’ is in response to others that begin it. It’s my way of letting them know that they’re out of line. Perhaps you didn’t read the whole thread?

            Example” “Your damned, dumb lies might play in your madrassa, mosque or any islamo-nazi state but they won’t play here Ahmed.” and this:

            “Irish extraction by way of what? The Mid-East and an Irish pig?”

            Nobody should have to accept such silly insults, nor did I respond to the first.

            You said ” You do have a high opinion of yourself, don’t you? please go and Google hubris.” ..

            I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion. I said my opinions are well considered. In English that means that I’ve read, studied and considered the matter before arriving at an opposed to many that post in a knee-jerk fashion.

            I presume by hubris, you mean my confidence is an affront to the Gods leading to a downfall…(as in Greek plays.).. I don’t believe in gods..and i doubt I’ll suffer any consequences for having formed my opinions over a long period of time with great effort:”

    • Moa

      Consider the awesome power of the IDF. If the Israelis wanted to exterminate the Palestinians then *no one* could stop them – not even the Americans. It would be all over in days if the Israelis really got pissed. But they do not.

      Instead, even during Israel’s War of Independence when the Arab Legion attacked with the explicitly stated goal of genocide against the Jews and Israelis the new nation of Israel allowed three Arabs to be elected as Members of the Knesset. It also allowed Arabs to remain as citizens with full rights in Israel.

      So now Israel has over a million Arabs as citizens with full rights and they still have Members of Knesset. Most of those Arabs want to remain Israeli citizens because they see Israel as their country too – flawed for sure, but still their country. Most Arab Israelis *do not* want to fall under the governance of the incompetent, corrupt, and oppressive Palestinian Authority.

      So, your statements are so counter-factual as to make you look like a total ignoramus. I suggest you try actually study the *facts* about the region – not just the propaganda put out there for the weak minded (a ‘Jedi Mind Trick’ that is played on otherwise moral people who are clueless about the *factual* history of the region).

      Incidentally, there are 57 Muslim majority nations in the world, most of them are empty. The Arabs don’t care about Israel the land, they care about commiting genocide against Jews as laid out in Islamic hadith Sahih Muslim 6985 (please go and read it). The Arabs don’t care about the land of ‘Palestine’ (which is why they had no problem when Jordan illegally occupied Judea and Samaria from 1948 to 1967; and Egypt similarly occupying Gaza). They only have a problem when Israel holds the territories, due to their anti-Jewish racism that originates in Muslim scripture.

      Here is a reference from a Classical Arabic scholar who translates statements from Arabic:
      and more …

      I suggest you check the historical facts before you embarrass yourself with nonsense again.

      • Urbane_Gorilla

        Thank you for your opinions.. I will read the links you posted. It truly is refreshing to have someone post an opinion (whether or not I agree with it) and substantiate it in a logical fashion.

        And yes..I agree. Israel, if it wanted, and if it ignored the fact that the Middle East would erupt, could easily steamroll over Palestine. My point is that that is not a politic solution. Much better to keep nibbling away at Palestine with the tacit blessing of the USA, as the USA pretends to work to a peaceful partition. That’s my opinion based on years of reading. You won’t find any government official claiming that’s what we want. But I can see no other point of view.

    • Gee

      Exterminate – wow we sure are lousy at it. In 1947 there were 1,230,00 Arabs in the Mandate. Some 480-600,000 fled had are now (according to the Arabs) over 5,000,000. We are exterminating them, really?

      As for the land – minor facts like the Arabs do not have a single legal claim and that our claims (yes plural) are international law (including the UN Charter).

      Care to garner a fact to support that claim?

      By the way the US – is giving those Arabs about $1 billion a year

      • Urbane_Gorilla

        Exterminate, push aside, force out, lock up in ghettos…Yeah…a real big semantic point of difference.

        Please provide a link to ‘your claims under international law’

        Which Arabs are you referring to? Saudis, Egyptians?

  • Bret Newfield

    Good article…but I have an issue with one statement…the writer implies that the Palestinians can ”

    if they so desired, to foster a new culture of tolerance that preaches and nurtures co-existence”. That is an impossibility without reforming and expunging the Quran from Jew-hating passages that incite genocidal behavior.
    Therefore the only way to achieve peace with any Muslim entity is for the West to apply pressure on the Muslim world to expunge the Quran.

    • Moa

      Actually, the worst verse that motivates Islamic genocidal goals is not in the Qur’an itself. It is the hadith in Sahih Muslim 6985. Sure, there is all sorts of evil elsewhere, but this is the ‘prime mover’ of much of the current trouble. Look up and bookmark the reference if you like, it’ll help you to demonstrate that the problem stems from Islam , because you have a clear and unambiguous verse.

  • Bamaguje

    There is no occupation.
    West bank (Judea & Samaria) was Jewish for over 3000 years before Jordan illegally occupied it from 1948-67.

    If anything, West Bank & Gaza Palestinian Arabs are the ones occupying lands designated for Jews as per the 1922 partition of British mandate Palestine.
    Palestinians got the lion share (77%), which is now Jordan.The remaining 23% which included West Bank & Gaza, is for Jews.

  • tracy

    I thought that Zionism started in Russia? and Israel used to be named Palestine,but in 1948 the UN trying to appease world guilt for the holocaust and not allowing Jews to immigrate to America, decided they would displace the Palestinians instead.This crap has nothing to do with the Bible and has all to do with world politics.Trying to bring God into the mix is a sin in it’s self, go home political Rabbi.Israel trains their children from school age on, in a militaristic society, to fight the world is against them. I don’t think the argument is sound anymore.

    A movement for (originally) the reestablishment and (now) the development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel. It was established as a political organization in 1897 under Theodor Herzl, and was later led by Chaim Weizmann

    • Moa

      “Israel used to be named Palestine”

      “Palestine” was the name introduced as a Roman province by the Romans – as an insult to the Jewish inhabitant of Judea. Palestine was so named for an ancient foe of the Jews, the Philistines, who had long since been destroyed by invading empires (eg. part of the various waves of Babylonians, Assyrians, Persians across the region etc).

      The term “Palestinian” was used before 1948 to refer to the Jewish inhabitants of the region. “Arab” was used for other inhabitants. The term “Palestinian” was co-opted by Arabs in 1967 so that they could lay claim to the Jewish portions of the region. Here’s a reference from various members of the PLO (including the Egyptian warlord, Yasser Arafat) that shows that choosing the word “Palestinian” was done deliberately by Arabs so that they can commit the genocide against Jews that hadith Sahih Muslims 6985 commands them to do.

      Here’s a series of slides that my statements refer to:

      • tracy

        Wow,that was really a fantastic read send more!

  • PowertodaPeople1848

    Ugh…a disgusting article, but exactly what I’ve come to expect from Zionists. I’m sure everyone here would have supported a similar article in Der Stürmer extolling the enlightened morality of the Third Reich’s occupation of Eastern Europe. Zionism is on the wrong side of history, and like Nazism, will vanish soon.

    • UCSPanther

      I was wondering when you would show up, commie.

      Here’s an inconvenient fact: The Nazis ACTUALLY were supporters of Palestinian nationalism, and propaganda left over from that regime are best sellers in Palestinian territories.

      Kinda defeats the victimhood narrative, don’t ya think?

    • PowertodaPeople1848

      I’m a socialist, not a “commie.” I doubt a fascist like you would know the difference.

      As for your contention that the Nazis supported Palestinian nationalism, seems like they were actually pretty cozy with the Zionists:

      Kinda defeats the victimhood narrative, don’t ya think?

      • UCSPanther

        A socialist is still a commie whether you like it or not. Just a like a neo-nazi claiming that he isn’t a nazi, he’s a national socialist.

        Just the same type of totalitarian animal.

        Your beloved Palestine won’t survive the 21st century either. It is failed state, and its subjects have only themselves to blame for its failure.

        Maybe if they want to keep up their victimhood narrative, you should tell them to limit the amount of copies of Mein Kampf or the protocols that are such best sellers in the Middle East…

      • Moa

        Hey socialist, how about you Google the person “Haj
        Amin al-Husseini”

        Here’s a link for you if looking up historical facts on Google is too hard:

        It was the Muslim Mufti of Jerusalem who appears to have expnded Hitler’a idea for the Final Solution. Hitler is famous for stating, “Who, after all, speaks to-day of the annihilation of the Armenians?”. (refering to the Tirkish jihad against the Amenians that killed over a million).

        It is standard fare for the political Left to compare Israel to Nazis. That way the Left can legitimize their support for Muslims who want to commit genocide against the Israelis (who did not seize the land from the Arabs, the Jews have been in the region *continuously* for over 3000 years, and were mere throwing off the colonial occupation of the Ottoman Empire and the British Mandate when they declared independence and were recognized by the United Nations in 1948).

        Your counterpunch article is pretty light on facts, However, it does point out to the fact that the most socialist state in the US, California, has an uncontrollable debt problem. This is because, despite it many industries, the burden of socialism is too great even for the enormous economy of California. This is the exact same pattern that we see in other socialist countries around the World. As Baroness Margaret Thatcher famously said, “The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money [to spend].”.

        Socialism is a nice idea. So is Global Peace. However, these are simply not practical ideas – the nature of humans and societies means they will never happen, no matter how many people the socialists kill to gain their utopia. A little socialism seems to work, despite it being a parasite on the fruits of capitalism (in the US this is the hard working conservatives who provide the bulk of the money for the social and entitlement programmes).

        So, there’s a couple of things to think about. Islam is aligned with Naziism in its goals (despite Islamic and Leftists propaganda trying to point a ‘black-is-white’ picture). The *facts* show this to be true: read about the history of Haj
        Amin al-Husseini; look at the Nazi salutes that Hezbollah gives in its parade; look at the Nazi flags the Palestinians fly (because they agree with the goals and methods of the Nazis)

        Then you get economics wrong. Socialism doesn’t work. Now there are the bullshitters that say, “It would work, if only they installed *true socialism*”. This is rubiish. The 21th Century is replete with different types of socialist experiments and they have all failed. The socialist aspects of the US are what is dragging it down (as spends its way past all the wealth accumulated before it had such large socialist porgrams); even the Scandivian example of Sweden (which has *very* high taxes) is failing – as uncontrolled Muslim immigrants push the social benefit system past breaking point. When you look past the ideas of socialism and start looking at the *facts* you’ll see not only does it not work, it can’t work. Humans look after each other without needing government imposed socialism (which increases inefficiency). Humans are productive *despite* their government, and these productive humans are capitalists, not socialist.

        Finally, for a dose of reality, perhaps you should consider a great line by Russians which highlights the reality of both socialism and communism, “We pretended to work, and they pretended to pay us”.

        A small amount of social programs within a country can work (and, is essential to keep people out of a recurring poverty trap). Once the social programmes start harming the capitalist ‘productive sector’ then your country is in trouble. This is where the US is at the moment. The Leftists blame the problem on the ‘military-industrial complex’ but completely ignore the gorilla in the room. It is the unfunded liabilities of the US Government supplied social and entitlement programmes that *completely* dwarfs every other risk to the US economy.

        Socialism don’t work. The current predicament of the US shows this – if you actually care to look at the numbers.

  • Texas Patriot

    Israel is a beacon of peace, freedom and democracy in a tumultuous sea of tyranny, totalitarianism, and barbarism, and as such, represents the only hope of long term peace, stability, and human dignity in the region.

  • Jeffrey Orr

    Israel has one third of one percent of the land the Arabs has. But the puketillians want it all.

  • Gee

    The occupation of Japan hasn’t ended yet