The Yinon Plan

Yinon Plan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term Yinon Plan refers to an article published in February 1982 in the journal Kivounim [1] ("guidance" or "direction" in Hebrew), published by the World Zionist Organization, based in Jerusalem. The article, entitled A Strategy for Israel in the 1980s, is signed by Oded Yinon, who presents himself as a journalist and former official of the Israeli Foreign Ministry. The thesis of the existence of the "Yinon Plan" is controversial: it is used by anti-Zionist activists to criticize Israeli policy in the Near and Middle East but other authors consider that the Article remained anecdotal (or largely ignored) and that it should not be confused with a "plan" or a "roadmap" which would be followed by the leaders of Israel.



Greater Israel: "From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates"

Contents

The article considers that the interests of the Jewish state is to promote the creation of, in the Arab world, antagonistic mini-states too weak and divided to effectively oppose it: "The fragmentation of Syria and of Iraq in areas determined on the basis of ethnic or religious criteria must be, in the long term, a priority goal for Israel, the first step being the destruction of the military power of those states. Rich in oil, and plagued by internal strife, Iraq is in the Israeli firing line. Its dissolution would be, for us, more important than that of Syria, because it is Iraq which is in the short term, the most serious threat to Israel."

History

Eight months after its initial publication in Kivounim, the article was republished in October 1982 by the Journal of Palestine Studies (1982–2008), translated by Israel Shahak (1933–2001), former president of the Israeli League for Human and Civil Rights (1970–1990) and militant anti-Zionist. This second publication came just as Israel's military intervention in Lebanon ended (June–September 1982), called "Peace for Galilee Operation", marked in particular by the massacres committed by the Lebanese Christian Phalanges in Palestinian refugee camps in Sabra and Shatila (16–18 September 1982).

Ideas similar to those of this article were proposed in 1996 in a report to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Titled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, the report suggests "a clean break" with the philosophy of the Oslo Accords, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein and a proxy war with Syria. One action set out in the report was to "work closely with Turkey and Jordan to contain, destabilize, and roll-back some of its most dangerous threats". The report was prepared by a study group from the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, a think tank of neoconservative Israeli-Americans. The study group was led by a figure of the neoconservative movement and former senior official of the Department of Defense, Richard Perle. The report's findings were rejected by Netanyahu.

The article was also published in 2007 by the journal Confluences Méditerranée.[2] under the title "A persistent strategy of dislocation of the Arab world" and using the introduction written by Israel Shahak for the Journal of Palestine Studies published twenty-five years earlier, and again in 2013 by Global Research[1] with an additional introduction by Michel Chossudovsky a Canadian economist, author and conspiracy theorist.

Influence

For some, the ideas set out in this article were largely taken by successive Israeli governments since 1982. There is evidence to support that this geopolitical doctrine is being followed by Israel and the US since the 1980s: the US invasion of Iraq in 2003, the fall of Saddam Hussein, the civil war in Syria (since 2011), the breakup of the country, the balkanization of the Middle East, and the rise of the Islamic State. This thesis is referred to by several anti-Zionist militants such as the Swiss preacher Hani Ramadan [3], the Holocaust denier Roger Garaudy (who refers to the "Yinon Plan" in his book[4] "The Case for Israel - Political Zionism in 1983"), the political scientist and essayist Pierre Hillard, the Italian journalist Silvia Cattori, etc.

Others believe instead that this article's ideas had no influence on the strategic decisions of Israel. The very identity of the journalist (unknown in Israel) remains mysterious: we do not know what his exact duties at the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs were. For Michael Prazan and Adrien Minard, biographers of Roger Garaudy, "nothing indicates that this product is a concrete work plan approved by the authorities. This is a personal position among others, expressed by a single journalist ".

Some view the "Yinon Plan" as a conspiracy and hoax similar to the hoax known as "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"[2] however there is no evidence that this is the case; the article was published in a respected journal and there is little doubt as to its authenticity; all that is in doubt is whether the author really was Oded Yinon or whether that was a pseudonym, or whether it has ever been an official policy of the Israeli Government.

Even if the name Oded Yinon is a pseudonym, the author self-identifies in a public journal and it therefore seems reasonable that the article is most commonly known as the "Yinon Plan".

The Plan in Summary

The plan sets out a series of steps that the author thinks could lead to the realization of a Greater Israel essentially through the balkanization of the Arab world.[5][6] In specific terms, and amongst other things, the article suggests the dissolution of Iraq and Syria, the recovery of Sinai from Egypt, the liquidation of Jordan and termination of the rule of King Hussein along with the transfer of Arabs from Israel and the Occupied Territories to Jordan.

References

^ Jump up to: a b "“Greater Israel”: The Zionist Plan for the Middle East | Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization". globalresearch.ca. Retrieved 2016-09-19. This article was first published on Global Research on April 29, 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b Reichstadt, Rudi (Wednesday, September 2, 2015). "Observatoire du conspirationnisme et des théories du complot". Complotisme: Hani Ramadan persists, sign ... and sinks. Conspiracy Watch. Retrieved 5 September 2015. Check date values in: |date= (help)
Jump up ^ Ramadan, Hani (Monday, August 31, 2015 at 17:12.). "Le Temps". You said "conspiracy theory"?. Le Temps. Retrieved 5 September 2015. Check date values in: |date= (help)
Jump up ^ Garaudy, Roger (1983). The Case for Israel - Political Zionism.
Jump up ^ “A Strategy for Israel in the Nineteen Eighties” by Oded Yinon, Translated by Israel Shahak and published by the Association of Arab-American University Graduates, Inc. Belmont, Massachusetts, 1982 Special Document No. 1 (ISBN 0-937694-56-8)
Jump up ^ Yinon, Oded (February 1982). "A strategy for Israel in the 1980s". KIVUNIM (Directions), A Journal for Judaism and Zionism. Jerusalem: Published by the Department of Publicity/The World Zionist Organization, Jerusalem. Editor: Yoram Beck. Editorial Committee: Eli Eyal, Yoram Beck, Amnon Hadari, Yohanan Manor, Elieser Schweid. Winter, 5742 (14).
Categories: GeopoliticsHebrew languageZionismMiddle EastIsraelPalestine (region)JordanSyriaIraqSinai PeninsulaEgypt
Navigation

US troops in Kuwait 2015

The Inhumanity of Man or "Never stop Caring"

So... another blog post following another terrorist attack... or at least one on a western city which is all that seems to make headlines in the UK...

Are we becoming desensitised to the violence and the atrocities? Are we just relieved that this latest attack was not in my backyard?

Should we hide our faces and close our borders? 

Raise our voices and our fists?
Turn back the boats?

Or will those of us of good conscience do something?

Should we have compassion both in word and deed? 
Turn the other cheek? 
Forgive... seventy times seven? 
Love our neighbour as ourself?
Even love our "enemies"?

We must NEVER stop caring. Each one of us is precious, made in the image of God, valuable beyond measure, a person with feelings that matter, a human being. We need to stop and think "What would I want others to do for me if we traded places?"

It doesn't matter what colour their skin is, what political persuasion, what religion, what gender, orientation or age. Whether able bodied or not, member of Mensa or bottom of the class. Whether vulnerable, suffering, hungry, homeless, jobless or nationless. Whether rich or poor, powerful or weak. We are all the same - made of flesh and blood.

All that matters in making decisions about what we should do is asking "What is wrong and what is right?" and "What if it was me?" It's not that difficult!

Syrian Refugees 

This is a crisis of unprecedented size and nature, certainly in living memory. People don't leave their lives and homes easily. To have this many displaced people is a sign of major catastrophe. Just think what it would take to make you leave everything behind. Sending people back to something that frightening is immoral, even evil. Shame on the EU. Shame on Turkey. This is tantamount to trafficking refugees. These are not economic migrants but refugees fleeing unbearable circumstances.

Until we sort out the cause (which the US, UK, France, the EU and Russia have all contributed too) and until refugees stop spilling out of their homelands, we have got to house them, feed them, care for them. What would Jesus do? What will we do?

ISIS: radicalising, beheading, cutting off fingertips, crucifying Christians, executing Yazidis and other minorities, prostituting young women, promising virgins to men who die as martyrs. The list goes on. If this was on your doorstep it wouldn't take long for you to seek refuge elsewhere.

The Syrian government, European nations, the US and Russia: bombing, killing civilians and aid workers caught up in the wrong place at the wrong time - collateral damage. Focused on their own self interest (or so called national interest) - oil, war mongering, arms trading, bullying, redirecting attention from the real issues, looking for new opportunities to amass personal wealth at the expense of the poor.

Who is right? Who is wrong?

The Palestinian Situation

As we saw last time Palestine, and Gaza in particular, is the second most dangerous place in the world to be a civilian after Syria. The refugee camps have been full a long time. People displaced, territories occupied illegally, lands annexed against international law. The people have nothing but their pride and a desire to live at peace in their homeland.

The UN-recognised State of Palestine remains largely unrecognised by the West and it struggles to get its voice heard in the international community. Another voiceless people.

Hamas: rocket attacks, knife wielding teenagers, stone throwing children.  Is this right? No of course it isn't.

Israel and the IDF: Sending tanks in, bombing, destroying buildings and sanitation, spraying effluent on houses, polluting water sources, arresting children, shooting children, shooting injured people in the head, segregating Jews and Arabs. Is this right? No of course it isn't.

But which is worse? 

By any measure it is clear cut. Remember Operation Protective Edge? 66 Israeli deaths compared to 1767 Palestinians deaths. The maths says this is disproportionate.

If Israel wants to be considered a democracy it needs to start behaving like one. Apartheid must be stopped. Jews and Arabs must learn to live together. There are plenty out there who want to, but both sides are so far apart and antagonistic towards each other and are spreading fear and hate in their own communities that it seems to be mission impossible for those who do want to do something positive about it.

There is evil abounding on both sides. Every decreasing circles. A race to the most inhumane treatment of each other.

Forget religion for a moment (we'll come back to that another time). There are two ideologies here that are strongly opposed - Political Zionism and Radicalised Islam (both mingling religion and faith with political, societal and governmental power structures). Both claiming priority over the other and both dehumanising the other. Both radicalising their young people. Both allowing their teenagers and young adults to view killing the other side as an OK thing to do. It's not OK.

If we don't grow up and learn to listen to each others' grievances and concerns, we will never get out of this hell hole. Stuck in an endless loop till there is no-one left standing.

The next time I hear the accusation of "anti-Semitism" or "Islamophobia" lobbed into the argument I will scream! When the discussion begins to get a bit to close to the truth, either side is all too eager to press the nuclear button to avoid the painful truth that neither side is right and that both are in the wrong.

I think there is a sociological medical condition attached to this type of behaviour: Collective Narcissism.

In any conflict there is normally one party that is morally more responsible for the situation. It is usually clearer to those on the outside. Most of us can spot the under dog. Israel, as a powerful nation and notionally a democracy has an obligation to treat those living in the land it has occupied with all the respect due to fellow human beings and commanded by international conventions.

So what's the answer? 

It's easy for me to say, in my warm house with 247 electricity and clean running water, but I think a start would be for the Palestinians to take the moral high ground. Stop all rocket attacks (they're pretty ineffective anyway), don't carry knives, follow the example of Gandhi. Take away any excuse for Israel and the IDF so that the stark reality of their actions are even more clear to the whole world. Groups like BTselem and Breaking the Silence need to continue to report the truth. The obvious truth that Israel is the aggressor in this conflict is not obvious enough to some... so make it more obvious.

If Israel still won't do the right thing, campaigns like BDS which seek to broaden boycotts, divestments and sanctions against what is by any simple definition an Apartheid State will gain more traction. When whole nations boycott Israel, just like in South Africa, eventually... equality and freedom will happen.


What can you do?

1. Always remember we are all human beings with feelings.
2. Never stop caring.
3. Never allow dehumanisation to win.
4. Support the underdog.
5. Speak the truth in love.
6. Write to your MP, senator, congressman or woman, councilor, or other representative and ask them to lobby parliament, congress etc.
7. Sign petitions (see a couple below for UK residents) and share them on social media.
8. Support and/or join human rights organisations like Amnesty
9. Vote for those with the strongest ethical views irrespective of their parties.
10. Look for opportunities to engage in dialogue with people with different views.
11. Make choices about how you spend your money (avoid products that relies on subjugated people, occupied or annexed land and other dehumanising activities). 
12. Anything else that will make a difference.

If you live in the UK you could sign these petitions:

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/sanction-israel-for-crimes-against-humanity-1

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124008

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/123495

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/120283


M.