Part II
The excessive pride and euphoria that gripped Israel after
the success of the Six Day War seem almost comic in
hindsight. Even the Left saw a kind of manifest destiny in
Israel's success and were wildly optimistic about the future.
Yet the conquest, and the humiliation suffered by the Arabs,
caused problems of their own that only led to more problems,
including the tragedies of the October War that left
thousands dead, but Arab pride restored enough so that Sadat
felt that he could make peace as an equal. And he did. But
what, in retrospect, did Israel gain from conquering the
Sinai? Nothing. There may have been no other way, given the
pikuach nefesh situation, but in terms of gain and
loss there seems to have been no gain.
*
Ibrahim Achmad El-Ado, Dean of the Faculty of Liberal Arts in
the University of Cairo, supplied the ideological basis for
the war on the Arab side, so to speak. In a speech before an
international symposium on the effects of the war he said:
"This was a war to defend (Egyptian) civilization and human
tidings . . . The October War returned to Egypt its complete
humanity, after washing its shame out in blood . . . the
Egyptian combat soldier succeeded in bridging the gap in
civilizations as quick as lightning . . . he managed to
bring his nation from the Middle Ages to the twentieth
century . . . The October War saved Egypt and the Arab world
not only from a military defeat but also from a defeat of
their civilization."
In light of this evidence, any intelligent person can see
that the conquest of Sinai was counterproductive. Of course,
we're not relating to the factor of self-defense from the
enemy which is a necessity, but rather to the harsh notes of
the chorus that accompanied it: the empty national arrogance
that intensified the humiliation of the Arabs, and the
conquest of large swatches of territories. Only a naive
person could have believed back then that the Arabs would
just accept such a situation. The consequences were
horrifying and horrendous.
*
Only on the heels of the Yom Kippur War did many people began
to think about "what did we gain from the Sinai conquest." In
later years, such expressions began to be heard from the
public at large about Yehuda and Shomron.
Many began to ask themselves: What is the benefit of being in
control of territories in which no Jew ever trod, and anyone
who goes there takes his life in his hands? What is the point
of territories that added hundreds of thousands of subversive
residents to the State, who could walk around amongst us and
commit acts of terror, G-d forbid? Was this the forecast and
hope of all those who danced in joy for "Greater Israel"
after the Six Day War?
Today everyone admits that it was the success of the '67 war
that created — ex-nihilo — the artificial
problem of "the suffering of the Palestinian people." Since
then the population of the territories is only seeking
independence. This problem (blown out of proportion by the
Left) brought the escalation of the bloody Intifadah and
turned all the Arab residents of the territories into
potential terrorists, whose goal is simply to shed innocent
Jewish blood.
Suddenly it's become clear that the "shining conquest" has
become a bone in the throat of Israel that it can neither
swallow nor spit out. On the one hand, everyone agrees it's
impossible to ignore the Palestinian demands for
independence, claims that have broad international support.
On the other hand, it's not a simple matter to unilaterally
withdraw from the territories and allow a militant and
belligerent Palestinian state on our borders. (We do not
presume to recommend one way or the other — only to
present the complications of the predicament.)
The "shining conquest" and the "liberation of the
territories" in the '67 War created a national headache of
the first order. The Arabs aren't giving up and are trying to
restore their wounded honor; Syria and Iran are doing this
with a massive military buildup, which increases the threat
to the State of Israel, and the Jewish inhabitants of Yehuda
and Shomron and the border towns have been undergoing a
wearying, daily Intifadah in the past years, which also
causes casualties in the central populated areas.
*
It turned out that the economic, political and military
bubble of hope that the territories held for Israel burst
very quickly. The conquest of Sinai brought in its wake the
bloody Yom Kippur War, and in the end, the situation was
returned to the way it had previously been, by the Camp David
peace treaty. The Egyptian territory that Israel held for
thirteen years never yielded any real benefit and only
brought another war on our heads, and in the end Sinai was
returned to the Egyptians then and the Gaza Strip was turned
over to the Palestinians in the Disengagement. This fulfilled
the verse: "There is a grievous evil that I saw under the
sun; riches kept by their owner that cause him harm"
(Koheles 5:12).
The Metzudas Dovid explains: "The riches were kept by their
owner and he did not lose possession of them, but they were
not kept for his benefit so he could enjoy them in the end of
his days and bequeath them to his heirs, but rather only for
his detriment. Tale-bearers spoke slander about him because
of his great wealth and he suffered as a result. "And those
riches are lost through an evil design" (Ibid.
13)— then the wealth was lost in the end through
the bad that it brought upon the owner, which refers to the
libel. He had to spend a fortune in bribes to save himself
from the evil designs against him."
As applied to our situation: The conquest of Sinai only led
to the shedding of Jewish blood in the War of Attrition and
the Yom Kippur War. In the end the Israeli government chose
to return the entire territory, with which it had hoped to
improve the political and security situation of the nation,
because of the troubles caused by retaining that territory
itself!
The territories of Yehuda and Shomron also do not validate
the hope they generated in the euphoric days of the 1967 War,
and many hold that in the political perspective the
territories are a drawback and not an asset. (We are not
discussing the mitzvah of settling Eretz Yisroel,
which is not connected to this issue. Every believing Jew
awaits the day when the entire Jewish people will dwell
securely in all of Eretz Yisroel, as promised in our
holy Torah, and hopes to hear the voice of the herald:
"kol mevaseir — A voice brings tidings: Set up
your dwellings up to Damascus" [Hoshanna of Succos].
But every believing Jew knows that this will become true only
in the days of the Moshiach when the shibud malchuyos
is removed.)
From this reality we can draw two main conclusions: First of
all, Eretz Yisroel isn't acquired through conquests
and military campaigns. If the Jewish people does not have
the spiritual merit to inherit the Land, the promise of the
Land is likely to turn from a blessing into a curse.
"Behold, I set before you today a blessing and a curse"
(Devorim 11:26). The Ohr HaChaim comments that this
posuk refers to the promise of the Land: "This gift
has a blessing and a curse. The blessing — `that you
will heed,' meaning that if you heed the commandments this
gift will be a blessing. But `if you will not heed,' it will
be a curse for you, because the nations of the world will be
jealous of you because of the Land, and you will perish
quickly from upon the good Land with great vengeance."
Certain groups speak about the "Wholeness of the Land"
(Eretz Yisrael Hasheleimah) as the motivation for
their approach which makes settling Yehuda and Shomron into a
fundamental principle that can even override certain
considerations of pikuach nefesh. They would be well
advised to make a serious spiritual accounting. Are all the
troubles and incidents of bloodshed coming out of these
territories perhaps an instance of a "gift that turned into a
curse" as a result of the Jewish people's insufficient
observance of the Torah's commandments?
A no less important conclusion is not to be impressed by
"successes" — no matter how attractive they may seem.
And also not be dragged along with enthusiasm of the masses,
who lose their head in the face of "shining conquests" and
they get carried away by euphoria. Let us not forget that
what appears at first as success may turn into bitter
disappointment.
Just like all the enthusiastic forecasts and recommendations
that were heard after the Six Day War seem today to be almost
comically out of touch with reality, so should we relate to
any future successes, especially when achieved by an
atheistic government. No one knows what the future will
bring, and what will turn out good and what will turn out
bad.
We have to place our trust only in the Creator, and not on
material successes of one kind or another, of which no man
can predict what will come of them.
