Call to Arms Demands Israel Defend Itself

War is a dirty business, and it often yields ugly dividends.

The Six-Day War left Israel in control of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, territories that are predominantly inhabited by Arabs. Recently the resident Palestinians staged violent riots against the Israeli government. Israeli security forces responded to the attacks with restraint, using live ammunition only as a last resort in life-threatening situations. Still, a single death is tragic, and Israel’s suppression of the violent demonstrations resulted in the deaths of more than 20 Arabs.

In response to the violence the American Jewish community has been criticized for its support to Israel, with newspapers lecturing that such backing cannot mean support for Israel’s mistakes and abuses. Further, it has been noted that Israel’s action in the occupied territories raises questions of both human rights and international law.

What is the status of Arabs in Israel? Thousands of Jordanians come over the border every day to work in Israel, and there is constant trade between the West Bank and the neighboring Arab states. Israel permits the Palestinians in the territories to hold peaceful public demonstrations. When was the last time that an Arab country permitted its resident Palestinians to stage peaceful anti-government protests?

There is, however, a big difference between a peaceful rally and a call to arms. Yasser Arafat, the “moderate” Palestinian leader, announced this week that the riots would continue “in waves” in order to force Israel to withdraw from the area. He also exhorted his followers “to fight and to wage the holy war until the flag of Palestine is raised atop the mosques of Jerusalem, the capital of our independent state.”

There has been much criticism of the deportation of nine Palestinians ordered by the Israeli government and now under review by Israeli courts. According to an Israeli military spokesman, most of them have long prison records for security offenses. Jamal Jabara, for example, allegedly participated in terrorist activities in the West Bank town of Kalkilya.

The legal bases for deportation are regulations that were introduced by the British in 1945. They were enforced by Jordan in both the West Bank and Gaza, and are still applicable. Jordan has never hesitated to deport and expel members of its Palestinian community whom it considers undesirable. There was no outcry in the media or in the United Nations when King Hussein ousted the Palestine Liberation Organization after heavy fighting in 1970 and 1971.

The countries, including the United States, that have joined the U.N. Security Council in calling on Israel to drop its deportation proceedings cite the Fourth Geneva Convention of Aug. 12, 1949, as support for their stand. Indisputably, Israel’s overriding obligation under the convention is to maintain order. The language of the convention prohibits deportations except when “the security of the population or imperative military reasons so demand.”

Additionally, the relevant text--Article 49--refers to “mass forcible transfers as well as deportations.” Experts in international law have said explicitly that the convention--which was drafted in the wake of the mass deportations, forced labor and exterminations during World War II--does not refer to individual expulsions. Without question, deportations are more humane than capital punishment--a remedy that is permitted by the convention. Furthermore, anyone who is threatened with deportation by the Israeli military is entitled to three levels of review to protect fundamental due process.

Finally, it should be noted that the transfer of a Palestinian from the West Bank of the Jordan to its East Bank is not a deportation. Israel has not annexed the West Bank, and since Jordan still claims the land as its own, it cannot argue that its own citizens are being deported when they are merely being sent from one city to another.

The activities of the past month have not arisen in a vacuum. Since 1967 Israel has extended a continuing invitation to its Arab neighbors to negotiate for peace. The one Arab leader who was willing to step forward and negotiate with Israel, Anwar Sadat, forged a peace with Menachem Begin that has outlasted both of their tenures. Unfortunately, the Palestinian and other Arab leaders have refused to come to the peace table. Instead, they keep their fellow Arabs behind fences in refugee camps as they pursue a policy of non-recognition and non-negotiation toward Israel.

Israel must actively continue to seek peace, and dissident elements of Isareli society, Jewish and Arab, who would thwart such efforts by force must be held in check. But Israel cannot sit alone at a peace conference. While it waits for a representative group of Palestinians who believe in nonviolence and who are prepared to negotiate, it must defend itself.