The Fifth Column?

The tall man with the carrot-red hair and stern expression hadn't spoken a word. The embarrassing silence was disconcerting to say the least. It wasn't stage fright or a mental block that caused the awkward delay. On the contrary, it was an intentional pause, a standard gimmick he used, meant for effect before making his opening remarks

He had made an immediate and lasting impression and he knew it.

We, his audience, were a group of Israelis attending a seminar for youth movement emissaries. After the seminar we were sent to work with Jewish communities in the Diaspora. Dan Schueftan

That was in August 1973 and the lecture was the first in a series of lectures on the Arab-Israeli Conflict given by Dan Schueftan an unorthodox Arab affairs analyst.

Perhaps the best way to describe him is in his own words, "Even by Israeli standards, I’m arrogant, but I have good reason to be. Any kind of modesty on my part would simply be false modesty." Explaining his rough-cut style he says, "My views are extremely unpleasant and politically incorrect. But I am right." Maybe you prefer another description -

“ Dan Schueftan: Israel's John Bolton, but cruder.”

Ten years later I met him again when I was working at the kibbutz movement seminar centre at Efal near Tel Aviv. He was just as arrogant and had a larger repertoire of disparaging remarks regarding Arabs.

Why do I bother mentioning him, after all I could have drawn on any number of Arab affairs experts instead of Professor Schueftan to help me explain what is happening in the Middle East. Many people find his uncouth style obnoxious; yet putting personal aversions aside, Dan Schueftan's experience, knowledge and qualifications more than compensate for his brusque, offensive manner.

I chose to mention him because the publication of his latest book, "Palestinians in Israel," coincided with the tumultuous events occurring in the Arab world and the recent Fatah-Hamas rapprochement.

In 1999, when Professor Schueftan's book "Disengagement: Israel and the Palestinian Entity" was published, his proposals appeared extreme; almost delusional. As there was no chance for securing an agreement with the Palestinians, Schueftan asserted at the time that Israel must undertake unilateral moves; that is, disengage from the Palestinians, even without getting anything in return.

Six years later, when the Israeli government withdrew from the Gaza Strip his proposal became a reality, albeit on a small scale.

However, following the publication of his book, Schueftan realised that even after fully disengaging from the Palestinians, the problem of Israel's Arab citizens will remain painfully unresolved. Recalling the dilemma he said, "There was a need to clarify what is required of us in order to maintain our Jewish, democratic character in Israel following disengagement,".

This clarification process lasted a decade and involved a thorough painstaking study of the subject. Relating to Schueftan's meticulous methodology Middle East analyst Asaf Romirowsky described his work environment as follows, "His study is crammed with crates filled with relevant documents. He has collected every word published in newspapers, both in Israel and abroad. He has documented every Knesset speech and has watched every television documentary on the topic produced over the past twenty years.

Schueftan's analysis led to the publication of his latest book, "Palestinians in Israel." The subtitle is unequivocal: "The Arab minority's struggle against the Jewish state."

Supported by masses of data he asserts, "They are unwilling to accept a solution that is less than what is perceived as the Jewish nation-state's suicide. We are dealing with an especially difficult branch of the complete rejection of the Jewish state in the Arab world."

Professor Schueftan serves as the head of the national security centre at the University of Haifa and also lectures at courses run by the IDF and at security colleges in London. Almost every Israeli prime minister and minister of defence has consulted him

In an article published recently in Yediot Ahronot columnist Roni Shaked quoted from Schueftan’s conclusions, "The preferred process for maintaining Israel as a Jewish, democratic state is to secure a historic compromise with the Arab world.

This requires difficult compromises on the security front and in respect to our attachment to the cradle of Jewish civilisation. This process raises the need to contend with a large minority of more than a million Arab citizens, who are fighting from the inside against Israel's Jewish, democratic character and identity."

He says Schueftan believes Israel’s Arabs want, "recognition as a national minority granted a recognised status, while eroding the state of Israel's national Jewish aims to the point of annulling them. The Jewish nation-state is illegitimate in the eyes of the main camp within Israel's Arab minority, even if an Arab-Palestinian state is established alongside Israel in the same land, between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean.

Their strategy is to attack the Jewish establishment from within, using the democratic means of the State and of society, in the name of democracy, pluralism and human rights.

The use of universal messages such as 'a state of all its citizens' hides a wholly different notion: An attempt to establish a bi-national state on the ruins of the Jewish state that will gradually change its demographic balance by rejecting the Law of Return and adopting the right of return. The new demographic balance will dictate the formation of an Arab state.

Despite the growing integration into Israel's society and economy, Israel's Arabs are committed to undermining the Jewish state's current format."Says Schueftan

Attempts to mitigate the negative aspects of our minority's behaviour by comparing them with minorities in other countries are misleading.

"Israel's Arabs are a special case," claims Schueftan. "We are not dealing with just a majority and a minority, but rather, a minority with the mentality of a majority vis-à-vis a Jewish majority with the mentality of a minority."

Even a casual observer checking statements made by the two Islamic movements in Israel, by Arab Knesset members, local authority mayors and other public figures in the Arab sector is likely to endorse Dan Schueftan’s conclusions.

Furthermore it's possible to deduce from statistics regarding Arab voting patterns, political affiliations and other parameters how many Israeli Arabs subscribe to this subversive strategy. No doubt it's widespread, perhaps even mainstream.

There’s a tendency to equate the Arab minority with the Islamic Movement.

Although the Islamic Movement enjoys considerable popularity among Israel’s Arabs it certainly is not synonymous with the whole Arab Sector.

There are in fact two Islamic movements. The southern movement is more moderate and it participates in the Israeli democratic system, both in municipal and parliamentary elections. The more radical northern Islamic movement chose not to be a part of the Israeli political system.

The goals of the Islamic Movement are similar, in essence, to those of all other modern Islamic movements, and its ideology is closely related to that of its mother organisation - the Muslim Brotherhood. The differences that exist in ideology between the Islamic Movement and the Muslim Brotherhood are largely the result of the circumstances in which the former operates - namely, the fact that the movement exists within a country whose population is mostly Jewish.

The differences between the branches are mostly in relation to the State of Israel, while differences on other issues are negligible.

The positions regarding Israel vary depending on the branch:

• The northern branch – doesn’t recognise the State of Israel's right to exist and its ultimate goal is to strive to have an Islamic state replace it. It is prepared to use state institutions and facilities.
• The southern branch – doesn’t recognise the State of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. It takes part in the political process and influences decision-making from within the framework of the state's institutions.

I have a very superficial knowledge of the Arab Sector. I live in a region (the Gilboa District) where Arabs make up a third of the population. They are well integrated and there is high degree of interaction between Arabs and Jews mostly in the business-commercial sectors. I have many Arab acquaintances but all my friends are Jews. My gut feeling (a very unreliable yardstick) is that Israeli Arabs know they are better off in the Jewish state. Their sentiments probably lie with the mainstream that Schueftan refers to, but for the time being they defer the ultimate goal indefinitely.

That being so I still have to ask are our Arabs a fifth column?

Award-winning Israeli Arab journalist and documentary film-maker .Khaled Abu Toameh proffers his opinion

“Many in Israel are worried about the ‘radicalization’ of the country’s 1.3 million Arab citizens, concerned that they will be a “fifth column.” They do not want to be, and they do not need to be.

Because of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, there is almost no dialogue today in Israel between Jews and Arabs.

The Palestinian Authority and Hamas are responsible for the fact that many Jews today see the Arab citizens of Israel as a “fifth column,” a “cancer,” and an ‘enemy from within.’ “

Next week we celebrate Independence Day while Arabs either ignore the event or mark the anniversary of the Nakba, the tragedy of their exile from Palestine.

Provided Nakba Day is observed without disrupting the normal routine there should be no objection to its commemoration.

Unfortunately some of our politicians, notably in the right wing Yisrael Beiteinu party have managed to pass the Nakba Law which bars public funding of entities that “undermine the foundations of the state”. The law empowers the minister of finance to fine anyone who marks Israeli Independence Day as a day of mourning.

It would be more productive if they would direct their efforts to addressing Arab grievances.

Chag Sameach

Beni 5^th of May, 2011.