Is International Terror Caused by the Creation of Israel?

by Gunnar Heinsohn

“Terrorism will not be defeated without peace […] between Israel and Palestine. Here it is that the poison is incubated.” Tony Blair, 17 July 2003, to U.S. Congress.

Tony Blair is no Mel Gibson or Osama Bin Laden. He is no mortal enemy of the Jews of Israel. Yet, since his assumption is so deeply ingrained in the mind of mankind one has to look for a method to test it. Is there a factor in our multicausal explanations of the conflict not yet appropriately tested? That appears to be highly improbable. Yet, what about the extremely old fashioned way of counting superfluous sons? Can a body count shed light on the validity of Tony Blair's view?

---

Conflicts 1949-2010 with at least 10,000 Fatalities.
Nations with Muslim majorities - all of them with youth bulges at the time of slaughter (in bold letters)

 1  40,000,000 Red China, 1949-76 (outright killing, manmade famine, Gulag, Muslim Uighurs)
 2  10,000,000 Late Stalinism, 1950-53; Post-Stalinism, to 1987 (mostly Gulag), more than 100.000 Muslims in Chechnya
 3  5,800,000 Zaire (Congo-Kinshasa): 1967-68; 1977-78; 1992-95; 1998-today
 4  4,000,000 Ethiopia, 1962-92: Communists, artificial hunger, genocides
 5  2,800,000 Korean war, 1950-53
 6  2,200,000 Sudan, 1955-72; 1983-2006 (civil wars, genocides); Dafur to today
 7  1,870,000 Cambodia: Khmer Rouge 1975-79; civil war 1978-91
 8  1,800,000 Vietnam War, 1954-75 (more than 90% Vietnamese, Allies)
 9  1,800,000 Afghanistan: Soviet and internecine killings, Taliban 1980-2001
 10 1,250,000 West Pakistan massacres in East Pakistan (Bangladesh 1971)
11  1,100,000 Nigeria, 1966-79 (Biafra); 1993-today
12  1,100,000 Mozambique, 1964-70 (30,000) + after retreat of Portugal 1976-92
13  1,000,000 Iran-Iraq-War, 1980-88
14  900,000 Rwanda genocide, 1994
15  875,000 Algeria: war with France 1954-62 (675,000); Islamists/Government 1991-2006 (200,000)
16  850,000 Uganda, 1971-79; 1981-85; 1994-today
17  650,000 Indonesia: Marxists 1965-66 (450,000); East Timor, Papua, Aceh etc, 1969-today (200,000)
18  580,000 Angola: war against Portugal 1961-72 (80,000); after Portugal’s retreat (1972-2002)
19  500,000 Brazil against its Indians, up to 1999
20  430,000 Vietnam, after the war ended in 1975 (own people; boat refugees)
21  400,000 France in Indochina, 1945-54
22  400,000 Burundi, 1959-today (Tutsi/Hutu)
23  400,000 Somalia, 1991-today
24  400,000 North Korea up to 2006 (own people)
25  300,000 Kurds in Iraq, Iran, Turkey, 1980s-1990s
26  300,000 Iraq, 1970-2003 (Saddam against minorities)
27  240,000 Columbia, 1946-58; 1964-today
28  200,000 Yugoslavia, Tito regime, 1944-80
29  200,000 Guatemala, 1960-96
30  190,000 Laos, 1975-90
31  175,000 Serbia>Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo, 1991-1999
32  150,000 Romania, 1949-99 (own people)
33  150,000 Liberia, 1989-97
34  140,000 Chechnya, 1994-today in independence war against Russia
35  150,000 Lebanon civil war, 1975-90
36 140,000 Kuwait War, 1990-91 (Arabs from Iraq and Kuwait, Allies)
37  130,000 Philippines: 1946-54 (10,000); 1972-today (Muslim Marxists, 120,000)
38  130,000 Burma/Myanmar, 1948-today
39 100,000 North Yemen, 1962-70
40  100,000 Sierra Leone, 1991-today
41  100,000 Albania, 1945-91 (own people)
42  80,000 Iran, 1978-79 (revolution)
43  75,000 Iraq, 2003-today (domestic)
44  75,000 El Salvador, 1975-92
45  70,000 Eritrea/Ethiopia, 1998-2000
46  68,000 Sri Lanka 1997-today
47  60,000 Zimbabwe, 1966-79; 1980-today
48  60,000 Nicaragua, 1972-91 (Marxists/natives etc,)
49  54,000 Arab wars against Israel, 1948-today (excluding the Israel-Palestine conflict; see 69) 44.000 Arabs; 10.000 Israelis
50  50,000 Communist North Vietnam, 1954-75 (own people)
51  50,000 Tajikistan, 1992-96 (secularists against Islamists)
52  50,000 Equatorial Guinea, 1969-79
53  50,000 Peru, 1980-2000
54  50,000 Guinea, 1958-84
55  40,000 Chad, 1982-90
56  30,000 Bulgaria, 1948-89 (own people)
57  30,000 Rhodesia, 1972-79
58  30,000 Argentina, 1976-83 (own people)
59  27,000 Hungary, 1948-89 (own people)
60  26,000 Kashmir independence, 1989-today
61  25,000 Jordan government vs. Palestinians, 1970-71 (Black September)
62  22,000 Poland, 1948-89 (own people)
63  20,000 Syria, 1982 (against Islamists in Hama)
64  20,000 Chinese-Vietnamese war, 1979
65  18,000 Congo Republic, 1997-99
66  19,000 Morocco: war against France, 1953-56 (3,000), Western Sahara, 1975-today (16,000)
67  15,000? "Tens of thousands of casualties and displaced" (Le Monde, 06-10-09). Yemen government against Huthi rebels.
68  14,000 Nigeria 2000 - 2010 (Muslims, Christians)
69  13,500 Israel-Palestinian conflict 1947-87 (5,000); 1987-91 (2,000); 2000-2010 (6,200: 80% Arabs, 20% Jews)
70  10,000 South Yemen, 1986 (civil war)

---

If conflict number 69 out of 70 conflicts with at least 10,000 casualties since 1950 is ranked as number 1 in need of an urgent solution to save the world, causes other than noble concerns for suffering may be at work. Since the Jews of Israel belong to the most persecuted ethnic and religious group in history, the mismatch between facts and their worldwide perception may force us to ask, again, if an anti-Jewish bias blurs the perception.

Around 11,000,000 Muslims suffered death by violence between 1948 and 2009. Of these, some 54,000, i.e., 0.5 percent or 1 out of 200 Muslims who were killed violently since 1948 died within the more than 60 years of fighting against Israel (1948-2010).

In other words, more than 90 percent of the 11 million Muslims perished in violence, since the creation of Israel, died in Muslim-on-Muslim violence.

A conflict would probably exist in Palestine as it does in territories with similar cases. Yet there are similar cases without bloodshed, e.g., Russian settlers in Latvia, as there are similar cases with bloodshed, e.g. Moroccan settlers in Western Sahara or Arab Iraqi settlers in Kurdish Iraq. There must be factor at work that can easily drive the Palestinian way of conflict resolution into a mortal mode.

The mortal mode can persist because well meant western aid – where nearly every newborn is provided for as a refugee – enabled Palestine to defeat Israel demographically. Gaza jumped from 200,000-240,000 inhabitants in 1950 to more than 1.6 million in 2010. In 2006, there were 640.000 Jewish boys under 15 against 1,120,000 Arab boys under 15 (West-Bank, Gaza Strip and Israeli Arabs combined). The last cohort with a Jewish majority – 30 to 44 years with 540,000 against 410,000 Arabs – has passed fighting age.

The death toll in the Israel-Palestine conflict remained low over six decades (1948-2009) because only one side tries to kill at random, whereas the Israeli side most of the time tries to defend itself with surgical strikes or targeted killing.

One could even say that the major factor for low Muslim casualties vis à vis Israel - as opposed to conflicts in which Muslims kill Muslims at random - is due to one side of the conflict not being Muslim.

Thus, it may be a good fortune for Palestinian Arabs that most of the time they must not turn against their own to consume their youth bulges but can turn the rage of their angry young men against Jews.

Yet, the battle of Lebanon against the Palestinian town of Nahr el Bared (May to September 2007) with a total of nearly 500 dead, or the internecine slaughter between Hamas and Fatah in Gaza since 2006 (more than 300 casualties) may give a hint of what may happen if hatred can no longer be executed against Jews. When Israel, in December 2008, tried to end the missile attacks from Gaza the strip suffered 1,385 casualties. Those are considerable losses. Yet, if Israel had pounded Gaza the way Lebanon has pounded Nahr el Bared killing 273 Islamists out of a population of 30,000, Gaza – with a population fifty times larger – would have lost 13,650. If Israel had smashed Gaza like Syria flattened the old city of Hama where, in February 1982, some 30.000 of its 300.000 inhabitants were killed to annihilate the Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood – “the single deadliest act by any Arab government against its own people” (Wright 2008, 243) – there would have been a loss of 150.000 in Gaza.

Yet, the battles of Nahr el Bared in Lebanon (May to September 2007) with more than 500 dead, or the intenecine slaughter between Hamas and Fatah in Gaza since 2006 (around 500 casualties) may give a hint of what may happen if hatred can no longer be executed against Jews.

Sources:

Brzezinski, Z., Out of Control: Global Turmoil on the Eve of the Twenty-first Century, 1993.

Courtois, S., ed., Le Livre Noir du Communism, 1997.

Heinsohn, G., Lexikon der Völkermorde, 1999. Heinsohn, G., Söhne und Weltmacht, 2006, 8th ed.

Rummel. R., Death by Government, 1994.

Small, M., Singer, J.D., Resort to Arms: International and Civil Wars 1816-1980, 1982.

White, M. Please click here for Death Tolls for the Major Wars and Atrocities of the Twentieth Century (2003).

Wright, R., Dreams and Shadows : The Future of the Middle East, Penguin, 2008

*Gunnar Heinsohn (born 1943 in Gdynia/Poland; "summa cum laude" doctorates 1974 in sociology and 1982 in economics), serves, since 1993 as speaker of the Raphael-Lemkin-Institut at the University of Bremen, Europe's first institute devoted to comparative genocide research where he authored the first encyclopedia of genocide (Lexikon der Völkermorde; 1998; 1999, 2nd ed.), as well as an outline for an international body to monitor genocidal developments globally (Völkermordfrühwarnung / Genocide Watch, 2000 [1998]).

His study “Sons and World Power: Terror in the Rise and Fall of Nation (Söhne und Weltmacht; Zürich 2003; with 10th impression in 2008 a scholarly bestseller; Dutch, Japanese, and Polish editions in 2008) tries to illuminate the role of youth bulges in mega-killings of past, present, and future.

From 2005 to 2009, he gave lectures on the subject of youth bulges and violence to many German and international institutions He has published on the subject in the major newspapers and magazines of the German language area as well as in the Wall Street Journal, the International Herald Tribune, Le Monde, the Financial Times, the Weekly Standard, NRC-Handelsbald (Amsterdam), etc.

Together with Philippe Bourcier de Carbon (Paris), he was the only expert from continental Europe consulted for the study, The Graying of the Great Powers by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS; Washington DC 2008).

Read full text......

Armenian Jews and Israelis - Remembering and Denial

Yair Auron Lecture in Paris, 2010

The State of Israel continues to struggle against Holocaust denial on one hand, but participates in the denial of another genocide on the other. This most likely will damage the struggle against Holocaust denial in the future. The recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Israel is crucial since the denial of the Armenian Genocide is very similar to the denial of the Holocaust of the Jews. One might view this attitude as a moral failure. I am sure, a great many Jews, in Israel and in the world, will continue the struggle for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Israel and by the world. This is our obligation to ourselves as human beings; this is our obligation as Jews and as Israelis.

I will speak about the special connections between our two peoples, about Jewish memory and Armenian memory, about the attitudes of the State of Israel to the Armenian Genocide, and then conclude with some general comments about our common responsibilities, Jews and Armenians alike, regarding moral issues.

There are similar characteristics in the history of the Armenian and the Jewish peoples, who for long periods lived as ethno-religious minorities among majorities, different from and hostile to them. The genocides we, Jews and Armenians alike, have suffered have created another similarity and connection between us.

Let me demonstrate the special connections between our two peoples by recalling two examples which appear in my first book:.

In 1918, Shmuel Talkowsky, the secretary of Chaim Weizmann, the Zionist leader who became the first president of the State of Israel, wrote with the approval of Weizmann, an important article entitled "The Armenian Question from a Zionist Point of View."

"We Zionists look upon the fate of the Armenian people with a deep and sincere sympathy; we do so as men as Jews and as Zionists. As men our motto is "Homo sum; humani nihil a me alienum puto." "I am a human being. Whatever affects another human being affects me." As Jews our exile from our ancestral home and our centuries of suffering in all parts of the globe have made us, I would fain say specialists in martyrdom; our humanitarian feelings have been refined to an incomparable degree, so much so that the sufferings of other people – even alien to us in blood and remote from us in distance – cannot but strike the deeper chords of our soul and weave between us and our fellow-sufferers that deep bond of sympathy which one might call solidarity of sorrow.

And among all those who suffer around us, is there a people whose record of martyrdom is more akin to ours than that of the Armenians? As Zionists we have a peculiar question of principle. Zionism being in its essence nothing else than the Jewish expression of the demand for national justice, it is natural and logical for us to be deeply interested in the struggle for emancipation of any other living nation. … In our opinion, a free and happy Armenia, a free and happy Arabia, and a free and happy Jewish Palestine, are the three pillars on which will rest the future peace and welfare of the Middle East." This was written, I remind you in 1918. Unfortunately the policy of the State of Israel is very far from the principle raised by the Zionist movement 92 years ago.

Jewish memory and Armenian memory

Jewish history in the post-Holocaust era cannot be understood without an awareness of the profound and lasting influence of the Holocaust. The Second World War and the Holocaust on one hand, and the establishment of the State of Israel on the other, fundamentally changed the history of the Jews. Within a period of only a few years the Jewish People experienced its greatest disaster and witnessed the birth of the Jewish State and Jewish sovereignty.

In spite of the passage of time, Jewish attitudes to the Holocaust and its implications remain a crucial element in contemporary Jewish identity. From the point of view of Jewish and Israeli identity, and from an educational point of view, this raises a substantive question, which is relevant in my opinion also to the Armenians: Is it possible in the long term to foster an identity on the basis of elements which are fundamentally negative? Is not a balance called for in terms of positive Jewish elements?

Similarly, Armenian history in the post-genocide era cannot be understood without an awareness of the profound and lasting influence of the genocide on the first, second, third and now even fourth generation. In spite of the passage of time, and even maybe because of it, Armenian attitudes toward the genocide and its implications remain a crucial element in contemporary Armenian identity in Armenia and, even more, in Armenian communities all over the world. The genocide is a central component today in the attitudes of young Armenians – the third and the forth generation – when viewing themselves as Armenians, be it the U.S, Canada, Armenia, Australia, Israel or elsewhere.

Furthermore, for you Armenians, there is also the painful fact that your genocide is unfortunately not recognized. By denial you have been victimized twice. There is something sad, even depressing in the ongoing efforts of the Armenians and their supporters over 95 years to gain recognition from the international community and the many states where they are living in diasporas as a direct consequence, very often, of the genocide. During the past 20 years I have seen your struggle in Israel, as well as in many other Armenian communities across the world.

The attitudes of the State of Israel

I know how important for the Armenians is the attitude of the Jews, especially the attitude of the State of Israel, to their genocide. Concern with that position is raised again and again, I believe, because the State of Israel was populated by people who were victims of a similar genocide.

The State of Israel has officially refrained from relating to the Armenian Genocide. A combination of factors connected to Israel's relations with Turkey and concepts of the uniqueness of the Shoah have brought about an almost total absence of its mention by Israeli representatives. Government ministers - apart from a few such as Yair Tzaban, Yossi Sarid, Yossi Beilin and Haim Oron [all members of the same liberal party, Meretz - Ed.] - have systematically avoided the issue altogether by declining to participate in Armenian Memorial Day ceremonies.

Public debates and argument about that official attitude towards the Armenian genocide has erupted several times due to a number of events. In 1978, a film on the Armenian Quarter in Jerusalem was banned from being screened. In 1982, the Israeli Government intervened unsuccessfully to bar an International Congress on the subject of the Shoah and Genocide, pressing the organizers to eliminate lectures on the Armenian Genocide. In 1989, Israel was involved in preventing Congress from recognizing the Armenian genocide in the American calendar. In one way or another Israel and Jews were involved in the debate in the State also in1985,1987,1989, 2000, and 2007' and eventually in 2010. In 1990, the showing of "Armenian Journey", a TV film produced in U.S., was banned.

In this context I would like to mention two statements. One was made by Yossi Sarid, at that time the Minister of Education, on April 24, 2000 at the memorial gathering of the Armenian community in Jerusalem. Sarid sympathized with the pain of the Armenians over the denial of the genocide. He concluded his statement with a commitment to ensure that the Armenian Genocide be included in the Israeli secondary school history curriculum.

He stated:

"I would like to see a central chapter on genocide, on this huge and inhuman atrocity. The Armenian genocide should occupy a prominent place in this program, which does justice to the national and personal memory of every one of you, to the memory of all the members of your nation. This is our obligation to you, this is our obligation to ourselves."

Sadly nothing resulted from this courageous statement.

About a year later, on April 10, 2001, the Foreign Minster of Israel (now the president) Shimon Peres was quoted as saying "We regret attempts to create a similarity between the Holocaust and the Armenian allegations. Nothing similar to the Holocaust occurred. It is a tragedy but not a genocide". This statement was repeated by the Israeli Ambassador to Armenia Rivka Cohen in February 2002. These statements may be regarded as Israel's escalation from passive to active denial, from moderate denial to hard-line denial. An Armenian friend told me, rightly so, "I do not know of any enlightened politician in a democratic state that has ever made remarks such as these; You, the Jews, of all people."

The Armenian Genocide was raised in the Israeli Parliament around the month of April (the Armenian Memorial day) in 2007, 2008, and 2009 by a member of the Knesset, Haim Oron, who asked the Knesset to debate the issue, but the government opposed his request. The issue will be raised by Oron another time in the next weeks, without any chance to gain the majority.

Jewish and Israeli responsibility

It is clear to all those who are involved overtly and covertly in the controversies regarding Israel’s attitude to the Armenian Genocide – Jews, Turks, Armenians – and also to the rest of the world, that the issue has special moral significance. The fact that the country in question is of a people that was the victim of the Holocaust, and the unique problems that resulted, come to the fore .

The recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Israel is crucial in this regard, since the denial of the Armenian Genocide is very similar to the denial of the Holocaust of the Jews.

The State of Israel continues to struggle against Holocaust denial on one hand, but participates in the denial of another genocide on the other. This most likely will damage the struggle against Holocaust denial in the future. One might view this attitude as a moral failure. We have to remember that moral claims can have influence only if they are consistent.

Many observers estimate, in the case of the Armenians, that one act could radically change the long-standing denial of their Genocide: recognition of the Genocide by the United States or Israel. These are the pivotal countries that could bring about a Turkish recognition of the Genocide. There is a connection or even interdependence between the decisions of the two states. If one of them recognized the Genocide, sooner or later the second would do the same.

There is no doubt that morally speaking, Israel should be the first. Sadly, however, taking a realistic view of Israeli society and policy, this is not likely to happen in the near future.

Everyone would agree that Israel has no right to bargain with the memory of the Holocaust. But, even more, it has no right – by no means, in any circumstances, and much less so than any other country – to bargain with the memory of another victim group. And yet Israel did just that with the Armenian Genocide. Israel is contributing to the process of genocide denial and by doing so, it also betrays the memory and the legacy of the Holocaust, at least from my point of view.

The attitudes of Israel and its society towards the Armenian genocide and towards other cases of genocide have a unique significance. It is because of the unique history of our people: the victim during the Nazi period, we, Israelis are, unique third parties. Our attitudes towards Genocides – the attitudes towards genocides of the present and towards genocides of the past, is in many ways an example to the rest of the world that finds itself regarding the Israeli attitudes as a moral reference point.

Our common struggle for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide bears, at least for me, a major moral significance, and in our joint moral struggle we must be consistent. That should mean that every human and every people, but in my opinion especially we, Jews and Armenians, have a continuing obligation never again to be victims, of course never to be perpetrators, but also never to be bystanders.

I can assure you that I, and I am sure, a great many Jews, in Israel and in the world, will continue the struggle for the recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Israel and by the world. This is our obligation to ourselves as human beings; this is our obligation as Jews and as Israelis.

This lecture was delivered in Paris to the International Colloquiem of the Bureau Francais de la Cause Armeniénne - Armenia-Turkey: How to normalize relations? on April 14, 2010.

Yair Auron is a professor in the field of genocide and contemporary Judaism at the Open University of Israel and the Kibbutzim College of Education.

Professor Auron has published numerous books and essays, mainly on genocide and on Jewish identity in Israel and Europe. He is the author of books in Hebrew such as Between Paris and Jerusalem (Selected Passages of Contemporary Jewish Thought in France); Jewish-Israeli Identity; Sensitivity to World Suffering: Genocide in the 20th Century; and We Are All German Jews: Jewish Radicals in France During the 60s and 70s (also in French). His book The Banality of Indifference: Zionism and the Armenian Genocide was published in both Hebrew and English (Transaction Publishers, 2000). His book, The Banality of Denial: Israel and the Armenian Genocide was published in Hebrew and English (Transaction Publishers 2003).

Most recently, Auron is co-author of A Perfect Injustice: Genocide and the Theft of Armenian Wealth (Transaction Publishers, 2009) with Hrayr S. Karagueuzian. He is currently editing for the Open University a series of twelve books in Hebrew entitled Genocide, which includes theoretical volumes concerning the phenomenon of genocide as well as an analysis of case studies such as the Holocaust, the genocide of the Gypsies, the Armenian genocide and other historical and contemporary genocides such as Rwanda, Tibet and Indian population of the Americas. In this series, he published in 2009 Reflections on the Inconceivable: Theoretical Aspects of Genocide Studies, and in 2007 The Armenian Genocide: Forgetting and Denying. In 2006, his book Genocide: So That I Will Not Be among the Silent, was also published in this series. His book Israeli Identities: Jews and Arabs Facing Mirror and the Other in 2010 is published in Israel by Resling and in a few months will be published in English in the United States by Berghahn Books.

Read full text......