War of words over Golan

[Scurrilous]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3360013.stm

<snip>

"The government of Ariel Sharon has again been accused of trying to pre-empt any future peace negotiations by strengthening Israel's hold over territory it occupied during the 1967 Middle East war.

Already condemned by the United Nations for building a controversial barrier through the West Bank which cuts into Palestinian land, Israel now faces more international criticism over its plan to expand settlements in the Golan Heights, captured from Syria in 1967.


Control of the Golan lies between Israel, Syria and a peace deal
The Israeli Government announced the plan after Syria's President Bashar al-Assad offered to re-open negotiations."

[SlavesandBulldozers]

1. Peace Deal?

negotiations? Anybody else getting deja-va?

[sweetheart]

2. another scam

stealing land and screwing people over... happy new year from likud.

[Aidoneus]

3. most of the Golan was already stolen and emptied previously

I think of the original inhabitants before the Israeli occupation, only 5-6 villages were left standing--not counting the colonies moved in almost immediately after the conquest--, and all of these are in the far north of the area (one of them half on Lebanon's side of the border, half in Israeli occupied Syrian Golan and divided accordingly, and one mostly in UN-occupied territory in the DMZ between the de facto border between Israeli-occupied Golan and the rest of Syria).
This is more of the usual, the colonizing of occupied land emptied in past aggressions with relative impunity and then criminally annexed--essentially what they'd like to do in the rest of '67-occupied Palestine, but those pesky folks just won't pack up and leave to make it easier..

[bemildred]

4. Is it lightly populated now?

[Aidoneus]

5. somewhat

On and around the ruins of around a hundred ex-villages stand about three dozen Israeli settlements and industrial areas. Official figures say that there are around 17k Israeli colonists (late 90s figure, I believe, there may be a thousand or two more by now), with a few hundred of the original inhabitants still around--this out of the original 120,000ish inhabitants before the Israeli seizure of the lands.

Like those kissibly cute Yesha movements squatting around central Palestine and Gaza (Gush Emunem, etc), the leaders of the colonist communities there threaten to make war & trouble for anybody who tries to move them out, be they Syrian or Israeli.

a couple links if it'd help, Uri's as one of the better for the length.

http://www.gush-shalom.org/archives/article75.html
http://www.itjustmightwork.co.uk/whatmatters/asp/articles.asp?i=56&s=
another version of the 2nd article with a different picture..]
http://www.fmep.org/reports/v9n6.html#2
http://www.fmep.org/reports/v9n6.html#6

[bemildred]

7. Thanks.

Very helpful. I don't always agree with Uri, but he
is a mensch, tells it like he sees it.

[Muddleoftheroad]

6. Irony

Complaints that Israel doesn't honor Syrian territory when Syria has conquered Lebanon and runs it as a client state.

[Jim Sagle]

8. Now, Muddle, you know we don't DO irony in this folder.

:hi:

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. Yeah, no nation can take territory

Oh, strike that. ALL nations can take territory except Israel. Even those who criticize Israel get a pass like Syria.

[Saudade]

10. Ridiculous

"ALL nations can take territory except Israel. Even those who criticize Israel get a pass like Syria."

Obviously, it's completely absurd to say that Syria is "getting a pass."

Syria is experiencing pressure from America in a way that Israel never has or will, and may well be the next victim of Bush's war-mongering.

[Muddleoftheroad]

11. Just from everybody else

Yes, the U.S. puts pressure on Syria for its support of terror and opposition to peace in the Mideast.

But the rest of the world, including the Arab League, the EU and others puts nominal pressure on Syria for its abuse of its neighbor Lebanon.

[Darranar]

12. No, the US is putting pressure on Syria...

because it is one of the few places in the Middle East that still lack pro-American dictators.

The "pro-terrorist" thing is just a cover. You don't see the US going after the House of Saud...

[Muddleoftheroad]

17. It should go after the Saudis

But just because it doesn't do so does NOT make Syria any less a villain.

The pro-terrorist thing is not new. Syria has been listed on a government watch list as a supporter of terror for a long time, vastly pre-dating *.

[Darranar]

19. I never said Syria WASN'T a villain.

[GabysPoppy]

20. But have you said they ARE?

[Saudade]

13. Syria

Syria is being threatened on a daily basis with invasion, regime change and so on, and it's subject to sanctions.

It has also been bombed for no reason by Israel. It's is absurd to say that Syria gets a "pass" when we all know who is getting the real "pass."

[Muddleoftheroad]

18. Syria is the cause of its own problems

Syria has never made peace with Israel since 1948. No wonder it has placed itself in jeopardy with Israel. In addition, Syria conquered one neighbor and backs terror against another.

Israel has PLENTY of reason to bomb Syria -- every member of Hezbollah for starters.

[Aidoneus]

21. could you elaborate on that last line?

[Muddleoftheroad]

22. Syria's ongoing support of military action against Israel

Is a military provocation. Hezbollah is in a HOT war with Israel and has been for some time. In addition, Syria has never made peace with Israel, so there is no reason for Israel to NOT continue to prosecute war against its enemy.

[bemildred]

14. They don't seem to be suffering the sort of violent

resistance that the previous occupiers did. I wonder
why that would be?

[Jim Sagle]

15. Because they kill anyone who resists.

[bemildred]

16. That (kill the resisters) didn't seem to work that way before?

In fact one can come up with lots of places where that
sort of approach has only aggravated resistance, but
we won't get into that here, it would be a distraction.
(I would just reference one of The Magistrates favorite studies,
the Japanese occupation of N. China and Manchuria before and
during WWII as an example of how ineffective that sort of
thing can be when the indigenous peoples are not buying it.)

I was considering whether there could be some sort of
press control in effect so that we don't hear about all
the violence in Lebanon, like we used to back during the
previous occupation. But I'm a bit skeptical, I have seen
a few ugly stories come out of there about intra-Palestinian
atrocities, and it's pretty hard to exercise real control of
information flow these days because of the web.

Simple ethnic associations among the Arabs in Syria and Lebanon
might explain some of it, although Lebanon has a varied population
ethnically, and seems to be quite balkanized internally.

So my conclusion so far is that the simplest explanation is that
it isn't really the sort of jack-booted occupation that you portray.
I suspect that the Syrians are in Lebanon for somewhat the same
reasons we've had troops in S. Korea all these years, as a trip-wire.
This is not to deny that the Syrians have other interests or that
they pursue self-interest as they see it like anyone else.