In any study of politics, one of the first points that must be understood is what the role of government is in society. What are the basic duties of government, its purpose, its reason for existing?
My understanding of the role of government, and that taught by most political sceince professors I have met, is as follows: It is the duty of government to protect its citizens from any undue threat to their security, livelihood, comfort, or the pursuit and realization of their rights as citizens. Such threat might come from within the society, or from external sources. To this end alone, government is entrusted with the enactment and implementation of laws by which all members of the society must live. Government is also provided with the necessary force to guarantee those laws. Such force is provided by the constitution or other guiding principles of the State, as well as through the use of law enforcement officers and armed forces.
If we take this definition a few more steps, it becomes apparent that "threat" is generally determined as a contravention of those laws that government has seen fit to impose upon society. In contravening laws, offenders threaten a segment of society; whether that threat is minor or major dictates the punishment to which that offender is subject.
So I look over the past four years, and I examine how the outgoing Labour government has done in the fulfillment of its mandate as the government, to protect its citizens from these threats -- these contraventions of law.
First, let us look at the law prohibiting theft. Israel has become the number one country in the world in car thefts. More cars are stolen in a month in Israel than are purchased in some countries. Indeed, in recent months, more cars are stolen in Israel than are involved in accidents. These cars are stolen by Arabs with their new-found freedom to roam the country at will and take what they please. Some Arabs are even adventurous enough to steal official government or military vehicles without even bothering to remove the license plates.
While we are discussing theft, let us not forget the 28 million dollars in unpaid phone bills that have been accumulated by the Palestinian Authority. The Israeli phone company, Bezek, at least has shown once that it is slightly bothered by these bills that are past due. But how lucky can you get? If I ran up a phone bill of even 1/100,000 of that amount, my phone service would be cut off. It is indeed a wonder that it took Bezek that long to take any action.
When it comes to theft, though, the Israeli Labour government has failed its citizens miserably. They are making no effort to find, arrest or prosecute the criminals responsible for the alarming rate of car thefts save for a few celebrated cases. And in these few cases, the effort ends with an unsuccessful and half-hearted extradition request to the Palestinian Authority. Israel repaid the debt on the phone bills, and has so far allowed the Palestinian Authority to walk away from such an alarming debt.
Furthermore, Israel under Labour has allowed those criminals already in its jails to go free as a sign of its friendship toward the PA, and to show its willingness and eagerness to fight crime.
In addition to theft, Palestinian offenders have committed murder, attempted murder, vandalism, and a host of other crimes against Israelis, with little or no response from Israeli law enforcement authorities. Very rarely are extradition requests made in proportion to the number of offences, and those that are made are never granted by the Palestinians or followed through by the Israelis. If Palestinian terrorism against Israel is treated as a crime, rather than as a political act, then the Palestinian Authority has failed in its duty to prevent such actions, and the Israeli Labour government has failed in its duty to react in the interests of its citizens.
Most societies consider it a crime to aid and abet a criminal. To protect a criminal from prosecution is considered to be an accessory to the crime itself. The PLO / Palestinian Authority has consistently refused to extradite, arrest, or imprison known criminals involved in the thefts described above, or in more serious crimes such as murder, rape, and assault. Thus, the PA is acting as an accessory to these crimes, where it is not directly responsible for them itself.
Israel under the Labour government has consistently failed to challenge the PA under International Law, or to prosecute members of the PA in absentia for being accessories to such crimes and for protecting wanted criminals. Yet, Israel has shown to be quite willing to imprison without charge law-abiding Jewish citizens for no reason. This represents a double failure of government, on the one hand to protect its citizens from abuses of the law, and on the other to persecute its own citizens who do not abuse the law.
In the more clearly international realm, Israel under Labour has failed to uphold treaties with other states, namely its extradition treaty with the United States, in the case of Abu Abbas and the Achille Lauro hijacking. This is in contravention of International Law, and by rights, Israel should be challenged in the International Court of Law for breach of this treaty. And this doesn't even take into account Israel's protection of a wanted criminal in this case.
While on the topic of protection of wanted criminals by Israel, I would like to go into more detail on this point. Israel has allowed entry into the country to hundreds of such criminals in the past four months so that they could take part in an ostensibly political gathering of the Palestinian Authority. Among these were Naif Hawatmeh, who was among those responsible for the Munich and Ma'alot massacres, Abu Abbas, Leila Khaled, and others, some of whom were not even members of the PA governing body, to whose meeting they were ostensibly coming.
Israel has allowed this body, and its many members with criminal backgrounds, political and diplomatic recognition. This, as pointed out so well and so often by Professor Louis Rene Beres, is in contravention of International Law, as it offers protection and recognition to international criminals.
In addition to political and diplomatic recognition, Israel has used its "good offices" in other states to pressure those states into also according the PLO/PA such recognition. Israel has provided the PA with financial aid, and has sought to acquire such aid from other states as well. Only a small part of this was the payment of the phone debt. Israel has provided weapons, training, and equipment to Palestinian armed forces.
If we exercise only a small portion of our memory, and think back a mere five years, we can remember that the PLO is a band of terrorists. From this we can infer that Israel under Labour has acted as a State Sponsor of Terrorism. Yet the United States Department of State does not attempt to include Israel in its list of such states. Far from it -- the State Department seems to want to follow Israel's lead on this.
I can't believe I just wrote that. For me to say that Israel should be considered a State Sponsor of Terrorism is like Joseph McCarthy saying the US should become a Communist state. And yet, that is exactly the case for Israel.
Israel's outgoing Labour government has utterly failed its duty to protect its citizens through protecting the rule of law. I can only hope that Israel's voters can see this and end the charade that has passed for government these past four years.
Copyright 1996. Reproduction in electronic or print format by permission only.
