Thomas Friedman on Israeli Involvement at Sabra and Shatila

PresidentMike

Technical Fool
Joined
Jun 12, 2003
Messages
556
Location
United States
This thread grew out of a discussion with G-Man in the Israeli security Cabinet will work to 'remove' Arafat thread. G-Man contended that there was no evidence indicating that Israeli troops knew about or observed the massacre at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Beirut, Lebanon on September 16-18, 1982. Between 450-1000 Palestinean civilians were killed by Lebanese Christian Phalangist militia.

The following is an excerpt from Thomas Friedman’s book From Beirut to Jerusalem. Mr. Friedman is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and columnist for the New York Times. In 1982 he was the Time’s correspondent in Beirut and was present in the city at the time of the massacre. I have edited the passage down to the relevant sections, but have not altered any of Mr. Friedman’s words.

From Beirut to Jerusalem, 1995 edition, p. 160-166

When I finally reached the Commodore Hotel and met a few of my American press colleagues, they told me that they had heard a rumor that Phalangists were in Shatila. The camp was sealed off by the Israelis, though, so no one had been able to get inside. That night at dinner, my friend from Time magazine, Roberto Suro, told me he had managed to get to the edge of Shatila earlier in the day and it had left him with an uneasy feeling. He had gone as far as the Kuwaiti embassy traffic circle, which overlooked Shatila from the west, and found a group of Phalangist militiamen relaxing, being fed and provided for by a group of Israeli soldiers.

“There was this one Phalangist militiaman wearing aviator sunglasses who looked as though he might be in charge, so I decided to try to talk to him,” Roberto told me. “He was a tall, skinny guy, and as we talked you could hear bursts of gunfire and explosions coming from the camps, but this guy didn’t flinch. In fact, he behaved as though it was perfectly normal. I asked him what was going on inside and he just smiled. Not far away there were these Israeli soldiers sitting on a tank. Even though there was gunfire in the camp, they were just lounging around, reading magazines and listening to Simon and Garfunkel on a ghetto blaster. It was pretty clear to me that whatever was happening, the Phalangists were going to be in charge of this area when it was all over, so I asked this Phalangist officer what they were going to do with Sabra and Shatila. I’ll never forget what he said: ‘We’re going to turn it into a shopping center.’”

What none of us knew at the time was that a day earlier some 1,500 Phalangist militamen had been trucked fro mEast Beirut to Beirut Airport, which they used as their staging ground. From there, small units of Phalangists, roughly 150 men each, were sent into Sabr and Shatila, which the Israeli army kept illuminated through the night with flares. The Phalangists wanted to avenge not only Bashir’s death but also past tribal killings of their own people by Palestinian guerrillas, such as the February 1976 massacre by Palestinians of Christian villagers in Damour, south of Beirut. Sharon would give them their chance. From Thursday, September 16, until Saturday morning, September 18, Phalangist squads combed through the Sabra and Shatila neighborhoods, liquidating whatever humanity came in their path.

No one knows exactly how many people were killed during the three-day massacre, and how many were trucked off by the Phalangists and killed elsewhere. The only independent official death toll was the one assembled by the International Committee of the Red Cross, whose staff buried 210 bodies-140 men, 38 women, and 32 children-in a mass grave several days after the massacre. Since most victims were buried by their relatives much earlier, Red Cross officials told me they estimated that the total death toll was between 800 and 1,000.

Afterward, the Israeli solders would claim they did not know what was happening in the camps. They did not hear the screams and shouts of people being massacred. They did not see wanton murder of innocents through their telescopic binoculars.

The Kahan Commission, the Israeli government inquiry board that later investigated the events in Sabra and Shatila, uncovered repeated instances within the first hours of the massacre in which Israeli officers overheard Phalangists referring to the killing of Palestinian civilians. Some Israeli officers even conveyed this information to their superiors, but they did not respond. The most egregious case was when, two hours after the operation began on Thursday evening, the commander of the Israeli troops around Sabra and Shatila, Brigadier General Amos Yaron, was informed by an intelligence officer that a Phalangist militiaman within the camp had radioed the Phalangist officer responsible for liaison with Israeli troops and told him that he was holding forty-five Palestinians. He asked for orders on what to do with them. The liaison officer’s reply was “Do the will of God.” Even upon hearing such a report, Yaron did not halt the operation.

The Israelis knew just what they were doing when they let the Phalangists into those camps. Again, as the Kahan Commission itself reported: during meetings held between Bashir Gemayel and Israeli Mossad secret agents, Israeli officials “heard things from [Bashir] that left no room for doubt that the intention of this Phalangist leader was to eliminate the Palestinian problem in Lebanon when he came to power-even if that meant resorting to aberrant methods against the Palestinians.”

The Israelis at least held an investigation when they were involved in a massacre, which is more than the Syrians ever did. But for all their inquiring, what was the final outcome? Sharon, who was found by the Kahan Commission to bear “personal responsibility” for what happened in the camps, was forced to step down as Defense Minister and become a minister-without-portfolio instead, until the next Israeli government was formed, when he became Minister of Industry and Trade. Israel’s Chief of Staff, Rafael Eitan, who was also assigned blame for what took place in the camps, who had lied to dozens of world newsmen when asked if Israel had sent the Phalangists in, was allowed to finish his tour of duty with dignity and was then elected to the Israeli parliament. Brigadier General Yaron was told he could never get another field command, but was then promoted to major general and put in charge of the manpower division of the Israeli army, which handles all personnel matters. After fulfilling that job, in August 1986 he was handed one of the most coveted assignments-military attaché in Washington.

A week after the massacre, the Israelis granted me the only interview given any Western journalist with Major General Amir Drori, the overall commander of Israeli troops in Lebanon. I was driven up to Aley, northeast of Beirut, to the Israeli headquarters at the summer palace of a Kuwaiti sheik. The interview was held at a long wooden conference table, with Drori seated at the head. Around the table sat all his staff, including Brigadier General Yaron, as well as my escort officer, Stuart Cohen, a gentle Israeli reservist from England whom I had taken a day earlier up to the roof of the Lebanese apartment building the Israelis had used as their headquarters outside Sabra and Shatila. I showed him through my own cheap binoculars-which were nowhere near as powerful as those used by Israeli troops-just how well one could see into certain open spaces in the camps, where the freshly turned dirt from mass graves used by the Phalangists to dump bodies was still clearly evident; Stuart was shocked. This was not the line that he had been fed from headquarters.

I must admit I was not professionally detached in this interview. I banged the tabled with my fist and shouted at Drori, “How could you do this? How could you not see? How could you not know?” Drori had no answers. I knew it. He knew it. It was clear his men either should have known what was happening, or did know and did nothing.
 
First, regarding the former thread, this shows quite clearly that Sharon was not inovolved in this situation, and unlike what you claimed there didn't order troops to stand aside.

Now -
There's hardly much indication of any real evidences Israeli soldiers would have had that there was a massacre there. There are bits of information that were they joined together at the time would've suggested at it, which is where the Israeli failure is. However concluding from this that Israel is responsible for the attacks would be the same as saying that the Americans are responsible to the sep 11th and pearl harbor attacks.

Sorry I don't make a longer post but I'm terribly tired....
 
Originally posted by G-Man
First, regarding the former thread, this shows quite clearly that Sharon was not inovolved in this situation, and unlike what you claimed there didn't order troops to stand aside.


The Israeli government commission that reported on the massacre disagreed.

Order Number 6, issued on September 16, 1982 by the Israeli army general staff stated that the "refugee camps [Sabra and Shatila] are not to be entered. Searching and mopping up the camps will be done by the Phalangists and the Lebanese army."

Sharon, who had a reputation as a hands on Defense Minister, certainly new about and approved this order.


Now -
There's hardly much indication of any real evidences Israeli soldiers would have had that there was a massacre there. There are bits of information that were they joined together at the time would've suggested at it, which is where the Israeli failure is. However concluding from this that Israel is responsible for the attacks would be the same as saying that the Americans are responsible to the sep 11th and pearl harbor attacks.

You stated in an earlier post that "the Israeli soldiers weren't even there and didn't even know about it" and that "there are no evidences at all that Israeli troops knew what was really happening there."

So where is there no "real evidence" that the Israeli troops did not know? Foreign reporters who visited the area for a few hours on the first day could tell that something bad was going on. They didn't have the access or intelligence that the Israeli army had, including (as Friedman demonstrated) excellent observation points of the camps.

Israeli commanders listened as the Phalangists ordered civilians shot. They heard reports from their own subordinates that a massacre was taking place, and did nothing. They could clearly see inside the camp and understand what was going on. There were signs everywhere of what was happening, but they took no action. The Israeli government knew that the Phalangists were bent on purging the Palestinean camps, and sent them in anyway.

Does Israel bear sole responsibility? No. IDF troops did not pull the triggers that sent 1000 people to their deaths. But they did allow the Phalangists in, knowing what would happen, and they did stand by while the milita killed everyone they saw. Clearly they are partly responsible.

As for Pearl Harbor and 9/11: I hardly see how that is a proper analogy for Sabra and Shatila. In the first two cases the U.S. was attacked by an outside power. You could argue it was provoked, but what does that have to do with Beirut and the massacre, unless you are saying Israel was provoked into killing innocent men, women and children.

I don't understand how you can read this account and still come away convinced that Sharon and Israel bear no blame. This isn't an Arab tabloid that's reported 4,000 Jews got a call to stay away from the WTC on 9/11. This is an internationally respected and award winning journalist working for arguably the greatest newspaper in the world. He is an impeccable source, and his account leaves no room for doubt in my mind.
 
Thomas Friedman is not an "impeccable source." He has definite and strongly held opinions on a variety of issues, probably including Israel (I know him from his globalization papers). This might bias his account toward his personal interpretation. A while ago I saw an excellent article linked from here expressing the other view point which might be useful in this discussion.
 
Originally posted by PresidentMike

But they did allow the Phalangists in, knowing what would happen, [/B]

Know they didn't. The Phalangists were sent in to root out a terrorist cell believed to be there. It was supposedly well armed and defended by the PLO.

Yes, Israel does deserve some blame, but not nearly as much as it received internationally. The main thing you are missing is the people's reaction to the event.

To quote a man/book I have many times here in the past (The author is described here: http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/mbbio.html ):

Israel had allowed the Phalange to enter the camps as part of a plan to transfer authority to the Lebanese, and accepted responsibility for that decision. The Kahan Commission of Inquiry, formed by the Israeli government in response to public outrage and grief, found that Israel was indirectly responsible for not anticipating the possibility of Phalangist violence. Israel instituted the panel's recommendations, including the dismissal of Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and Gen. Raful Eitan, the Army Chief of Staff.

The Kahan Commission, declared former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, was "a great tribute to Israeli democracy....There are very few governments in the world that one can imagine making such a public investigation of such a difficult and shameful episode."

Recently, efforts have been made in Belgium to try Sharon for his role in what happened in Lebanon. The appellate court there, however, threw out the case.[ Radio Free Europe/Radio Free Liberty, (June 26, 2002).] The European campaign appears designed to smear Israel in general, and Sharon in particular, and is particularly odious given that Israel's own democratic judicial institutions already dealt with this tragedy.

Ironically, while 300,000 Israelis demonstrated in Israel to protest the killings, little or no reaction occurred in the Arab world. Outside the Middle East, a major international outcry against Israel erupted over the massacres. The Phalangists, who perpetrated the crime, were spared the brunt of the condemnations for it.

By contrast, few voices were raised in May 1985, when Muslim militiamen attacked the Shatila and Burj-el Barajneh Palestinian refugee camps. According to UN officials, 635 were killed and 2,500 wounded. During a two-year battle between the Syrian-backed Shiite Amal militia and the PLO, more than 2,000 people, including many civilians, were reportedly killed. No outcry was directed at the PLO or the Syrians and their allies over the slaughter. International reaction was also muted in October 1990 when Syrian forces overran Christian-controlled areas of Lebanon. In the eight-hour clash, 700 Christians were killed — the worst single battle of Lebanon's Civil War. These killings came on top of an estimated 95,000 deaths that had occurred during the civil war in Lebanon from 1975-1982.

Thus, it was the Israelis who were more outraged than the Muslims! And no Muslims were angry when they committed massacres.

EDIT: Mopheo, is this the site you were talking about?
 
Oh cool. Yes, that would probably have been me, then, since I have posted that same quote three times now in regards to this same subject...I bet G-Man could vouch for that. ;)
 
Originally posted by PresidentMike
The Israeli government commission that reported on the massacre disagreed.

Order Number 6, issued on September 16, 1982 by the Israeli army general staff stated that the "refugee camps [Sabra and Shatila] are not to be entered. Searching and mopping up the camps will be done by the Phalangists and the Lebanese army."

Sharon, who had a reputation as a hands on Defense Minister, certainly new about and approved this order.

Sharon might've known about this, but there's nothing wrong with this. Sending an army to take over an area in a war is a legitimate move.


Originally posted by PresidentMike
You stated in an earlier post that "the Israeli soldiers weren't even there and didn't even know about it" and that "there are no evidences at all that Israeli troops knew what was really happening there."

So where is there no "real evidence" that the Israeli troops did not know? Foreign reporters who visited the area for a few hours on the first day could tell that something bad was going on. They didn't have the access or intelligence that the Israeli army had, including (as Friedman demonstrated) excellent observation points of the camps.

How am I supposed to provide evidences that soldiers didn't know? You claim they knew, now proove it. Even Friedman admits it's possible Israeli soldiers didn't know about it at all.

Originally posted by PresidentMike
Israeli commanders listened as the Phalangists ordered civilians shot. They heard reports from their own subordinates that a massacre was taking place, and did nothing. They could clearly see inside the camp and understand what was going on. There were signs everywhere of what was happening, but they took no action. The Israeli government knew that the Phalangists were bent on purging the Palestinean camps, and sent them in anyway.

How was the Israeli goverment supposed to know this?
And if Israeli soldiers really heard anything about civilians shot how come the only report he's quoting is "Do the will of God", which is a VERY common saying in arabic, especially when talking about a religious army.

Originally posted by PresidentMike
Does Israel bear sole responsibility? No. IDF troops did not pull the triggers that sent 1000 people to their deaths. But they did allow the Phalangists in, knowing what would happen, and they did stand by while the milita killed everyone they saw. Clearly they are partly responsible.

How were they supposed to know this will happen?

Originally posted by PresidentMike
As for Pearl Harbor and 9/11: I hardly see how that is a proper analogy for Sabra and Shatila. In the first two cases the U.S. was attacked by an outside power. You could argue it was provoked, but what does that have to do with Beirut and the massacre, unless you are saying Israel was provoked into killing innocent men, women and children.

The analogy isn't about the attacks but about the information regarding them. In both cases the US had plenty of evidences suggesting such a thing will happen but not all the information was put together and that's what made the attacks possible. Israel had pieces of information suggesting there's a massacre, but they weren't put together and so the massacre was possible.

Originally posted by PresidentMike
I don't understand how you can read this account and still come away convinced that Sharon and Israel bear no blame. This isn't an Arab tabloid that's reported 4,000 Jews got a call to stay away from the WTC on 9/11. This is an internationally respected and award winning journalist working for arguably the greatest newspaper in the world. He is an impeccable source, and his account leaves no room for doubt in my mind.

A journalist who admits it's entierly possible that Israel simply didn't know about it, and who provided absolutely no evidences that Sharon did anything. Israel's blame is one of not finding out about these massacres, not one of allowing them and certainly not of creating them.
 
Back
Top Bottom