Texas Jewish Post (Fort Worth, Tex.), Vol. 23, No. 19, Ed. 1 Thursday, May 8, 1969 Page: 5 of 16
sixteen pages : ill. ; page 22 x 16 in. Scanned from physical pages.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THE
CANAL
Major-General CHAIM HI5RZOG examines Nasser’s motives
in stepping up the scale of warfare across the Suez Canal
>
CD
m
CLASHE
/XN Tuesday night, Israeli
1 1 commando units hit deep
inside Egyptian terri-
tory, in response to Cairo's
escalation of attacks across the
Suez Canal and in support of
Jerusalem’s contention that the
ceasefire cannot be one-sided.
Israeli retaliation was predict-
able.
For some time it has been
obvious that Egypt’s policy, ably
co-orciinated by the Russians
and supported by the French,
has been to endeavour to reap
some harvest from the four-
Power conference by creating a
war-like atmosphere and thus
bringing, Cairo hopes, pressures
to bear on Israel to withdraw.
It is also clear from recent
events that, in pursuit of this
policy, they are becoming more
and more desperate and more
and more/frustrated, for it is
built our an illusion, namely
that of the danger of-an immi-
nent war. Once that illusion is
dispelled, this latest political
gamble of the Egyptians and
their allies will prove to be a
failure.
New phase
The Egyptians have been
pursuing their policy by means
of massive artillery bombard-
ments across the Suez Canal.
Initially—in September, 1968—
these bombardments, coming
across the ceasefire lines, caught
the Israel Defence Forces
unaware and inflicted casualties.
However, Israel drew the logical
conclusions from this new
phase, with the result that when
the second series of bombard-
ments began over a month ago,
it found the Israeli forces well
entrenched and heavily forti-
fied. Indeed, the Egyptian shell-
ing, involving tens of thousands
of shells a day, achieved, from
a military point of view, very
scant results and evoked Israeli
reactions which proved to be
very costly to the Egyptians.
Last week, apparently because
of the lack of results from the
artillery barrages and the heavy
losses suffered by them in per-
sonnel and in installations, the
Egyptians adopted a new policy,
namely that of sending over
commando units on raids across
the Canal. In one of these raids,
three Israeli soldiers were killed
and one taken prisoner.
Heavy casualties
When evaluating what hap-
pened, it is well to place the
events in their correct perspec-
tive and to remember that
along a line some 100 miles long,
a total of two Egyptian patrols
succeeded in crossing and that
one of them succeeded in inflict-
ing casualties. Their further
attempts to cross were
beaten back with considerable
casualties.
It is obvious that the Israeli
forces have adapted themselves
to this new method of the
Egyptians, whose initial success
in taking one Israeli soldier
prisoner can be attributed more
to a lack of alertness on the
Israeli side than to increased
effectiveness on the part of the
Egyptians.
From a purely military point
of view the Egyptian operations
are, in fact, pin-pricks, however
painful they may be to those
who are directly affected.
Their attempts along the Canal
have no bearing whatsoever on
the basic strategic position of
Israel, which has not merely
remained unchanged but has
been strengthened as a result
of the Egyptian action along the
Canal.
This is, in fact, the main
aspect in regard to all Arab
activities since the June war,
one which has been overlooked
by many commentators through-
out the world. The Arab actions,
wherever they may have taken
place, have been, basically
speaking, incidental to the mili-
tary situation and have not been
capable of affecting it.
The Egyptian action along the
Canal is taking place to create
what Cairo regards as the
correct atmosphere for the “ Big
Four” talks, to bolster sagging
morale in Egypt (it is obvious
from all sides that President
Nasser’s position is becoming
more and more precarious) and
to foster the impression in the
Arab world that Egypt, and not
the various terrorist groups, is
the leading force fighting against
Israel.
Egypt has now taken two steps
further in her extremist atti-
tude. She announced officially
Egyptian forces are operat-
ing in Sinai, thus discarding the
story of a so-called guerrilla
force in Sinai, and “ A1 Ahram,”
the semi-official Cairo paper, has
The Suez ( anal
town of Kantara
in Israeli - occu-
pied Sinai has
been the target
of repeated Kgvp-
t i a n artillery
b o m h a r d ni cut.
As a result, many
of its inhabitants'
have been re-
settled in tlie HI
Arish area, south
of Gaza. This
photograph was
taken from the
Egyptian side of
the Canal
announced that Egypt no longer
recognises the ceasefire arrange-
ment.
Nasser’s increased extremism
seems to be a reflection of his
desperation, having regard to
his internal position and frustra-
tion. He is making a desperate
effort to create the impression
of an impending war, come what
may.
Dual advantage
It is obvious that the
Egyptians have written iff, from
a civilian point of view, the
towns along the Suez Canal.
They are now evacuating Port
Said. They have a double
advantage iii the northern sector
of the Canal, because in the
extreme northern part above
Kantara, they hold both sides
of the Canal, and from Ras el
Aish to Kantara, the Israeli
positions are on a narrow raised
dike and are supplied along a
single path dominated by
Egyptian fire.
It is clear from the recent
events that the Egyptians wish
to press their advantage in this
sector, even if this means first
clearing out the United Nations
observers from their positions
by firing on them and by making
life untenable for them.
The signs indicate that, should
the Egyptians be contemplating
a limited operation in order to
achieve some local gains for
morale purposes, it: is in this
sector that they may make their
attempt. They presumably fear
possible Israeli retaliation on
Port Said, with a resultant
panicking population, and this
would appear to be a reason for
the evacuation of that town.
Consideration for the personal
suffering of citizens has not
been one of the strong points
of Egyptian Governments.
Nasser recently enunciated
Egyptian defence policy in a
television interview, as being
based on three phases—the
defence phase, from which they
passed last September into the
retaliation phase with the com-
mencement of the artillery
barrages, and what is presum-
ably the next stage, the offensive
phase.
What we are seeing now is a
scaling-up of the second phase,
when it is clear to the Arabs
from a military point of view
that the third phase is out. of
the question because they are
incapable of entertaining -a
major engagement with the
Israeli forces today. The frustra-
tion arising out of this know-
ledge. coupled with the growing
disenchantment of the Egyptian
people with their leadership, is
giving rise to the recent ads
of desperation which, as stated,
have no bearing whatsoever on
the basic military situation.
While attention has been
directed to the Suez front, the
Israeli Defence Forces have
quietly achieved an impressive
victory over the El Fatah forces
on the Jordan front, who
mounted their much-heralded
Continued on Page 6
Farewell to de Gaulle
M
AZAL tov,” “ Hag
sameah ”—these two
greetings were fre-
quently exchanged between
French Jews at “ referendum
parties ” on Sunday night and
Monday.
However, when it became
clear that the rule of “ le grand
Charles ” had finally come to
an end, French Jews who had
voted against him almost
unanimously did not indulge in
gloating, and there was a notable
lack of spiteful satisfaction at
the French President’s defeat.
Until he imposed an embargo
on French arms for Israel after
the Six-Day War, much of
French Jewry had been faithful,
loyal and devoted to General de
Gaulle. He had to display
animosity towards them many
times before he destroyed their
deep feelings towards him, and
even then some remnants linger
on. For this reason, and also
because of distaste for kicking
a man when he is down, even
the most outspoken anti-Gaullist
Jews are restrained in their
comments now that he has
relinquished power.
The “ love story ” between de
Gaulle and French Jews began
on June 18, 1940, when the then
fairly young and unknown
general broadcast an appeal
from London for French people
to join him in continuing the
fight against the Nazis. There
were so many Jews among the
first Frenchmen to rally to him.
that he is said to have
exclaimed: “ I appealed to
France and only the synagogue
came ! ”
In wartime occupied France,
many Jews played a brilliant
From Fred Goldstein-Paris
I)e Gaulle and former Prime Minis-
ter Pompidou, leading contender
for the succession
part in the Gaullist resistance,
while others were members of
the Communist-led Maquis.
Nor was this all. Hundreds
of Jews shot by the Germans
or murdered by them in the
camps, died with “ Long live de
Gaulle, long live France" on
their lips.
Attitude to Jews
As for General de Gaulle him-
self, whatever his private opinion
of the “synagogue," his attitude
towards the Jew's was one of
the utmost correctness, and even
of warm sympathy and under-
standing—until his notorious
“ domineering elite ” speech of
November, 1967.
In the years up to then he
had become for French Jews the
symbol of the France they loved,
of their motherland, a tolerant,
welcoming country, which
accorded equality to all its
citizens.
The sentimental links between
French Jewry and the General
had been further strengthened
by his action in restoring full
rights to the Jews of Algeria
as soon as he had liberated it.
during the war; by his treat-
ment of deportees returning to
France from the Nazi camps ; by
his friendly altitude towards
the young Jewish State ; and by
his refusal in the immediate
post-war years to agree to Ger-
many being rearmed.
During the years before he
came to power again in 1958,
“ the desert years " at Colombey
les Deux Eglises. many Jews
were prominent in the Gaullist.
movement, even though to be a
Gaullist at that time made one
almost an outcast.
In 1962. the first cloud, no
bigger than a man’s hand,
appeared over the horizon. This
was the time of the exodus of
Jews from North Africa in the
wake of Algerian independence.
Most of them regarded the
general as a traitor who had
“sold them down the river.”
With the outbreak of the Six-
Day War the small cloud grew
until it almost covered the sky.
While French Jewry felt itself
spiritually reborn through the
victory of the Jewish State.
General de Gaulle came out
bitterly against Israel. The
immediate result was a deep
chasm in French Jewry. Some,
totally disillusioned. turned
against him completely : others
believed that, as Frenchmen.
they could still maintain their
faith in General de Gaulle, while
yet not compromising their
Jewishness.
But the average Jewish
bourgeois began to dislike him,
and although many Jews voted
for Gaullist candidates in the
July elections of last year, alter
the May riots, they did so
because they wanted the restora-
tion of law and order, not
because they were heart and
soul behind President de Gaulle.
Arms embargo
When ” le grand Charles ”
imposed France's arms embargo
on Israel, this proved to be the
final blow. Despite his anti-
Israel line during and after the
June war, despite his November
speech. General de Gaulle still
had a following among French
Jews, but the embargo
announcement killed any regard
for him stone dead.
Today, with General de Gaulle
hack in Colombey les Deux
Eglises, many of Hie Jews of
France are beginning to remem-
ber what he once meant to
them and what the; once felt
about him. With that typically
Jewish characteristic of easily
forgetting the wrongs done to
them and always remembering
the good deeds, French Jews
are saying : “ He is a greal man,
hut he had turned nasty in his
old age and we had to vote
against him. But it is a pity lie
had to be sent away, and a
greater pity that lie turned
against us.”
-5 POSTORIAL THURSDAY, MAY 8, 1969 TEXAS JEWISH POST
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Wisch, J. A. Texas Jewish Post (Fort Worth, Tex.), Vol. 23, No. 19, Ed. 1 Thursday, May 8, 1969, newspaper, May 8, 1969; Fort Worth, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth754917/m1/5/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; .