'Terror Was Needed to Make Arabs Leave': What the Israeli Army Did in 1948, Revealed

In the view of many Israelis, if the Arabs decided to flee, Israel is not responsible for creating the Palestinian tragedy. But if Israel expelled the Palestinians and its troops apparently didn’t hesitate to spill the blood of those who refused to leave, then a very dark cloud hangs over the period of the state’s establishment. If the underlying mission of the nascent army was not to ensure “purity of arms” as conceived at the time – i.e., that soldiers will not harm innocent people and will only use their weapons against individuals who perpetrate violent acts – but rather to perpetuate ethnic cleansing, it follows that historical memory in Israel is a deception… Maxim Cohen was commander of the Carmeli Brigade, one of the largest and most prominent of the infantry brigades involved in the war, in 1948-49. Summoned to the witness stand by Lahis’ lawyer, he provided gruesome testimony. “How do you expel a village?” he asked. “You lop off the ear of one of the Arabs before everyone else’s eyes, and they all flee. In practice, no village was evacuated without stabbing someone in the stomach or by means of similar methods. We won thanks only to the fear of the Arabs, and they were fearful only of deeds that were not in accordance with the law.” Haim Ben-David, an operations officer in Carmeli who rose to the rank of IDF major general and later became Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion’s military secretary, explained in his testimony that expulsion of Arabs was a routine matter and that the mop-up of an area “takes the form of killings,” depending on the circumstances. “In our operative orders we were careful not to mention killing. The orders relating to conduct were orally conveyed to the battalion commanders,” Ben-David explained, noting that written directives that came from the General Staff did not expressly call for the destruction of the villages, but actions on the ground were undertaken “with the knowledge of the High Command.” What if an Arab insisted on remaining in his home? In that case “he gets a bullet,” Ben-David told the court. “We knew the international laws, but I also know that we often did not behave according to those laws. We resorted to illegal means.” Such means, he said, were also implemented against women and children. Another high-ranking officer called to the witness stand was Yosef Eitan, commander of the 7th Armored Brigade, who went on to become head of Central Command. Eitan referred to the disparity between written orders and what the troops were told orally: “I didn’t see [a written order] to annihilate every living soul, but in the form of hints – that, yes.” He added that officers in the field had “permission to interpret the order,” adding that “our soldiers annihilated inhabitants” on the basis of directives they were given. Yisrael Carmi, a battalion commander in the 7th Brigade, testified in the Lahis trial about the conquest of Be’er Sheva in October 1948, explaining that the method was to kill civilians who resisted expulsion and that it was used in both the north and the south. “I conquered the city,” Carmi testified. “In mopping up that area, I gave an order to annihilate anyone who appeared in the street, whether they resisted or did not resist. An order was given to destroy everything. After the conquest of the police station – after the surrender – the murder stopped. Until then everyone was killed – women and children and everyone. Then an order was given to the people to go to Hebron. Anyone who didn’t go was ‘removed’” (quotation marks in the original). Another archival file whose materials have been made available deals with the trial of soldiers who raped and murdered a Bedouin girl in the south, in 1949. The documents show how the killing of civilians served not only to expedite their expulsion, but also to prevent the return of Arabs to their lands. An operational command issued to soldiers in writing shortly after the cease-fire agreements ordered them “to shoot every Arab who is in the area as far as the armistice boundary.” Signed by: A. Rosenblum. Captain. Commander of the line.” The verdict in this case stated that the orders issued to soldiers “were unreservedly to shoot every Arab – hence it makes no difference whether it is a man or a woman, whether the Arab is armed or not, whether he flees or raises his hands and surrenders. If you saw an Arab while on patrol, you are obligated to shoot him.” In light of this, the judges noted, it’s difficult to see the soldiers as being responsible for murder, and accounts should be settled with them only for the rape. “If the officer had killed the Arab woman instead of ‘taking’ her, it’s possible that he would not have merited punishment at all.”

This is terrible and important to read. I will have to finish it later, the bit about excusing the rape shook me. Crossposted, thank you.

Archive link wasn’t working for me, but it could just be me. What’s the original article from?