ZOA: If Treaty unravels, Israel should retake Sinai & oil fields
ZOA Condemns Egypts Rapprochement With Hamas
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has condemned the Egyptian government rapprochement with Hamas, the terrorist group that rules Gaza and which calls in its Charter for the destruction of Israel (Article 15) and the murder of Jews (Article 7). In recent weeks, relations between Hamas and Egypt, which had been previously strained have, according to Hamas officials, greatly improved. The provisional Egyptian government has made statements suggesting that the Israeli-Egyptian treaty is not on as firm a footing as before, implying that changes, perhaps even its abrogation, could lie in the future.
An Egyptian Foreign Ministry spokesman, Ambassador Menha Bakhoum, said that, We are opening a new page Egypt is resuming its role that was once abdicated. She also described the blockade of the border with Gaza and Egypts previous enforcement of it as shameful, and said that Egypt intended soon to open up the border completely. An Israeli official also said that the rapprochement of Egypt and Hamas could have strategic implications on Israels security In the past Hamas was able to rearm when Egypt was making efforts to prevent that. How much more can they build their terrorist machine in Gaza if Egypt were to stop? (David D. Kirkpatrick, In Shift, Egypt Warms to Iran and Hamas, Israels Foes, New York Times, April 28, 2011).
ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, The ZOA condemns the rapprochement between Egypt and Hamas, stands by what it said in the early days of the political tumult in Cairo, when we warned that a change now in the Egyptian regime would not only do nothing to advance the cause of democracy and human rights in Egypt, but would likely strengthen Islamist forces like the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Hamas is its Palestinian off-shoot.
Now we see improving ties between the provisional Egyptian government and this vicious, genocidally-inclined terrorist organization. We also read reports of attacks upon the pipeline carrying natural gas to Israel under the terms of the Treaty. We can expect to see more of these occurrences and for disruptions to become commonplace.
The Egypt-Israel peace treaty is a legal, contractual undertaking by both sides. It requires the faithful performance of all treaty obligations. It is both absurd and unthinkable that Egypt can abrogate the peace treaty, yet retain all of what it gained by signing it, while Israel is deprived of all it gained under the treaty.
Israel therefore must make it clear that, in the event that Egypt cancels the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty, Israel will act on the logic of that act and rescind its major concessions under it. This means that it would consider retaking the Sinai desert; its four oil wells, originally developed by Israel; re-establish its former air force bases there; and re-build Yamit, the Jewish town from which 5,000 Jews were forcibly removed as condition of the treaty. The U.S. should also consider ending its $2 billion in annual aid to Egypt if it cancels the treaty.
It makes no difference that 30 years have passed since the signing of the treaty. The treaty was not a limited one of thirty, or a hundred years. Egypt cannot renounce the treaty without automatically forfeiting whatever it gained by it. By doing so, Israel may play a valuable, stabilizing and restraining influence on Egypt. By showing that significant negative consequences could flow from Egypt abrogating the peace treaty, Israel would reduce the likelihood of Egypt doing so.
We also urge that, if Egypt cancels the treaty, the U.S. must also consider cancelling all further aid to Cairo and removing its military advisers, who have expertly trained Egypts armed forces. The more than $60 billion in aid over three decades has enabled Egypt to build up one of the largest armies in the Middle East, twice the size of Israels, with over 1,000 tanks, 300 F-15 fighter jets, over a dozen warships, missiles and chemical weapons.
If Egypt had abrogated the treaty, shall we say, six months or a year after the treaty was originally signed in 1979, there would be simply no question that Egypt would not able to keep the concessions made by Israel under the treaty as if nothing had happened. It would also be unthinkable that the U.S. would start, or continue, to give $2 billion in U.S. annual aid to a country that had just flagrantly abrogated the very treaty under which it was to receive U.S. aid.