Eretz Israel is our unforgettable historic homeland...The Jews who will it shall achieve their State...And whatever we attempt there for our own benefit will redound mightily and beneficially to the good of all mankind. (Theodor Herzl, DerJudenstaat, 1896)

We offer peace and amity to all the neighbouring states and their peoples, and invite them to cooperate with the independent Jewish nation for the common good of all. The State of Israel is ready to contribute its full share to the peaceful progress and development of the Middle East.
(From Proclamation of the State of Israel, 5 Iyar 5708; 14 May 1948)

With a liberal democratic political system operating under the rule of law, a flourishing market economy producing technological innovation to the benefit of the wider world, and a population as educated and cultured as anywhere in Europe or North America, Israel is a normal Western country with a right to be treated as such in the community of nations.... For the global jihad, Israel may be the first objective. But it will not be the last. (Friends of Israel Initiative)

Sunday 6 February 2011

The Muslim Brotherhood’s True Intentions: The 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty Consigned to the Flames

Despite the absurdity of the BBC’s unfit-for-purpose (yes, I’ve used that description before, and I make no apology for using it again) Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen describing it online as a “moderate” organisation, the radical Islamist Muslim Brotherhood’s intentions regarding the Peace Treaty signed between Egyptian President Anwar Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin in 1979 has been revealed by the Brotherhood’s deputy leader, Rashad al-Bayoumi – the demise of Hosni Mubarak’s government in favour of one dominated by the Brotherhood would be followed by the abrogation of that treaty.
“We have been repeatedly assured in the media – on the basis of no evidence – that if the Muslim Brotherhood comes to power in a coalition or even directly that the radical Islamist group would keep the peace treaty with Israel,” writes Middle East analyst Professor Barry Rubin, who informs us that on Russian television Rashad al-Bayoumi has said that a Brotherhood government would abolish the treaty altogether

and has told an interviewer on Japan's NHTV:

"After President Mubarak steps down and a provisional government is formed, there is a need to dissolve the peace treaty with Israel"
Al Beeb’s World Affairs editor John Simpson reported yesterday that the Friday crowd in Tahrir Square contained many more Islamists, including adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood (I noticed footage of placards with the Magen David scrawled on Mubarak's face, an ominous signal), and it seems to me that there are signs that within the BBC itself there at least a few who see Bowen’s foolishness for what it is.

The description “moderate” was pulled from Bowen’s online report regarding the Brotherhood.  In an early evening bulletin yesterday, newsreader Gavin Esler was at first somewhat tough on the Muslim Brotherhood’s representative in Britain, Dr Kamal Helbawy (pictured; one of Al Beeb's Islamic poster boys), asking him precisely what the Brotherhood’s policy towards Israel would be if they took power in Egypt – the well-practised old fellow, however, ducked and weaved as usual, refusing to be drawn, and making a distinction between honouring peace treaties and pursuing justice – at which point Esler softened and exclaimed that the answer was interesting and asked him what he saw when he looked at Gaza.

Andrew Neil, less willing to let Helbawy off the hook, actually gave Helbawy a bit of a drubbing, not the easy ride that persons of the latter’s ilk usually enjoy from Al Beeb; Neil also spoke of “gullible journalists” – could he have had Bowen in mind, by any chance? See the video here:

Al Beeb’s website reported last August, in a feature by Magdi Abdelhadi, described on his by-line as “BBC Middle East editor” (confusing, isn’t it – does Middle East head honcho Jezza know?):

‘Kamal Helbawy, a senior member of the Muslim Brotherhood, now based in London, who is quite candid about his support for jihad in what he regards as "occupied countries", including Afghanistan - where both the US and UK have troops.
But Mr Helbawy says this does not amount to encouraging European or American Muslims to take up arms against their governments.
His advice to them is to use whatever democratic means available to them to campaign against such policies.'

Surely some in Al Beeb's higher echelons  must realise by this time how risible Bowen’s reputation is. Interviewed overlooking Tahrir Square by on-the-spot reporter George Alagiah for his analysis of events, the “Middle East editor” was his familiar unimpressive self – telling us in effect that things could go that way, or they could do this, we’ll have to wait and see. Duh!

The line that Helbawy spins, to the evident satisfaction of Bowen and his acolytes (that Abdelhadi article contains the line "Critics believe the Muslim Brotherhood are radical fundamentalists" - more Al Beeb whitewash, eh?) is seen in what Helbawy told French television

Interviewer: "And would you revoke the peace treaty with Israel?"
Answer: "We respect all protocols and the treaties built on justice.
Interviewer: "Sorry, I didn't understand your response."
Answer: "We respect every treaty and every protocol for peace, but it should be built on justice.
Interviewer: "Does that mean you would keep the peace treaty with Israel?
Answer: "You keep it, but you have to review it in [unclear] of the atrocities from either side."
Interviewer: "What do you mean by that?"
Answer: "I mean that we don't need injustice to reach the people. If the peace treaty does not give the people their rights, it is not a good treaty, is not a good peace accord."
Interviewer: "So are you saying that the current peace treaty is not good enough?"
Answer: "No, it is not good enough. I must say that."
Interviewer: "So you would revoke that peace treaty.
Answer: "No, I didn't say that.
Interviewer: You would change it?
Answer: It could be reviewed in view of respect of human rights. And through the United Nations, through freedom given to the people, respect of every one. Not occupation and the military atrocities against civilians."
As Barry Rubin observes:

“Clearly, Brotherhood leaders have been warned to avoid extremist statements as it tries to sell itself to the Western audience and (insert adjective) media as moderate and cuddly....
So while trying to avoid admitting it, he explains that Egypt would demand changes and not accept the existing treaty. But what you also have to know--and most journalists would miss--is that the Muslim Brotherhood regards Israel's existence as "occupation" and the denial of Muslim rights.
Paradoxically, then, the only way Israel could have a peace treaty with Egypt is not to exist at all.
Other Brotherhood spokesmen have said that if the group comes to power there will be a referendum on the treaty, and of course it will be rejected. This has been said many times in Arabic though the Western media seem completely unaware of it, as with many other things about the Brotherhood.
You have to understand the bizarre situation here. Every speech in Arabic of Brotherhood leaders and cadre and articles in their publications are full of anti-Jewish hatred, anti-American hatred, and support for violence. Yet in the Western media all of this simply is never mentioned, in part because reporters take the group's word on its credentials.
In other words, the Brotherhood will end the peace with Israel and return to a state of war.
This would not necessarily mean going to war, since Egypt's army might well be unwilling to do so, considering the consequences and not liking the Brotherhood. In contrast, though, it is easy to make Egypt into a safe haven from which terrorists could attack across the border and any weapons Hamas wanted would come from Egyptian arsenals (or if the army blocked that, just be freely imported into the Gaza Strip.
Eventually, this would lead to renewed war between Israel and Hamas, or even Israel and Egypt, in which thousands of people would die. Some would call that speculation. I would prefer that they didn't get to see it proven to be accurate.”
By the way, you'll never see it on Al Beeb, but here's a taste of what the Islamists of Londonistan have been up to outside the Egyptian Embassy (hat tip: reader Shirlee)


  1. Caroline Glick has a good article on the MB

  2. And so that means we get to smash them into the dust again. Maybe for the last time.

  3. Well, they're in talks now - but hopefully won't become too influential.

  4. Great historical find by Elder of Ziyon on pan-Islamism (1883)


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.