Telegraph

Telegraph bizarrely suggests Entebbe raid set back peace with Palestinians


There are few IDF missions as well-known as the Operation Entebbe.

On June 27, 1976, terrorists affiliated with the PFLP and a West German group known as the Red Army Faction forced an Air France Airbus to land in Uganda and demanded that Israel release 53 terrorists. The hijackers freed the French crew and non­-Jewish passengers, but kept the more than 100 Jewish and Israeli hostages who they threatened to execute.

Israel then launched a dramatic raid, rescuing 98 hostages and killing all eight terrorists. Three hostages were killed in the crossfire. Additionally, Dora Bloch, a 74-year-old British national who had taken ill during the hijacking and was sent to a hospital, was later murdered by the Ugandans as revenge for Israel’s successful rescue operation. 

The iconic mission was widely praised as representing a successful blow against international terrorism. 

Yet, Telegraph contributor Saul David, noting the 40th anniversary of the mission, in a June 27th article promoting a book he wrote about famous episode, reaches the following conclusion.

Moreover, it could be argued that the success of the raid has actually made it harder for Israeli politicians – particularly Bibi Netanyahu – to embrace the compromises required for a lasting peace with the Palestinians. Why? Because it convinced Israelis that their intelligence services and soldiers could deal with any security threat. “It was double-edged,” one hostage told me. “We were saved but it was bad for Israel. It made peace less likely.”

The reasoning is truly astonishing. Are we to take away from this paragraph that either an unsuccessful raid (where most of the hostages were killed) or giving in to the terrorists’ demands both would have been more preferable outcomes? However, even leaving that aside, let’s briefly examine David’s claim that the success of the raid made Israeli leaders less likely to make compromises for peace.

First, Yitzhak Rabin, who, as prime minister, ordered the Entebbe raid, later (during his next stint as prime minister) signed the Oslo Peace Accords.

Binyamin Netanyahu, whose brother was killed in the raid, signed (in 1998 during his first term as prime minister) the Wye River Memorandum which reinstated implementation of the Oslo II Agreement.

Further, the success of the raid didn’t prevent Israel from withdrawing from Gaza in 2005, or from entering into final status negotiations and offering Palestinians an independent state twice, in 2000 and 2008.

In short, even if we suspend judgement on his bizarre take on the operation, David’s working hypothesis – that thwarting terrorists’ plans to murder Jews was somehow detrimental to peace – simply doesn’t hold up to critical scrutiny. 

21 replies »

  1. New evidence – if we need any more at all – malevolent stupidity has only low limit. If something could increase the possibility to make peace it is (among other things) the Israeli public’s conviction regarding the superiority and strength of their security services. Saul David is abusing his basic human right to be a moron.

  2. It depends what you mean by “peace”–Saul David is apparently using it in the Palestinian sense:
    The state of affairs once all the Jews are finally driven into the sea and the Zionist Entity is no more (חו”ח)

  3. Sure, I agree, that maybe peace would have come about had the Israeli army not rescued the Jewish passengers….the same way as perhaps, the whole annoying Jewish question and having to deal with”that pesky nation, Israel” would have been solved had only the allies allowed Hitler win the war and not fought him with all their might. There would be no Jews left, therefore no antisemitism, and definitely no Israel. Peace on earth would reign!! The world would be speaking German and doing the goose step. The Arab world would by supporting and backing Hitler, would be victorious and there would be no devides or schisms between Sunni and Shia………..only peace.
    The intellectual acrobatics and inverted logic, goes along with a very deep belief system that “if only”the PLO had had an opportunity to preserve their pride and show how much they wanted to live in peace with Israel, and their bargaining chip(the captured Jewish passengers) could have been exercised, things in ME would have been so much more successful and peaceful………
    “Clever hindsight” and/or “wishful thinking” provide juicy fuel for another opportunity to find fault only with Israel for missing peace opportunities.

  4. Is this not antisemitism at its finest most elaborate ? The Jews must be slaughtered in order for there to be progress. Does that also go for the hundreds of thousands of Arabs who have been slaughtered by their brethren ? Is there some sort of upside we are not seeing here ?

  5. Let’s go back a couple years to the Munich Games. Is it safe to say, with the “success” of murdering a team of athletes in a terror attack — with success defined by number of dead + lack of Western scorn for the atrocities — that has convinced the Palestinians that one day they will finally defeat the all-powerful Zionists?

    People who can’t see evil clearly do not get the right to dictate how wrong the other side is. Sorry.

  6. I went back to read the whole article and as usual, the need to incorporate the asinine Leftist/AzaJew perspective (I have no idea what Mr. David’s background is, but he’s certainly carrying water for the Left) ruined what was otherwise an interesting take on the Entebbe operation. Some of that stems from previous research that honestly shows David’s “reveals” aren’t really news–anyone who knows more about Entebbe already than he does already was aware of the Rabin-Peres disagreements, the rush to find intelligence on Uganda (though David, not surprisingly, ignores facts that show Israel was able to get a great deal of data together in time for it to be useful, and that the gaps were similar to and common with a lot of counter-terrorism operations in the 1970’s), and that hostage statements confirmed a terrorist gave up instead of murdering dozens of people (of course, David leaves out/ignores that the terrorist did this after shooting at the IDF and being shot and wounded, and takes a ordinary act of non-barbarism and unsuccessfully tries to paint it as an act of sainthood).
    Also, to be honest, I don’t think he actually quoted a hostage there, because there’s no reason a Leftist/AzaJew would have demanded anonymity in the British press on a matter that most of their cheerleaders will buy anyway. It’s more likely David put in a fake quote to express his own views, which as mentioned above (accurately) are morally bankrupt and make zero sense.

    • Socialist economy. Nationwide healthcare. A lack of abortion restrictions. Freedom of press. Gay rights. Environmental protection. You sure you get all that stuff in Venezuela?

      Sounds like Israel is more left wing than most so-called leftists.

  7. I see that only the Jews have to compromise – never the Arabs. So typical of racist morons.

    The best chance for peace is to shoot every single terrorist and keep shooting until they stop attacking Israel. Then and only then can there be a chance for peace. Remember Egypt and Jordan only made peace AFTER they were convinced at gun point that they would never get what they wanted via violence.

    The ‘Palestinians’ are simply a more violence and moronic version of the same people

  8. Is this chap Saul David not embarrassed by the poor standard of his article? Next he’ll be fundraising for Hope not Hate with Jemma Levene.

  9. After 8 years of marriage, my husband left me…
    Reading your crap here Ruth your husband must be a very slow-moving fellow.