The Koenig report and Israeli policy towards the Palestinian minority, 1965-1976: old wine in new bottles

Arab Studies Quarterly (ASQ), Summer, 2003 by Ahmad H. Sa'di

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The documents discussed above show that the differences between the approaches of Tolidano and Koenig are not substantial. Both of them adhered to the same discourse and sought similar objectives. They shared the goals of decreasing the proportion of the Palestinians among the country's population, the splitting up of the concentrations of Palestinian population by Jewish settlement and security instillations, the use of reward and punishment policy, the creation of a new leadership of collaborators, the fight against independent, nationalist and Communist leaders as well as against indigenous organizations, disallowing the establishment of a worthwhile Palestinian economic base, and preventing the Palestinians from holding significant positions in the economy. The difference between them, however, relates mostly to style and tactics. While Tolidano emphasized the instrumentality of economic dependence in the achievement of these goals, Koenig underscored the use of coercion. This discrepancy is also the main dividing line between the advocates of "moderate policy" (Such as Tolidano) and the supporter of "activist policy" (such as Israel Koenig, Amnon Linn, Uri Lubrani and Moshe Arens).

One of the main questions that students of the Palestinian minority are interested in concerns the impact of such policy-guidelines on the daily life of the Palestinians. For example, Benziman & Mansour (1992) argue that senior civil servants and security officers--the advisor to the Prime Minister on Arab Affairs, Military Governors, and Commissioners--by and large have had marginal effect on the formulation of State policies. Their role was mostly executive, although they occasionally endeavored to introduce new ideas to the decision-making bodies. (18) Tolidano gave a different appraisal. In his above cited testimony he argued that:

   [Some people] say that there is no coordination
   between the various ministries concerning areas of
   responsibility, and there is no policy concerning the Arab
   sector. I think that is ridiculous.... We have a broad
   committee which meets on monthly basis.. And there is a
   central committee that meets on bi-weekly basis--in
   accordance with the needs; and there is a coordinating
   internal committee. Practically, today every act big of
   small--like the confiscation of land, the building of a
   Mosque, the enlargement of building area ... the
   permission to a woman (from the occupied territories) to
   join her husband (in Israel), the connection of a house to
   the electricity grid, the appointment of Kadis (religious
   judges), the opening of a workshop or a health clinic--all
   of these activities are coordinated, and no ministry does
   any move before getting the OK of the intra-ministerial
   committee.

   As to the issue of policy, the principles, which I
   mentioned compose the general guidelines. It is true that
   we don't always find all the solutions, yet we know what
   we strive for, and we disallow what we disapprove of. (19)