Today it is already clear that the first Lebanon war was the most unnecessary war in Israeli history and certainly the most successful. More than 650 members of the security forces were killed in it, and thousands were injured. Many many IDF soldiers returned home mentally exhausted.
Watch this week’s article here 11
“A confused army that sits and takes care of itself, within a hostile population that it does not understand, and everything it does, it snatches. It was an experience of continuous loss, and this experience is an intense experience for me and my generation, and it, I think it also affected Israel’s behavior. And of the IDF many years later, “says military commentator Ofer Shelach, who fought it.
The Israeli stay in the battered country from the north lasted for 20 years until the hasty withdrawal in 2000. But the historical question, which also reached the courts in Israel and the United States, remains: What did Begin know about the front?
Sharon’s military secretary, Oded Shamir: “This is the first time, in the books I read about the Lebanon war, that I found that the picture described there of the relationship between the prime minister and the defense minister is described in a very, very accurate and true way.”
In a new book, “1982 – Lebanon The Road to War”, the historian Dr. Yigal Kipnis claims: Begin is not deceived, but led Israel to war. . Begin knew better than anyone the umbrella, not the military, the political. He knew why he wanted to come. His worldview was orderly, ideological and value-based, “the author of the book claims.
Oded Shamir was the military secretary of Ariel Sharon, the then defense minister. “In my memory, this is the first time, in the books I have read about the Lebanon war, that I have found that the picture described there of the relationship between the prime minister and the defense minister is described in a very, very accurate and true way,” he said.
Kipnis’ book is innovative. For the first time, he divides the responsibility between Begin and Sharon, and does not place all the responsibility for the Lebanon war on Sharon, as he has been until now. Claims that led to defamation lawsuits – Sharon against the “Time” newspaper in the United States and against the journalist Uzi Benziman in Israel.
The head of the operations division at the General Staff of the time, and the head of the future security service, Uri Sagi, agree with the claim presented in the book: “Menachem Begin, as I understand it, is not deceived by the worldview. On the contrary, he may have even led it.”
Maj. Gen. Sagi had a good point of view on the decision-makers in the days leading up to the operation: “There were questions. I think I understood that he has a worldview, for the prime minister. He is not just carrying on waves of insights from the defense minister and / or the defense establishment.”
The book, published by Dvir, sharpens the debate between the “Beginists” and the “Sharonists.” Kipnis marks Begin as the thinker and leader of the war that eventually led to his resignation. One moment made Ariel Sharon publicly perceived as guilty, and this happened on the second day of the war when Prime Minister Begin arrives at the Beaufort summit, meets the fighters and seems disconnected, out of date on the night events and the number of casualties. Sharon in front of him, is perceived by the public as someone who knows and perhaps someone who hides.
Going back: Oranim’s plan to invade Lebanon was presented to the government in various versions until the spring of 1982, but was rejected by the ministers. Following the assassination attempt on Israel’s ambassador to Britain in June 1982, Israel decides to launch an operation. The debate is: what has the government decided, a pine plan or a limited operation?
Begin’s secretary of state and close aide, Dan Meridor, recalls: “The approved plan spoke of 40 kilometers, period. The intention was only to prevent the shooting, is it also justified to make Lebanon a state of peace? Certainly. No”.
“Officers would come to me, people from the field. They would say, ‘Look, what you’re reporting is not like that, it’s not happening.’ “Not me personally, and what is happening on the ground, and it bothered me a lot. And then a kind of rivalry developed between Sharon and Azriel Nevo and I, between me and maybe others, because of this thing. It really was, and the question was whether it was planned in advance or it was in retrospect,” he said. Meridor.
Sharon feels that all the arrows of criticism and blame for the entanglement in Lebanon are directed at him and skip over others, with an emphasis on Begin. He did not give up. He handled defamation lawsuits, and in 1987 came to a founding speech at Tel Aviv University to make order. The audience included former senior officers, generals and quite a few politicians.
“The very raising of the arrival in Beirut was not a novelty for the commanders because everyone already knew the Oranim plan, knew their expected missions in its framework, some even managed to tour the expected war sectors near Beirut,” Sharon claimed at the time.
And here’s the controversy. Former time journalist Uzi Benziman quoted a conversation between Begin and his son Benny in which the former prime minister said that if Sharon planned to come to Beirut then he as prime minister was misled. Meridor is also convinced – Begin is telling the truth in this controversy.
Meridor on Begin’s retirement: “I saw the man whose shoulders are swimming more and more, he is sad, self-contained, has not lost his mind and understanding for a moment, but is self-absorbed in the feeling that things are going badly.”
“A protest against the Lebanon war in the end, and this again, Baginists will tell you, in my eyes, as someone who looked at it from the outside, is it the one who brings Begin, or is it probably the straw that breaks Begin’s back and sends him home,” concludes the process. Begin from his position.
“I saw it happen,” Meridor testifies. “I saw the man whose shoulders are swimming more and more, he is sad, self-contained, has not lost his mind and understanding for a moment, but is self-conscious in the sense that it is going bad.”