Israeli Violations

A list of UN Resolutions against "Israel"

Here is a list of UN resolutions that Israel has not complied. As far as I know they have ignored every single resolution. But the situation is far worse than would at first appear, it involves the serious distortion of the official Security Council record by the profligate use by the United States of its veto power. (See Table)

Israel's defiance goes back to its very beginnings. This collection of resolutions criticizing Israel is unmatched by the record of any other nation.

1955-1992:

* Resolution 106: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid".
* Resolution 111: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
* Resolution 127: " . . . 'recommends' Israel suspends it's 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 162: " . . . 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions".
* Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria".
* Resolution 228: " . . . 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
* Resolution 237: " . . . 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
* Resolution 248: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
* Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of
* Resolution 252: " . . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
* Resolution 256: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation".
* Resolution 259: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
* Resolution 262: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
* Resolution 265: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
* Resolution 267: " . . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
*Resolution 270: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
* Resolution 271: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
* Resolution 279: " . . . 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 280: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 285: " . . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
* Resolution 298: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem".
* Resolution 313: " . . . 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 316: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 317: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
* Resolution 332: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 337: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty".
* Resolution 347: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 425: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 427: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
* Resolution 444: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
* Resolution 446: " . . . 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious
obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 450: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
* Resolution 452: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
* Resolution 465: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel's settlements program".
* Resolution 467: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon".
* Resolution 468: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
* Resolution 469: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the council's order not to deport Palestinians".
* Resolution 471: " . . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 476: " . . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'".
* Resolution 478: " . . . 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'".
* Resolution 484: " . . . 'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors".
* Resolution 487: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's
nuclear facility".
* Resolution 497: " . . . 'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
* Resolution 498: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
* Resolution 501: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
* Resolution 509: " . . . 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
* Resolution 515: " . . . 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and
allow food supplies to be brought in".
* Resolution 517: " . . . 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 518: " . . . 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
* Resolution 520: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut".
* Resolution 573: " . . . 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters.
* Resolution 587: " . . . 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
* Resolution 592: " . . . 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
* Resolution 605: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians.
* Resolution 607: " . . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
* Resolution 608: " . . . 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
* Resolution 636: " . . . 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
* Resolution 641: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 672: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
* Resolution 673: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United Nations.
* Resolution 681: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 694: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
* Resolution 726: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 799: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for there immediate return.

1993 to 1995
UNGA Res 50/21 - The Middle East Peace Process (Dec 12, 1995)
UNGA Res 50/22 - The Situation in the Middle East (Dec 12, 1995)
UNGA Res 49/35 - Assistance to Palestinian Refugees (Jan 30 1995) l
UNGA Res 49/36 - Human Rights of Palestinian Refugees (Jan 30 1995)
UNGA Res 49/62 - Question of Palestine (Feb 3 1995)
UNGA Res 49/78 - Nuclear Proliferation in Mideast (Jan 11 1995)
UNGA Res 49/87 - Situation in the Middle East (Feb 7 1995)
UNGA Res 49/88 - The Middle East Peace Process (Feb 7 1995)
UNGA Res 49/149- Palestinian Right- Self-Determination (Feb 7 1995)
UNGA Res 48/213 - Assistance to Palestinian Refugees (Mar 15, 1994)
UNGA Res 48/40 - UNRWA for Palestinian Refugees (Dec 13, 1993)
UNGA Res 48/41 - Human Rights in the Territories (Dec 10 1993)
UNGA Res 48/58 - The Middle East Peace Process (Dec 14 1993)
UNGA Res 48/59 - The Situation in the Middle East (Dec 14 1993)
UNGA Res 48/71 - Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in Mideast (Dec 16 1993)
UNGA Res 48/78 - Israeli Nuclear Armanent (Dec 16 1993)
UNGA Res 48/94 - Self-Determination & Independence (Dec 20 1993)
UNGA Res 48/124- Non-interference in Elections (Dec 20 1993)
UNGA Res 48/158- Question of Palestine (Dec 20 1993)
UNGA Res 48/212- Repercussions of Israeli Settlements (Dec 21 1993)
==========+++===========

U.S. Vetoes of UN Resolutions Critical of Israel
(1972-2002)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vetoes: 1972-1982
Subject Date & Meeting US Rep Casting Veto Vote
Palestine: Syrian-Lebanese Complaint. 3 power draft resolution 2/10784 9/10/1972 Bush 13-1, 1
Palestine: Examination of Middle East Situation. 8-power draft resolution (S/10974) 7/2/1973 Scali 13-1, 0 (China not partic.)
Palestine: Egyptian-Lebanese Complaint. 5-power draft power resolution (S/11898) 12/8/1975 Moynihan 13-1, 1
Palestine: Middle East Problem, including Palestinian question. 6-power draft resolution (S/11940) 1/26/1976 Moynihan 9-1,3 (China & Libya not partic.)
Palestine: Situation in Occupied Arab Territories. 5-power draft resolution (S/12022) 3/25/1976 Scranton 14-1,0
Palestine: Report on Committee on Rights of Palestinian People. 4-power draft resolution (S/121119) 6/29/1976 Sherer 10-1,4
Palestine: Palestinian Rights. Tunisian draft resolution. (S/13911) 4/30/1980 McHenry 10-1,4
Palestine: Golan Heights. Jordan draft resolution. (S/14832/Rev. 2) 1/20/1982 Kirkpatrick 9-1,5
Palestine: Situation in Occupied Territories, Jordan draft resolution (S/14943) 4/2/1982 Lichenstein 13-1,1
Palestine: Incident at the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem. 4-power draft resolution 4/20/1982 Kirpatrick 14-1, 0
Palestine: Conflict in Lebanon. Spain draft resolution. (S/15185) 6/8/1982 Kirpatrick 14-1,0
Palestine: Conflict in Lebanon. France draft resolution. (S/15255/Rev. 2) 6/26/1982 Lichenstein 14-1
Palestine: Conflict in Lebanon. USSR draft resolution. (S/15347/Rev. 1, as orally amended) 8/6/1982 Lichenstein 11-1,3
Palestine: Situation in Occupied Territories, 20-power draft resolution (S/15895) 8/2/1983 Lichenstein 13-1,1

Security Council Vetoes/Negative voting 1983-present
Subject Date Vote
Occupied Arab Territories: Wholesale condemnation of Israeli settlement policies - not adopted 1983
S. Lebanon: Condemns Israeli action in southern Lebanon. S/16732 9/6/1984 Vetoed: 13-1 (U.S.), with 1 abstention (UK)
Occupied Territories: Deplores "repressive measures" by Israel against Arab population. S/19459. 9/13/1985 Vetoed: 10-1 (U.S.), with 4 abstentions (Australia, Denmark, UK, France)
Lebanon: Condemns Israeli practices against civilians in southern Lebanon. S/17000. 3/12/1985 Vetoed: 11-1 (U.S.), with 3 abstentions (Australia, Denmark, UK)
Occupied Territories: Calls upon Israel to respect Muslim holy places. S/17769/Rev. 1 1/30/1986 Â Vetoed: 13-1 (US), with one abstention (Thailand)
Lebanon: Condemns Israeli practices against civilians in southern Lebanon. S/17730/Rev. 2. 1/17/1986 Vetoed: 11-1 (U.S.), with 3 abstentions (Australia, Denmark, UK)
Libya/Israel: Condemns Israeli interception of Libyan plane. S/17796/Rev. 1. 2/6/1986 Vetoed: 10 -1 (US), with 4 abstentions (Australia, Denmark, France, UK)
Lebanon: Draft strongly deplored repeated Israeli attacks against Lebanese territory and other measures and practices against the civilian population; (S/19434) 1/18/1988 vetoed 13-1 (US), with 1 abstention (UK)
Lebanon: Draft condemned recent invasion by Israeli forces of Southern Lebanon and repeated a call for the immediate withdrawal of all Israeli forces from Lebanese territory;Â (S/19868) 5/10/1988 vetoed 14-1 (US)
Lebanon: Draft strongly deplored the recent Israeli attack against Lebanese territory on 9 December 1988; (S/20322) 12/14/1988 vetoed 14-1 (US)
Occupied territories: Draft called on Israel to accept de jure applicability of the 4th Geneva Convention;Â (S/19466) 1988 vetoed 14-1 (US)
Occupied territories: Draft urged Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention, rescind the order to deport Palestinian civilians, and condemned policies and practices of Israel that violate the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories;Â (S/19780) 1988 vetoed 14-1 (US)
Occupied territories: Strongly deplored Israeli policies and practices in the occupied territories, and strongly deplored also Israel's continued disregard of relevant Security Council decisions. 2/17/1989 Vetoed 14-1 (US)
Occupied territories: Condemned Israeli policies and practices in the occupied territories. 6/9/1989 Vetoed 14-1 (US)
Occupied territories: Deplored Israel's policies and practices in the occupied territories. 11/7/1989 Vetoed 14-1 (US)
Occupied territories: NAM draft resolution to create a commission and send three security council members to Rishon Lezion, where an Israeli gunmen shot down seven Palestinian workers. 5/31/1990 Vetoed 14-1 (US)
Middle East: Confirms that the expropriation of land by Israel in East Jerusalem is invalid and in violation of relevant Security Council resolutions and provisions of the Fourth Geneva convention; expresses support of peace process, including the Declaration of Principles of 9/13/1993 5/17/1995 Vetoed 14-1 (US)
Middle East: Calls upon Israeli authorities to refrain from all actions or measures, including settlement activities. 3/7/1997 Vetoed 14-1 (US)
Middle East: Demands that Israel cease construction of the settlement in east Jerusalem (called Jabal Abu Ghneim by the Palestinians and Har Homa by Israel), as well as all the other Israeli settlement activity in the occupied territories 3/21/1997 Vetoed 13-1,1 (US)
Call for UN Observers Force in West Bank, Gaza 3/27/2001 Vetoed 9-1 (US),
with four abstentions
(Britain, France, Ireland and Norway)
Condemned acts of terror, demanded an end to violence and the establishment of a monitoring mechanism to bring in observers. 12/15/2001 Vetoed 12-1 (US)
with two abstentions (Britain and Norway)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: U.S. State Department

Causes of Modern Terrorism

Causes of Modern Terrorism

http://wwwnew.towson.edu/polsci/ppp/sp97/terror/causes.html

Every terrorist needs a particular cause to justify the use of terror tactics both to his own psyche and to the audience he hopes reach. Most terrorists are not deranged or psychotic individuals. From their point of view, terror tactics are logical, valid activities to achieve a particular goal. These individuals do not consider themselves insane nor do they want the world to consider them insane.

The modern wave of global terrorism that began in the second half of the 20th century is rooted in specific economic, social and political grievances. The validity of these grievances is of course debatable. This page will profile origins of terrorist movements in three parts of the world—the Middle East, Europe and Latin America.

Middle East Terrorism

The current global wave of terrorism, in many ways, originated and was fueled by events in the Middle East, particularly the ongoing Arab-Israeli conflict. Some of the world's most violent terrorist acts have been committed in the name of Palestinian self determination and the destruction of Israel.

Israel's official creation in 1948 began an intermittent conflict which lasts to this day. Palestinians maintain Israeli lands (?) were promised to them by British colonial authorities. Israel's Arab neighbors failed to destroy Israel by conventional military means, so radical Palestinians believed terror tactics were the only other choice. Even prior to Israel's formation, Jewish settlers used terrorism against British colonial authorities and Palestinian Arabs living in the area to affect the creation of a Jewish state. Consequently, Arabs reciprocated. In 1964, the major Palestinian terrorist groups formed a coalition called the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) under the leadership of Yasser Arafat. The PLO's stated mission included the annihilation of Israel and establishment of a Palestinian state. The terror escalated to a global scale after the 1967 Six Day War when Israel annexed Palestinian lands on the west bank of the Jordan River and Gaza Strip near the Sinai Peninsula.

The causes of Middle East terrorism are mainly political. The dispute is over possession of land. Palestinians considered the territory occupied by Israel rightfully theirs. Aside from the land dispute, a social element is also present in this situation. Israel is the only non-Muslim nation in the Middle East, therefore it vividly stands out as "different," or an "invader." Islam is more than just a religion to its faithful. It is a prescription for life; dictating social norms in addition to civil and criminal law. The existence of Israel is viewed as an invasion of the western world's "corrupting" influence.

To fundamentalist Muslims the West, led by the United States, is characterized by the inequity and exploitation of capitalism, a philosophy centered on the individual. Islam on the other hand, is based on a more egalitarian and group-focused philosophy. But the main reason Muslims are opposed to Western influence concerns the attractiveness of capitalism. While Marxists have attempted to paint capitalism as evil and decadent, they have failed to account for its comparative efficiency in allocating resources and generally raising living standards. Coupled with the fact that life in the West is often glamorously portrayed by the media, religious leaders fear Muslims will be corrupted by Western greed and forsake their Muslim faith. This fact is one explanation for the increase in Muslim fundamentalism in the Middle East.

Fundamentalist terrorist groups like Hizballah and Hamas are infamous for their fanatical tactics, most notably suicide bombings. Religious zealots will be recruited by these groups to take explosives, either strapped to their bodies or in vehicles, and detonate those explosives, killing themselves, and destroying the assigned target. In 1983, a Hizballah suicide bomber drove the bomb-laden truck which destroyed the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon killing over 200 Marines. More recently, Hamas suicide bombers have blown-up a number of buses in Israel. The Muslim fanatics are convinced killing themselves in the process of killing their enemies is a path to martyrdom and eternal salvation.

Middle East terrorism has fueled the global wave of terrorism because a variety of terrorist groups (IRA, ETA, Japanese Red Army, Baader-Meinhof Gang, etc.) have received training and support from Palestinian terrorist groups, particularly the PLO.

European Terrorism

A number of rather small, elitist terrorist movements evolved in Europe between the late 1960's and early 1980's. Most were left-wing Marxist-Leninist or nihilist movements which grew out of the activism and student protests of the 1960's. Their motivations included economics and idealism. Western Europe suffered an economic downturn and high unemployment in the 1960's, which European Marxist scholars assailed as evidence of capitalism's failure. Graduating college students, who encountered flat labor markets, blamed governments and business leaders for the economic hardship.

Extremists in these left-wing student movements felt violence was necessary to destroy the industrialized capitalist structures they found detrimental to society. These groups were mainly composed of well educated idealistic individuals seeking to "reform" society. Examples of groups include Italy's Red Brigades (BR), West Germany's Baader-Meinhof Gang (also known as the Red Army Faction) and France's Direct Action (AD). These groups wreaked havoc throughout the 1970's, targeting business and political leaders. The most notorious terrorist act was committed by the Red Brigades, when they kidnapped then murdered former Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro in 1978.

The oldest of Europe's recent terrorist insurgencies also have far different motivations for their respective struggles. Northern Ireland's Provisional Irish Republican Army (PIRA) and Spain's Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA) wish to secede from their nations.

In 1922 Ireland was granted independence from Britain with the stipulation that its six predominantly Protestant northeastern counties (known as Ulster) would remain part of the United Kingdom. Many Irish never truly accepted a division of their nation. The Catholic minority that remained in Ulster was then discriminated against in terms of employment, housing and effective political participation. Catholics launched a civil rights movement in 1968 which was violently repressed by Protestants. The stage was then set for a pattern of violence that continues today. Radical Catholic nationalists called for Ulster's secession from the U.K. and union with the Republic of Ireland.

Extremist elements of the Irish Republican Army (IRA—guerrilla group formed in 1919 to secure Ireland's independence from Britain) then split to form the PIRA, or "Provos," in 1969 and embraced terrorism, claiming IRA's tactics were too timid to be effective in reuniting Ireland.

Social, political and economic elements led to this conflict. First and foremost, economic and political discrimination led to Catholics in Ulster becoming an underclass. Second, Catholic Irishmen wanted to be reunited with the rest of the Irish nation. These factors culminated in the Irish civil rights movement and the choice to use terrorism to affect reunion.

The Basque ETA was formed in 1959 as a political movement against General Franco, the fascist leader of Spain. The movement's goal was the creation of an independent state for Spain's Basque ethnic group. The Basques have been oppressed and their culture attacked under Franco. Initially the group received a great deal of support in its anti-fascist efforts, particularly from France. But Western support waned as the ETA made greater use of terror tactics.

The ETA's struggle stemmed from political oppression the Basques had suffered, and the Spanish government's attempt to destroy their culture and assimilate them into Spanish culture. Although many Basque grievances were settled after the end of Franco's rule, the ETA vows to maintain its struggle until Basques are given a sovereign homeland.

Latin American Terrorism

Terrorism in Latin America is essentially a product of class conflict. Until recently, nearly all Latin American nations were controlled by corrupt authoritarian regimes who gave little consideration to the welfare of their people. The result—a majority of Latin Americans live in poverty. The undereducated and impoverished people were very receptive to the egalitarian Marxist, Leninist and Maoist philosophies espoused by extremists.

Nearly every Latin American nation has had, or currenlty has, an active guerrilla or terrorist insurgency. The driving force behind most of these groups has been a desire to reorganize society along socialist lines, remove foreign business interests and redistribute land and wealth.

Major Latin American terrorist groups include Peru's Sendero Luminoso (Shining Path) and Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA), Colombia's National Liberation Army (ELN) and Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), and Chile's Manuel Rodriguez Patriotic Front (FPMR).

Click here or the image to view a video clip allegedly showing MRTA terrorists preparing to seize the Japanese ambassador's residence in Lima, Peru on December 17, 1996.

Occupation drives suicide

Occupation, not Islam, ‘drives suicide attacks’
By MARILYN H. KARFELD,

Senior Staff Reporter, Clevland Jewish News

I must congratulate the Cleveland Jewish News for publishing this. It takes a lot of guts to do it and it is the right thing to do. We need to place truth above everything else.

We are constantly working to knock these stereotypical myths about people, any people, and it is a breath of fresh air to see this piece in this news paper. It breaks the myths.

I am immensely pleased to read this column and forward it to as many groups as I can, there is a myth out there that the Jewish Americans are blindly loyal to Israel to the detriment of the interests of the United States. The second one is their intolerance and aggression towards any one who is critical of Israel policies as demonstrated against former President Jimmy Carter's, even though the President has done more good to Israel than any president since his tenure. He means good for Israel and good for Palestinians. One can never have undue advantages over the other, such benefits are temporary and deleterious.

Re:
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2007/06/israeli-palestinian-conflict.html
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2007/06/rabbis-on-israeli-occupation.html
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2007/06/jewish-news-suicide-attacks.html

Mike Ghouse
www.MikeGhouse.net


Occupation, not Islam, ‘drives suicide attacks’
By MARILYN H. KARFELD, Senior Staff Reporter
http://www.clevelandjewishnews.com/articles/2007/06/08/news/local/islam0608.txt


In the wake of Sept. 11, Robert Pape, a professor in international security affairs at The University of Chicago, speculated on TV news shows on the causes of suicide terrorism.

“Like everyone else, I jumped to the conclusion that it was radical Islam,” he says. “I even bought a Koran to see what’s wrong with Islam.”

After searching for data on suicide terrorism and finding that the government did not begin to track such attacks until 2000, Pape began to collect his own information. He compiled data on 462 suicide bombings from 1980 to 2004 and later updated his findings to 2006. His book Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism was published in 2005.

Contrary to his initial impression, Pape discovered that half of the 462 suicide attacks were by people who were secular or even anti-religious. The world leaders in suicide bombings were members of the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka, a Marxist and Hindu group.

Over 30% of Muslim suicide bombers were not Islamic fundamentalists, Pape learned. For instance, some belonged to an anti-religious extremist Marxist group in Turkey, the Kurdish Workers Party or PKK.

“Over 95% of all suicide attacks are not religious,” Pape says. Rather, they are driven by the political goal of compelling foreign combat forces, with their tanks and fighter aircraft, to leave territory “the terrorists consider their homeland or they prize greatly.”

Only 5% are random, isolated attacks, the products of any ideology, religion included, Pape adds.

“Every suicide campaign since 1980 has been carried out by groups seeking self-determination for territory,” he says.

Pape spoke to the CJN before addressing the annual banquet and fundraiser of the Cleveland chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). The following day, he spoke to the counter-terrorism task force of the Cleveland field office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

In the Jewish state, Pape says, 75% of suicide bombings are in Israel proper, directed against targets such as bus stops and pizzerias. Suicide terrorists avoid what he calls “hard” targets, such as railroad stations and even shopping malls, which are too well defended.

At settler outposts in the West Bank, Pape says terrorists will attack and run away so they can do it again and again before getting shot. “Inside Israel proper, they know it’s highly likely the best way to achieve killing is through suicide attacks.”

If suicide bombers were motivated solely to become martyrs and go to heaven, they would stand in front of Israeli tanks. “No,” he insists. “The motivation is to kill the largest number of people. It’s not about how to die.”

Suicide bombers are typically walk-in volunteers from blue-collar and middle-class backgrounds with no experi- ence in killing. Of the 462 he studied, 232 were Arabs. They are not being brainwashed in madrassas, he says. “They are already perfectly willing to die.” They are then taught the mechanics of how to commit suicide bombings.

Only 10% are poor. “These are not individuals who have nothing to lose,” Pape says. “They would have led productive lives.”

They are also highly educated, with 54% having some college education, compared with 12% in the surrounding society.

The common denominator “driving suicide attacks” in the Jewish state is anger at the Israeli occupation, says Pape. “Deep anger is the critical circumstance. When you mix it with personal motives of revenge and social prestige, you trigger the suicide terrorist.”

When Israel withdrew from Gaza and allowed Hamas to win a parliamentary election, the “second intifada came to a halt,” he maintains.

In his 2003 article in American Political Science Review that profiled suicide bombers, Pape advised Israel on how to stop the second intifada.

“Israel should unilaterally withdraw from Gaza and areas of the West Bank and build a security fence,” he suggested. “Israel did about 70% of what I said. I would have moved the fence to the Green Line. Suicide attacks since summer 2004 are down 90%.”

Hamas is still an Islamic fundamentalist organization, he points out. If religion motivated suicide attacks in Israel, they would be continuing.

The Defense Department has been funding Pape’s studies, and he has spoken in Washington to the CIA, Department of Homeland Security, the National Security Agency, the FBI and members of Congress. Before the 3rd Infantry Division was sent to Iraq as part of President Bush’s surge of 21,500 combat troops, Pape addressed about 150 of its officers.

The recent surge of American troops in Iraq will make a bad situation worse, Pape says. “If we remove our troops, there will be a substantial decline in the number of suicide terrorist attacks.”

Lebanon exemplifies his conclusions, Pape claims. Hezbollah was born in July 1982, created by the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.

When Israel finally withdrew from southern Lebanon in 2000, Hezbollah did not follow Israeli soldiers to Tel Aviv, Pape notes. “The suicide attacks stopped completely. To this day, there’s not been another suicide attack by Hezbollah.”

If Israel would completely withdraw from the West Bank, Pape predicts that Hamas would end its suicide attacks.

He acknowledges that Hamas keeps saying they want to run Jews out of Israel proper. But Pape says they aren’t doing this through suicide bombings. While it’s possible that Hamas would some day adopt this strategy, he says governments do not build policies on things that are purely hypothetical.

As for Iraq, the U.S. has an interest in a stable Persian Gulf region and maintaining access to oil. We “don’t cut and run,” Pape says. “But our policy can’t be to stay and die.”

The U.S. needs a third way that begins with our core interest, access to oil, which is integral to our economy, Pape says. “Offshore balancing” is what he recommends. “Military forces are poised (outside of Iraq), ready to intervene if necessary. We wouldn’t go to war to spread democracy at the barrel of a gun.”

Pape insists he is all for humanitarian intervention but not at serious risk to American lives. “Our current policy is increasing the risk of another 9/11. It’s creating so much hatred.”

Unlike Vietnam, where America simply pulled out its troops with minimal repercussions, immediate withdrawal is not possible in Iraq, he believes. In Vietnam, the U.S. had no real interests. But leaving Iraq abruptly would damage U.S. interest in Persian Gulf oil and hurt the world’s economy.

Instead, Pape suggests a phased withdrawal beginning this year and taking place over the next three or four years. It took Al Qaeda six years after its first terrorist attacks in 1995 to come to the U.S. for 9/11, he notes.

“This, unfortunately, is the reality of Iraq.” Occupying Iraq has been “just foolish. It’s a tragedy that leaves us in the worst of all possible worlds. It’s time to change policies.”

mkarfeld@cjn.org