In Depth: How Israel Created the European Refugee Crisis
By Mike Peinovich
The world has looked on with shock and horror at the Jewish bombardment of innocent civilians in Palestine over the last few days. Apparently even Israel thinks their actions are indefensible, since on May 15th, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) destroyed a building housing the Associated Press (AP) and other media outlets in Gaza with the intention of stopping images of Palestinian suffering from reaching the rest of the world. Following the attack on the AP, Israel stepped up its bombing of civilian targets, killing dozens of Palestinians with airstrikes on populated streets.
But the Zionist strategy entails more than simply brutally punishing Palestinians and other Arab populations that stand up to them. They also utilize an extensive network of Jewish-run NGOs and refugee resettlement agencies in the West to empty the Middle-East of potential opponents.
Since the creation of the Jewish state in 1948, refugee resettlement outside its borders has always been a major strategic goal. A 2013 article from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz revealed secret archival documents showing that from the very beginning, Zionist Jews saw Europe as the destination of choice for the Arabs they had displaced.
In the first half of the 1960s, the Foreign Ministry continued to examine plans to encourage the emigration of Arab refugees from the Middle East to Europe, particularly to France and Germany. One option that was considered was to find them jobs in Germany, which was then in dire need of working hands. During 1962, Israeli officials examined the possibility of finding employment for Palestinian refugee laborers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The initial checks done for this plan, known as “Operation Worker,” and the correspondence involved, were kept completely under wraps.
This plan was eventually tabled since then Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meier feared it could generate a huge backlash from the German people. In the 1960s Israel was considerably less powerful and secure than it is today, so such bold plans had to be put on hold until later. But it demonstrates that foisting the Arabs on Europe as a form of racial revenge was on the minds of the Jews in Israel from the very beginning.
Demographics have always been at the forefront of Israeli policy, and their control over Western governments has long been used to ensure that Jews remain a demographic majority on their newly seized territory. Meier leveraged Jewish power in Washington to scuttle a 1961 plan spearheaded by President Kennedy to offer resettlement in Israel to the then 1.1 million Palestinian refugees displaced by the 1948 war.
In late 1961, in the wake of President Kennedy’s initiative, Dr. Joseph Johnson, from the Carnegie Endowment, was appointed a special representative to tackle the problem and to work with the parties involved to come up with a solution. The plan he devised − to distribute questionnaires to the Palestinian refugees and permit those who wished to return to Israel, subject to security considerations − stirred deep fears in Jerusalem.
Meir, who was appalled by the idea, wielded all the influence at her command in Washington in order to ensure that the plan met a quick death.
The Clean Break
The entire history of the Arab-Israeli conflict is beyond the scope of this article, but the roots of the current refugee invasion can be traced back to the year 1996 when the so-called “neo-conservative” movement was formalized with the publication of the now infamous memo “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm” by several Jewish foreign policy analysts at the Israeli Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies in Washington DC. The authors included well-known Jewish warmonger Richard Perle, and the Jew David Wurmser who would go on to be the Middle-East policy adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney during the George W. Bush administration.
The “clean break” memo recommended that Israel break with its old strategy of using the United States simply for defensive military aid and diplomatic cover, and instead start an aggressive war against the entire Arab world and Iran using the US military as a proxy army. In particular it recommended taking out Iraq and Syria.
Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria. This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.
A year later, in 1997, Jewish-Zionist “intellectuals” William Kristol and Robert Kagan set up the now infamous Project for the New American Century (PNAC) which recommended the United States engage in a massive military buildup to be used for pushing “democracy” around the world. Of the 25 signatories to PNAC’s statement of principles, 15 were Jewish and ten served in the George W. Bush administration, including Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz. Richard Perle has also served as chairman of PNAC.
PNAC’s focus was on “regime change” in Iraq, though they acknowledged that without some “catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor” this would be difficult to sell to the American people. That event came on 9/11, and the US subsequently invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003 at the behest of the Jewish-Zionist warmongers in the Bush administration.
According to a 2006 interview with retired General Wesley Clark, the decision to invade Iraq was made two weeks after 9/11, and there were even more ambitious plans in the works to invade “seven countries in five years.” Playing into popular conspiracy theories, Clark claimed this strategy was somehow connected to oil. He failed to mention that the plan he described had already been laid out in the “clean break” memo and PNAC policy papers written by various Jewish-Zionist officials in the Bush administration, all of which placed the issue of Israel’s security significantly ahead of oil issues. In fact, oil politics were mainly viewed as an impediment to Israel’s interests due to the strategic leverage oil has offered to Arab countries and Iran.
The issue of oil has always been used to distract Americans from the real reason for their government’s seemingly insane foreign policy in the Middle-East. If the US simply wanted secure access to oil, the last thing it would do would be to start wars and topple governments, thereby creating significant disruptions to world oil markets. Oil is often cited as the motivation for America’s longstanding policy of support for the barbaric regime in Saudi Arabia, making a farce of its claims to care about human rights and democracy. But with the Iraq War, the US showed it is more than willing to take out major oil producing states if Israel requires it. The longstanding friendly relationship between Saudi Arabia and Israel is a far better explanation for the US stance towards that country.
In 2011, civil wars broke out in Syria and Libya, both of which were fomented by the US acting on behalf of Israel. The nauseating refrain of “supporting democracy” has been trotted out by the US for years as a threadbare excuse to arm and fund terrorist militias in Syria to try to remove Syrian President Bashar Assad from power, while pretending to fight against the “Islamic State in Iraq and Syria” (ISIS) terrorist group.
A 2012 email published by Wikileaks from current Biden administration National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan to then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton clearly stated the US position regarding Islamist terrorist groups. Sullivan famously said that the US and Al Quaeda, who the US claims was responsible for 9/11, are on the same side in Syria.