Israel Seizes Syrian Land

By Walter E. Block

Israel-Lebanon-Syria border Conflict 2023  By Quetz72 derivative work. Original work by Veggies and Ecrusized. – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0

The world community is once again aghast at the behavior of Israel under the leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu. What have they done this time to arouse the ire of public opinion? The charges come thick and fast. This country has stolen land from Syria. The Jewish state has once again resorted to land theft. Israel has engaged in imperialism and in a violation of private property rights.

Here he is, with his hand clearly ensconced in the cookie jar: Benjamin Netanyahu stated that the Syrian part of the Golan will “forever be an inseparable part” of Israel. Land theft does not get any clearer than that, many have said.

For example, the always reliable (in such matters as bashing Israel) Al Jazeera reported that “The Qatari Foreign Ministry said … that Doha considers the Israeli incursion ‘a dangerous development and a blatant attack on Syria’s sovereignty and unity as well as a flagrant violation of international law’”. Further, that: “Saudi Arabia slammed the Israeli moves …, saying that they confirm ‘Israel’s continued violation of the rules of international law and its determination to sabotage Syria’s chances of restoring its security, stability and territorial integrity.’”

States an anonymous author writing for LewRockwell.com: “The recent seizure of Syrian land on the Golan Heights by Israel is an ominous example of expansionism at its worst, in complete violation of property rights,

Reported the equally reliable (in this regard) Guardian: “The UN said on Monday that the move constituted a violation of a 1974 disengagement agreement between Israel and Syria. ‘There should be no military forces or activities in the area of separation. And Israel and Syria must continue to uphold the terms of that 1974 agreement, and preserve stability in the Golan,’said Stéphane Dujarric, spokesperson for the UN secretary general, António Guterres.”

And in the view of Reddit: “… such a move would likely be considered a violation of international law, as the territory in question is disputed. Unilateral annexation or occupation would undermine Israel’s standing in the international community” (they must have comedians writing for them; it is difficult to see how “Israel’s standing” could sink any lower than it already is).

Let us take a deep breath and consider the following. Suppose Canada had seized Montana from the US. Posit that they would treat the citizenry of this state reasonably well. They would make “The Big Sky Country” the eleventh of their now 10 provinces. The Great White North would offer Montanans equal representation along with the other 10 in its parliament, etc. The federal government would tax their newly acquired province the same as all the others and treat them equally every imaginable manner.

Or, posit that the United States had done the same with regard to the Canadian province of British Columbia. Again, the US would act in a similar manner. This former Canadian province would become the 51st state. It would be awarded two senators and a proportionate number of congressmen, and treated in exactly the same way as the other 50 states in every other way imaginable.

Would either of these occurrences deserve the characterization of land theft or stealing property or a property rights violation? Well, yes and no. Yes, on the assumption that the US “owned” Montana, and that Canada “owned” British Columbia. No, on the ground that this would be an improper extension of these concepts from the private to the public sector.

Now consider the following. Farmer Jones seizes the lower forty acres of what was previously the entirely justified property of farmer Smith. Jones starts planting and reaping in this territory; he allows only his cows and sheep to graze there. Jones, for some reason does not demur (maybe Jones is more powerful than Smith; maybe the former has bribed the government to acquiesce in this alteration). Jones now holds title to this terrain. Can this transfer of land titles be regarded as theft, as stealing, as a violation of property rights. You are darned tootin’ it can be. Actually, this is a veritable paradigm case of expropriation of property. Smith previously “owned” this property. Without any justification whatsoever, Jones is now the “owner” of it. This is blatant theft, robbery, a property rights violation.

Notice how different this is from the US and Canada cases mentioned above. Note the disanalogy. And, yet, the critics of Israel blithely elide over this gigantic distinction. Yes, Israel has seized some land previously belonging to Syria. But to call this theft, or stealing, or a property rights violation is a gigantic stretch. One might even go out on the proverbial limb and call this analogy invalid. It is not robbery at all.

The above is, merely, a verbal dispute. Here is an even more important consideration. Who, which person, which organization, is now the proper “owner” of Syria? That would be Abu Mohammed al-Jolani, the leader of this organization, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). Who, which person, which organization, was the previous the “proper owner” of Syria? That would be Bashar al-Assad and his Alawite organization, if we are to maintain the fiction that this is a valid analogy. If we are to employ the previously articulated (invalid) nomenclature, Jolani, just like Jones, “stole” the property of Assad, who now takes on the role of Smith. There was land theft of the entire country of Syria on the part of Jolani, and the victim of this stealing was Assad. Jolani violated the property rights of Assad.

Waitasec. Jolani did not “steal” the entire territory of Syria from Assad. Netanyahu also “robbed” a teeny bit of it, that lying to the east of the Golan Heights! Jolani can “properly” be accused not of pickpocketing the entire country, but, rather, only, the overwhelming majority of it. So he and Netanyahu are in the same category: thieves, and equally deserving of the characterization.

But Jolani is far more guilty. After all, he robbed almost 71,500 square miles. How many square miles did that thief, Netanyahu, rip off? He robbed only 155 square miles. So, HTS is a major imperialist; Israel is only a pipsqueak in this regard. Jolani is a major felon. Netanyahu is guilty, merely, of failing to come to a full stop at a stop sign, in comparison. You do the math.

So where is outraged world opinion at this blatant, gigantic, humongous, gargantuan robbery of HTS? Why are they focusing, only, solely, on no one else, but Israel. Surely, Jolani is a major leaguer; Netanyahu is only a little leaguer. We all know the answer to that one. Just in case there is someone out there in ignorance of this primordial fact, this is due to anti-Semitism.

This, too, is an insufficient justification of the recent land accretion of Israel’s. It only demonstrates the wild-eyed, unhinged, manner in which world opinion evaluates the doings of this country, compared to other nations. Just because there are bigger thieves out there hardly justifies a small property rights violation, on the invalid assumption that this is an accurate characterization of what is now occurring in the Middle East.

How, then, can this latest move in the direction of a greater Israel be justified? It can be done on the basis of preemption. When someone is coming at you with a knife and blood in their eye yelling “kill all Jews” and you are one of them, are you obliged to wait until he actually sticks this knife into your chest before you take defensive action? Must you wait until he is only ten feet away from you? Of course not. Sometimes, preemptive action is justified. So the question, the issue, is not whether or not Israel stole some private property from Syria. It did not, by any stretch of the imagination. It is, rather, does HTS constitute a reasonable threat to Israel?

And the answer emanating from any fair minded person is, “What, you have to ask such a stupid question?” Israel is beset on all sides by its sworn enemies. The Jewish state has been under almost continuous attack ever since 1948, with but a few months of peace here and there scattered throughout, while its attackers lick their well-deserved wounds and get ready for the next of their incessant incursions and mass murders. (And before 1948, the creation of this country, there were numerous pogroms.) If there is any nation in the entire world justified in a preemptive intrusion into the territory held by a neighbor it is this one. Moreover, Syria has long been used as a staging ground for Iran and its HHH proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthies. Thus, there is even more justification for this “land theft” than would otherwise be the case.

Netanyahu’s recent entirely justified Israeli expansion is not theft. It is not robbery. It is not a violation of property rights. It is a purely defensive action. If its neighbors do not much like a Greater Israel, they have an option they can easily engage in: Stop Attacking Israel! Then and only then will this country limit its expansion to an upward, vertical direction, not horizontally.