THE ANGRY ARAB: Netflix’s
Mossad Propaganda
September 24, 2019
As’ad AbuKhalil says Arabs are pushing back against the distortions and
fabrications in “The Spy,” a new series based on the supposedly true
story of Israeli spy Eli Cohen and his exploits in Syria.
For too long,
Israeli propaganda has gotten away with tall tales about the story of failed
spy Eli Cohen.
Cohen was inserted into
Syria in 1961 (under a false name) and was discovered and hanged by Syrian
military intelligence in 1965. In another context, this story would have
been deemed a disaster for the intelligence agency which recruited this spy.
Instead, Israel has managed to spin and fabricate a large volume of lies about
Cohen’s ostensible exploits.
Whenever Israeli intelligence suffers defeats and failures it resorts to
its past successes and the relationship between the Mossad and Hollywood and
has proven to be invaluable for Israeli propaganda.
Netflix seems as closely tied
to Mossad as old Hollywood. In addition to a series about Egyptian spy Ashraf
Marwan (who Egyptian intelligence still insists was a double agent, although
most likely he was not), Netflix has come up with “The Spy,” a series about
Elie Cohen starring Sacha Baron Cohen.
Arab Pushback
This is not the first
American film depiction of Cohen: the book, “Our Man in Damascus” (which
clearly was a Mossad propaganda work) was also made into a movie years
ago. But Arabs are now more alert to Western distortions and fabrications
and have been quite quick to respond to the blatant inaccuracies and lies in
the new Netflix series. One Syrian writer counted 10 historical mistakes in the series, while others said that the movie
sets had no resemblances to Damascus whatsoever.
As these critics make clear, the entire premise of the Eli Cohen
fictitious plot is a figment of the Mossad’s imagination: that Cohen penetrated
deep into Syrian society and government and that he was able, during his first
phase while posing as a Syrian immigrant in Argentina, to befriend none other
than Amin Al-Hafiz (who later served in key positions in Syria). Israeli
and Western accounts talk about him befriending “the president of Syria” (in an
Israeli TV interview with Cohen’s widow, they even referred to him as Amin Al-Asad, confusing Syrian leaders).
There is only one problem
with that story. As Syrian historian, Sami Moubayed writes in Gulf News, Col. Amin Al-Hafiz
denied being stations as a military attaché during the time when Cohen was
there. Al-Hafiz arrived in Argentina in 1962, after Cohen’s departure.
And he was not in power when Cohen was in Syria (he was, in fact, an
interior minister and later served as a member of a ruling council).
There is not even a shred of evidence that Al-Hafiz ever met Cohen
except in his prison cell because he wanted to ask him questions about his
failed mission. And Hafiz denied categorically those claims of
acquaintance (they were made into a friendship in the Netflix series) in more
than one TV interview. The
Netflix series also draws upon the worst Zionist Orientalist sexist portrayal
of Arabs, including typical Israeli sexual humiliation of Arabs. There is a
scene where, as soon as Amin Al-Hafiz meets Cohen, Hafiz’s wife (a conservative
woman from Aleppo in real life) immediately reaches over and squeezes Cohen’s
genitals.
Collapsing Myth
Once you expose the lies
about Al-Hafiz, the entire Cohen myth collapses.
In the 1960s and 1970s the
Syrian Ba`th regime did assist the Mossad’s propaganda about Cohen. The
Ba'athists of Syria, who had hated Al-Hafiz due to a bitter factional feud, did
not want to tell the truth and deny that Hafiz ever met Cohen. They were
not displeased that Israeli propaganda embarrassed Al-Hafiz, who later defected
to Iraq and supported Saddam Husayn against the Asad regime.
The Netflix series even
introduces the founder of the Ba`th Party, Michel `Aflak, to the story,
claiming that he not only knew Cohen but proposed that Cohen hold a party for
key leaders on the night of the coup of 1963. `Aflak in the Netflix rendition
is a drinking partying man, while in reality, he was an austere ascetic known
for spending evenings in his modest home.
Much was made by Israeli
propaganda of Cohen’s friendship with a senior Syrian military officer,
`Abdul-Karim Zahr Ad-Din. Again, there is absolutely no evidence that Cohen
ever met him or even saw him. As a 1965 court ruling published in
the Syrian paper Ath-Thawrah shows, Cohen knew a nephew of his, Ma`dhi Zahr Ad-Din, but the latter was a
recruit who was later discharged and held a low clerical post in the Ministry
of Municipal and Rural affairs. What kind of secret information would an
acquaintance with this employee produce?
It is true that Cohen established a friendship with an employee at the
Ministry of Information but the employee was hardly the senior official that
Mossad’s accounts made him be. This Ministry of Information employee,
George Sayf did introduce him to a few friends but none were in top government
posts as the Israeli accounts claimed.
And the notion that top military officers were escorting Cohen to the
front and sharing with him classified information is as laughable as current
claims by Western correspondents in Beirut that top military fighters of
Hizbullah shares top intelligence secrets with Zionist Western correspondents.
It is true that Cohen once
visited the Al-Himmah area, in the southern part of the Golan Heights, but
there is no evidence that he obtained any secret information. And as
Syrian journalist Ibrahim Hmaydi pointed out in the international Arabic paper Ash-Sharq Al-Awsat recently,
Cohen operated in Syria before the Ba`thist coup of 1966, and the new regime
changed all military plans and personnel leading to the 1967 war.
Newspaper Smuggler
It was in Israeli interest
to claim that Cohen’s espionage was so crucial that it contributed to its
decisive victory in 1967. But the reasons for that outcome are well-known
and had nothing to do with secrets. It was because Arab armies were woefully
ill-prepared and Israel had a huge advantage of Western military and financial
support. The only evidence of Cohen’s usefulness to Mossad was that he
would smuggle Syrian newspapers from Damascus in the shipment of Syrian
artifacts. But the brilliant Mossad could have obtained Syrian newspapers
from Lebanon with great ease, and without any need for dangerous missions and
the use of mustaches for disguises.
Israeli propaganda also
claimed that Amin Hafiz (who he never met) offered him the post of deputy
minister of defense. And it’s common for Western accounts of Cohen to mention
that he almost assumed this title. But Arab critics are pointing out a
problem with that story: The position of deputy minister of defense did not
exist in Syria until after the coup of Hafidh Al-Asad in 1970. The series
also puts the chief of Syrian military intelligence, Ahmad Suwaydani, in
Argentina at the time of Cohen’s stay when he never served there. It also
claims Ahmad Suwaydani was acquainted with Cohen when in reality he was the one
who caught him.
Israeli Mossad-Netflix propaganda also carries a purposeful classical
Israeli sexual insults to Arabs: the story of Cohen insists that Cohen had 17
or more Damascene female lovers, that he was one of the most eligible bachelors
in Syria’s capital city. He was Israeli after all, and Israeli are supposed to
be — according to Israeli propaganda — sexually irresistible. But how would
Israel know that? Cohen, after all, was its only source in Damascus. Either
Cohen invented the idea that he was a sexual magnet for Syrian women (as the
Netflix series showed) or that Israeli intelligence made this up after his
hanging in order to compensate its ultimate humiliation: having a spy get
caught, tried and hanged.
Israeli intelligence has
suffered many losses over the years. There was the botched assassination
attempt of Khalid Mish`al in Amman in 1997; the assassination of Hamas
official, Mahmoud Al-Mabhouh in Dubai in 2010, when Dubai Chief of police
released the pictures of all the members of the Mossad hit team and they were
circulated worldwide. There are also the failures of Mossad in the face of
Hizbullah (and the subsequent discovery of many Israeli spy networks in Lebanon
in the last 10 years). All of this has damaged the image of an organization
that former CIA Director Admiral Stansfield Turner once said was based more on
PR than actual effectiveness.
An intelligence
organization that hopes to rescue its reputation through a Netflix series is a
desperate organization seeking glory from past — fake — exploits. Elie
Cohen was a failed spy who was not able to secure access to the government or
the military of Syria but who sent Syrian newspapers to Israel and ran what
appeared to be a brothel in Damascus.
As’ad AbuKhalil is a Lebanese-American professor of
political science at California State University, Stanislaus. He is the author
of the “Historical Dictionary of Lebanon” (1998), “Bin Laden, Islam and
America’s New War on Terrorism” (2002), and “The Battle for Saudi Arabia”
(2004). He tweets as @asadabukhalil
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario