The case of debating Israeli-Western propaganda regarding the outcome of the October War 1973. Naming the Devresoir Battle: It is important to survey a number of other conceptual metaphors regarding the battle that ex-UK Foreign Secretary David Owen had referred to. This survey is from the actual, authentic and documented literature on October War 1973 by key military and political figures who managed this crisis. In the beginning, let us state that some analysts never used any conceptual or non-conceptual metaphors when they neutrally described that battle as just "The Devresoir Battle "…or the battle of the Chinese farm, i.e. the name of the place near Devresoir. That is to say, they just made reference to the actual geographical place. Devresoir is a small town located on the Suez Canal, but the majority of analysts, military experts and political actors used conceptual metaphors like the ones in the following table: Table #1: Metaphors for the Devresoir Battle, Metaphors Used for the Devresoir Battle 1- 'The corridor' (Used by several analysts) 2- 'The Devresoir Pocket'(Used by President Sadat) 3- 'The Flimsy pocket' (Used by General Hassan El Badri) 4- 'Fragile, vulnerable pocket'(Used by General Hassan El-Badri) 5- 'The Breach'(Used by many analysts) 6- 'The television show battle' (used by General Andre Beauffre), Former Manager of the French Strategic Centre. 7- 'The Enclave' used by: Haim Barlev, the ex-chief of Israeli general staff. 8- 'Operation Gazelle' a code name by the Israeli army for the Israeli counterstroke. 9- 'Zionist propaganda show' (Used by Egyptian military leaders) 10- 'Operation Stouthearted Men' (Abiray-Lev in Hebrew) (Used by Sharon, Adan, Avraham) 11- Operation Valiant.(Used by Richard Owen) 12- Valley of Death.(Used by Sadat and by the Israeli Colonel Ammnon Reshef) 13- 'Death Trap'(Used by Egyptian military commanders) 14- 'The Devresoir bottle neck they created was only inlet artery' 15- 'Strategic Trap', (Used by General Abdul Ghany el-Gamasy). 16- 'Mortal Peril' (used by Henry Kissinger on the total impact of October War on the Israelis) III- 3-1- The corridor metaphor: This metaphor described what did happen in the Devresoir Battle. If we make the analogy of a corridor, which is a very narrow path that connects rooms in a house, with what happened in the Devresoir Battle, here, we may think of Ismailia as one room and the corridor run from it to another room which is Suez. Israeli forces failed completely to enter Ismailia or Suez. The fact of the matter is that the Israeli armed forceswere besieged there in that corridor. Among the several responses in the Arab media regarding the claims made by Lord Owen's Cairo talks in October 2009, only Abdel-Moneim Saeed, the incumbent chairman of Al-Ahram Press institution, used the corridor metaphor in his analysis, when he said: "What we can say for certain is that Owen's opinion reflects a different, Western take on the October war, one that runs pretty much along the lines of the British politician's argument in Cairo. But Western opinion on this matter is not uniform. Some hold that the October War ended in a "tie", with no clear victor or loser. Perhaps the fairest view is that which regards the outcome of that war as an "incomplete" or "ambiguous" victory for Egypt. The diversity of opinion in the West stems from two factors: first, the confusion that arose from the "breach" operation conducted by Israeli forces enabling them to drive a narrow corridor through the Sinai to the western side of the Suez Canal. This was precisely what Israel wanted to achieve from that operation; it had to improve its image in the Western media after a series of powerful blows and setbacks inflicted upon it by Egyptian forces since the outset of hostilities. The second is the fact that Egyptian-Israeli talks on October 28 were held at kilometer 101, which helped the Israelis exaggerate the significance of their having reached this point on the Western bank of the Suez Canal. However, the fact remains that Egypt achieved its goals from the October War, to which testify the Israelis as well. Indeed, because of the astounding results that Egyptian forces achieved during that war Israel created a factfinding commission charged with investigating how the defeat happened. Chaired by the head of the Israeli Supreme Court, the commission found that there had been severe flaws both in mIsraeli military intelligence operations and in leadership on the front. During the hearings, a senior Israeli intelligence mofficer acknowledged how expertly the Egyptians had prepared for and fought this war." To be continued next week Wageih is a professor of linguistics of negotiation, Chairman of the English Department, Faculty of Languages & Translation, Al-Azhar University, and a PhD holder from Georgetown University [email protected]
