Israel's New Government and The Future
As an advocate for a solution to the conflict between the Palestinians and Israelis that results in the creation of a Palestinian state along side an Israel with secure borders and as an advocate for a solution that does not result in ongoing, much less worsening, suffering for Palestinians in Gaza and Israelis in Sderot and surrounding communities, I am pretty depressed these days.
As an advocate for the fair treatment of Israel in the national and international media and on college campuses around the world, where anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiments are flourishing, I am pretty depressed these days.
An internationally besieged Israel has turned to the political right, even empowering the far right, and I am a progressive. I do not want to defend someone who demands a loyalty oath such as Avigdor Lieberman and am not going to do so. I can't. I think it is wrong, though I would add that the US does have its Congressman swear an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States. I see no reason why Israeli MKs should not swear an oath to defend the nation against its enemies and to work for the prosperity of all of its citizens, Israeli Arabs included. That is the purpose of the Knesset.
It is very wrong, however, to make people swear an oath to support the policies of the current administration, whatever type of administration that is, in order to vote. That violates my sense of right and wrong. Dissent should not be silenced and Israeli Arabs certainly should have the right to dissent against the policies of the Israeli government. I have long feared the religious right in Israel, which seeks to trample upon civil liberties and has restricted Jewish marriages to the sole auspices of the Orthodox. Lieberman actually wants to undo that control. He is an advocate for civil liberties for Jews, the strongest by far in Israel, something that has created tremendous animosity between his party and the religious parties.
I believe that Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the head of the Union for Reform Judaism, of which my congregation is a member, spoke very strongly in his article in the Forward recently in which he used harsher language in reference to Avigdor Lieberman and his party than he uses toward Hamas http://forward.com/articles/103108/. Rabbi Yoffie wrote, speaking of Israel Beiteinu's campaign: " It was an outrageous, abominable, hate-filled campaign, brimming with incitement that, if left unchecked, could lead Israel to the gates of hell." I agree with the general sentiments. This campaign in general and Israel Beiteinu's in particular were about Israel's problems with the Arab world, both inside and outside of Israel and the right of the political spectrum seems to have had much more appeal than the left. Hatred was heard more than love.
Later in the article when Rabbi Yoffie says that Lieberman represents "values that we abhor" surely he did not mean civil marriage and civil divorce and separation of church and state, but only his views about those Israeli Arabs who actively opposed the policies of the Jewish state. The statement, which became an Israel Beiteinu slogan, "No citizenship without loyalty," is definitely frightening and abhorrent in my view. It is reminiscent of times and places where in Jews were so accused. Rabbi Yoffie and others are correct both to condemn and to fear that kind of language.
I too fear that radical voices are speaking too loudly and are being too easily heard. I fear that a lack of hope for peace and disdain for the compromises required to achieve it have emboldened its radical opponents, not only Hamas on the Palestinian side, but those on the Israeli side as well. Lieberman, whose party's views are certainly radical in my mind, was not radical enough for some, who voted the National Union party into the Knesset with FOUR seats, one more than Meretz, the social left party, holds.
While Eric Yoffie wrote, "Remember that he received only about 12% of the vote, much of it a protest against the perceived weakness of the other major-party leaders. And, it’s safe to say, most Israelis find his views utterly unacceptable," he forgot to include the National Union and Jewish Home parties which share many of Lieberman's views, but are MORE radical. Including them, the far right, not including the religious right, received about 1/6 of the vote. Still, some of that is protest vote and some of those voters were voting for Israel Beiteinu's hard-line SECULAR positions and not its statements about Israeli Arabs.
I took an election quiz not long ago in one of the Israeli newspapers which was designed to tell me which party would support my views. I found myself in the Labor party camp, though perhaps as a fringe Kadima voter. I am not a Conservative. I am a progressive, even liberal on many issues. It astounds me how far to the right the Israeli electorate has gone, rather been driven, by the failures of peace and constant berating for not being willing to simply give in to those who would see Israel finished as a secure home for the Jewish people.
I hope that Benjamin Netanyahu will be able to forge a coalition of the Center and even perhaps the left rather than working with Israel Beiteinu OR Shas, neither the secular political right nor the religious right. I simply doubt that there is much of a chance that it will happen.
I wrote of all of this years ago. I wrote at the time of disengagement from Gaza in 2005 that:
How the Palestinian Authority deals with events in Gaza and with the population of Gaza in general will radically affect the peace process over the months and years to come.
If there are constant barrages from Qasam rockets into Israel, if Hamas and other terrorist organizations continue to attack and the Palestinian Authority is not able to stop them, if there are no compromises foreseen concerning Palestinian demands for Jerusalem and its suburbs built on land acquired in 1967, it is highly unlikely that a lasting peace will be any nearer because of Israel’s actions over the past few weeks. In fact, without the worry about the safety of settlers living in Gaza, Israel may feel more able to act on its own in pursuit of terrorist leaders and infrastructure in Gaza, which would escalate tensions and make governing Gaza more difficult for the West Bank based Palestinian Authority.
I wrote back then in 2005 that:
If nothing is done and Hamas continues to exert its strength in opposition to the Palestinian Authority while the PA is unable to put it in its place, it may be that what we will be discussing in the coming years is a three state solution, rather than a two state one with a Hamas governed Gaza and a Fatah governed West Bank, both surrounded by walls, still not at peace with Israel. While that seems like a bad solution, it is better than what would result from a complete failure by the Palestinian Authority to better the lives of Palestinians in the relatively near future. Hamas could gain enough support, even in the West Bank, to take over the leadership of the Palestinian Authority.
I wrote back then that:
While the Palestinian Authority officially decries the actions of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other organizations seeking the destruction of Israel it remains unable or unwilling to stop them from pursuing that end. This places Israel in the untenable situation of either being accused of provocation when it tries to stop these groups before they can act or waiting until they have acted on their plans, possibly killing numerous innocents. In the latter case, history tells us that no action taken by Israel in response to attacks by these groups is seen as justified by much of the world. Arrests or strategic assaults on them are never seen as police actions, much less as actions in a continuing war, but are perceived as “harmful to progress toward peace.”
On November 29, 2007 when speaking of Annapolis, I wrote:
If Israel compromises too much, the current government will be ousted and almost certainly a far more right wing oriented government will come to power...The result of that shift would be a center-right coalition led in all likelihood by Bibi Netanyahu.
It is not that these things were not foreseeable, but that it seems not to have mattered. I am certainly not the only one who argued these things then. They have nonetheless come true.
The peace process seems to be ever careening toward a cliff, forced ahead by drivers (there are more than one) in distant lands fighting over a remote control directing the car and who hope that the road goes the way that they imagine that it should, not knowing the way it actually does. Meanwhile, the passengers, Israelis and Palestinians, are being battered around and hurtled toward tragedy time and again by some very well meaning people.
Both Israelis and Palestinians have been radicalized by the failures of the process over the past decade and a half. Israel has sheltered itself. It fears that no concessions will be enough and all concessions will be met with increased violence. Israelis have no hope that Shalom is attainable soon. Palestinians have sheltered themselves as well, hiding from the violence and suffering that permeate society in Gaza. Having lost hope long ago, they find refuge in the comfort of hatred. Better to hate than to love and lose.
What needs to change to bring about hope?
Life has to get better for Palestinians in Gaza. Life has to get better for Israelis in Sderot. There has to be hope that somehow someday children will be able to play in peace and security.
I have difficulty seeing this happening with an Israeli government tilted far to the right (I'm still holding out hope that Kadima will enter the coalition and bring it more to the center) or with Palestinian AuthoritIES (Hamas in Gaza and Fatah in the West Bank) both unable to speak for the Palestinian people as a whole.
Peace seems a long way off. Hatred seems way too close.
-D
Friday, February 20, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
After the Troops Have Gone
Shalom All,
I have, since this operation began, said that Israel's goal could not be the cessation of rocket fire from Gaza. I noted that the very moment that the last Israeli soldier who entered during this conflict leaves Gaza, rockets will be launched into Israel. Some may be launched in spite, just to have the last word. Others will be launched by militants not under Hamas control. Most will be launched because Hamas really has no desire to have the rockets stop and will not act to prevent anyone from doing so because it does not want peace with Israel, much less FOR Israel.
What is peace? Peace is not threatening to go to war if demands are not met. Peace is not simply an opportunity to increase your ability to wage war in the future. Peace as it is defined by the terms Shalom in Hebrew and Salaam in Arabic is not only the absence of violence, but the absence of the threat of violence. It is a time of well-being. That is the goal of Israel and, I believe, the goal of the vast majority of Palestinians. That is the goal of a long term cease fire.
That peace is also far from what is occurring on the ground in Gaza now as arms flow in from Egypt through fortified smuggling tunnels not destroyed in Israel's operations, through rockets and mortars continually fired into Israel or through belligerent rhetoric uttered by the leadership of Hamas. The Palestinians themselves are not remotely at peace with one another. There is a state of civil war between Hamas, leaders of Gaza, and the Palestinian Authority which leads the West Bank. Hamas took the opportunity during the last few weeks to arrest, maim, and murder dozens of its Palestinian opponents in Gaza. This, brings me to a major problem.
There is no one who can represent the Palestinian people with any legitimacy. Hamas won parliamentary elections fair and square. Why? Because their opponents in the election, the Palestinian Authority, which is simply a descendent of the Palestinian Liberation Organization led by Yassir Arafat were so hopelessly corrupted that the one thing that could be assured in their leadership was that aid would not reach the people, but would end up the pockets and bank accounts of the PA leadership. Mrs. Arafat had a nice fat $600 million in her bank account when Yassir died. Isn't it nice to know where our aid money ended up?
Well, enter Hamas. Hamas was known to care about the Palestinian people. Then ran and run schools and hospitals as well as a number of social service agencies. Hamas also runs the smuggling tunnels bringing everything from militants and weaponry to cattle (yes, CATTLE) and electronics, from medical supplies to fuel, into Gaza and they get to charge money for all of it. They make a lot more money when the regular borders are closed than they do when they are open.
The argument that somehow smuggling will slow if and when the regular borders open is grossly naive. First of all, Hamas has an incentive to force them to shut, which is why there is almost always an attack at one of the border crossings within a few days of their being opened. Such an attack forces the crossings closed and makes the smuggling tunnels the only means to import and export and they are controlled by Hamas. Second, smuggling will not end if the borders were to open simply because not all things can cross those borders when they are open, such as weaponry, other armaments, drugs and militants. In fact, not needing to bring other items in through the tunnels simply lowers the price to bring in these things. The result would eventually be another series of battles, borders closed, more deaths and more suffering.
Clearly, the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza must be relieved. Life there with both Egypt and Israel forced to shut their borders with Gaza is never going to be good. That said, life for Israelis, if Hamas is able to continually increase its strength and ability to strike out and harm them, will get worse. Things cannot stay the way that they are. If indeed Hamas will not renounce its pledge to destroy Israel and expel or kill all of the Jews living therein, there can be no real peace. The stronger Hamas is allowed to become, the more powerful militarily or prosperous financially, the greater the threat to Israel's peace becomes and the average Palestinian suffers in any conflict between them.
Why is Israel not bringing Fatah back into Gaza? Why not say, "We will not negotiate with Hamas at all? We will only negotiate with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority?" Why not empower the PA? Only negotiate with the PA? If there is a true civil war in Gaza, why not help the side you prefer?
I suggested a week ago that Israel demand that the PA reoccupy Gaza before it withdrew a single soldier. Why not have an entire force of Fatah allied troops enter Gaza under Israeli cover into the areas that were under Israeli control? Why not demand as Egypt did a couple of weeks ago that the PA take control over all of the border crossings? Let Fatah, the Palestinian Authority, battle Hamas?
Unfortunately, I would imagine that it did and that the PA is not willing to reenter Gaza. Hamas has won the Palestinian civil war. The result is a far stronger Hamas, not worried about being removed from power. I believe that this is catastrophic both for the hopes for peace and for the Palestinian people who will have no good hope of improvement in their lives. Will Israel be MORE inclined to relax border control after the event if Hamas stays in power and has an increased ability to threaten it? Hardly. Life will continue to be terrible.
How do things get better? That is relatively easy to answer, but very hard to accomplish. Israel has already accomplished some of the task, but unfortunately it needs help. The first step is to remove or drastically reduce Hamas' ability to smuggle over the Egyptian border. It is truly not weaponry that keeps Hamas in power, but its ability to smuggle in other things and to functionally prop up the economy through clandestine efforts that bring it income while at the same time destroying the hope of others to acquire prosperity by means outside of Hamas' control. If the borders were truly open and goods could truly flow, Hamas would be far weaker. Prosperity would also weaken the resolve of Palestinians to continue to fight to eradicate Israel.
If you have businesses to run and family events to attend and enjoy, you are not inclined to drop everything in order to pick a fight or to maintain a fight that undermines both your ability to have, much less run, your business or to enjoy your family. It is therefore in Hamas' interest in furthering its goal of destroying Israel, not just "freeing Gaza," to threaten Israel's security to the point that it must shut its borders. By removing Hamas' alternative supply lines, you eliminate the financial and political gain obtained by forcing Israel to shut the borders.
If indeed the United States, Egypt, and the European Union can effectively reduce the smuggling trade coming into Gaza from Egypt, things will move a long way toward peace. Hamas will need the legitimate borders open and might even work to enforce a peace, which leads me to a reality that all too many people seem to forget.
The difference between desiring war and desiring peace is that desiring war, you cheer on those trying to harm your enemy; while desiring peace, you actively try to prevent harm to your enemy, even using lethal force against your own people in order to prevent that harm being done.
The real question that lies before us is not "Is there a desire to create a lasting peace?" but instead "Is there a will to make it happen?" The answer to the first question is "Yes."
I'm not sure what the answer to the second question is, but I'm not optimistic.
-D
I have, since this operation began, said that Israel's goal could not be the cessation of rocket fire from Gaza. I noted that the very moment that the last Israeli soldier who entered during this conflict leaves Gaza, rockets will be launched into Israel. Some may be launched in spite, just to have the last word. Others will be launched by militants not under Hamas control. Most will be launched because Hamas really has no desire to have the rockets stop and will not act to prevent anyone from doing so because it does not want peace with Israel, much less FOR Israel.
What is peace? Peace is not threatening to go to war if demands are not met. Peace is not simply an opportunity to increase your ability to wage war in the future. Peace as it is defined by the terms Shalom in Hebrew and Salaam in Arabic is not only the absence of violence, but the absence of the threat of violence. It is a time of well-being. That is the goal of Israel and, I believe, the goal of the vast majority of Palestinians. That is the goal of a long term cease fire.
That peace is also far from what is occurring on the ground in Gaza now as arms flow in from Egypt through fortified smuggling tunnels not destroyed in Israel's operations, through rockets and mortars continually fired into Israel or through belligerent rhetoric uttered by the leadership of Hamas. The Palestinians themselves are not remotely at peace with one another. There is a state of civil war between Hamas, leaders of Gaza, and the Palestinian Authority which leads the West Bank. Hamas took the opportunity during the last few weeks to arrest, maim, and murder dozens of its Palestinian opponents in Gaza. This, brings me to a major problem.
There is no one who can represent the Palestinian people with any legitimacy. Hamas won parliamentary elections fair and square. Why? Because their opponents in the election, the Palestinian Authority, which is simply a descendent of the Palestinian Liberation Organization led by Yassir Arafat were so hopelessly corrupted that the one thing that could be assured in their leadership was that aid would not reach the people, but would end up the pockets and bank accounts of the PA leadership. Mrs. Arafat had a nice fat $600 million in her bank account when Yassir died. Isn't it nice to know where our aid money ended up?
Well, enter Hamas. Hamas was known to care about the Palestinian people. Then ran and run schools and hospitals as well as a number of social service agencies. Hamas also runs the smuggling tunnels bringing everything from militants and weaponry to cattle (yes, CATTLE) and electronics, from medical supplies to fuel, into Gaza and they get to charge money for all of it. They make a lot more money when the regular borders are closed than they do when they are open.
The argument that somehow smuggling will slow if and when the regular borders open is grossly naive. First of all, Hamas has an incentive to force them to shut, which is why there is almost always an attack at one of the border crossings within a few days of their being opened. Such an attack forces the crossings closed and makes the smuggling tunnels the only means to import and export and they are controlled by Hamas. Second, smuggling will not end if the borders were to open simply because not all things can cross those borders when they are open, such as weaponry, other armaments, drugs and militants. In fact, not needing to bring other items in through the tunnels simply lowers the price to bring in these things. The result would eventually be another series of battles, borders closed, more deaths and more suffering.
Clearly, the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza must be relieved. Life there with both Egypt and Israel forced to shut their borders with Gaza is never going to be good. That said, life for Israelis, if Hamas is able to continually increase its strength and ability to strike out and harm them, will get worse. Things cannot stay the way that they are. If indeed Hamas will not renounce its pledge to destroy Israel and expel or kill all of the Jews living therein, there can be no real peace. The stronger Hamas is allowed to become, the more powerful militarily or prosperous financially, the greater the threat to Israel's peace becomes and the average Palestinian suffers in any conflict between them.
Why is Israel not bringing Fatah back into Gaza? Why not say, "We will not negotiate with Hamas at all? We will only negotiate with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority?" Why not empower the PA? Only negotiate with the PA? If there is a true civil war in Gaza, why not help the side you prefer?
I suggested a week ago that Israel demand that the PA reoccupy Gaza before it withdrew a single soldier. Why not have an entire force of Fatah allied troops enter Gaza under Israeli cover into the areas that were under Israeli control? Why not demand as Egypt did a couple of weeks ago that the PA take control over all of the border crossings? Let Fatah, the Palestinian Authority, battle Hamas?
Unfortunately, I would imagine that it did and that the PA is not willing to reenter Gaza. Hamas has won the Palestinian civil war. The result is a far stronger Hamas, not worried about being removed from power. I believe that this is catastrophic both for the hopes for peace and for the Palestinian people who will have no good hope of improvement in their lives. Will Israel be MORE inclined to relax border control after the event if Hamas stays in power and has an increased ability to threaten it? Hardly. Life will continue to be terrible.
How do things get better? That is relatively easy to answer, but very hard to accomplish. Israel has already accomplished some of the task, but unfortunately it needs help. The first step is to remove or drastically reduce Hamas' ability to smuggle over the Egyptian border. It is truly not weaponry that keeps Hamas in power, but its ability to smuggle in other things and to functionally prop up the economy through clandestine efforts that bring it income while at the same time destroying the hope of others to acquire prosperity by means outside of Hamas' control. If the borders were truly open and goods could truly flow, Hamas would be far weaker. Prosperity would also weaken the resolve of Palestinians to continue to fight to eradicate Israel.
If you have businesses to run and family events to attend and enjoy, you are not inclined to drop everything in order to pick a fight or to maintain a fight that undermines both your ability to have, much less run, your business or to enjoy your family. It is therefore in Hamas' interest in furthering its goal of destroying Israel, not just "freeing Gaza," to threaten Israel's security to the point that it must shut its borders. By removing Hamas' alternative supply lines, you eliminate the financial and political gain obtained by forcing Israel to shut the borders.
If indeed the United States, Egypt, and the European Union can effectively reduce the smuggling trade coming into Gaza from Egypt, things will move a long way toward peace. Hamas will need the legitimate borders open and might even work to enforce a peace, which leads me to a reality that all too many people seem to forget.
The difference between desiring war and desiring peace is that desiring war, you cheer on those trying to harm your enemy; while desiring peace, you actively try to prevent harm to your enemy, even using lethal force against your own people in order to prevent that harm being done.
The real question that lies before us is not "Is there a desire to create a lasting peace?" but instead "Is there a will to make it happen?" The answer to the first question is "Yes."
I'm not sure what the answer to the second question is, but I'm not optimistic.
-D
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Friday, January 16, 2009
End Game in Gaza
Shalom All,
Let's talk about the end game in Gaza. I have since this operation began said that Israel's goal cannot be the cessation of rocket fire from Gaza. The very moment that the last Israeli soldier who entered during this conflict leaves Gaza, rockets will be launched into Israel. It is like children fighting about who will have the last word. Hamas will have the last word, or Islamic Jihad, or frankly, some unknown guy who happens to have been a part of a rocket squad and knows where to find or how to make a rocket.
Israel's goal cannot possibly be to leave Hamas in power with any long term ability to increase that power and I would argue strongly that it cannot leave it in power with any long term ability to maintain power at all. Further, IF Israel gets to a point wherein it finds itself needing to withdraw, I see no reason whatsoever that it should not change the rules on the ground in Gaza first.
Why is Israel not bringing Fatah back into Gaza? Why not say, "We will not negotiate with Hamas at all? We will only negotiate with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority?" Why not empower the PA? Only negotiate with the PA? If there is a true civil war in Gaza, why not help the side you prefer? I would suggest that Israel demand that the PA reoccupy Gaza before it withdraws a single soldier. Why not have an entire force of Fatah allied troops enter Gaza under Israeli cover into the areas under Israeli control now? Why not demand as Egypt did that the PA take control over all of the border crossings? Let Fatah battle Hamas. If the answer is that the PA can't or won't, SAY THAT publicly. Better yet, hold a press conference with Abbas and demand that he say it publicly. There is no reason for Israel to protect an entirely failed governmental system from scrutiny.
If the PA is not willing to reenter Gaza, the first result would then be the nullification of all previous agreements. Furthermore, the result would be either a far stronger Hamas, not worried about being removed from power, or a power vacuum that could well be filled by another of Israel's enemies. The end game cannot simply be Israeli withdrawal. It must be stability in Gaza or at least instability with the hope of attaining stability.
Leaving Gaza without removing Hamas or at least weakening Hamas so much that it cannot hold power for long would be catastrophic both the hopes for peace and for the Palestinian people who will have no hope of improvement in their lives. Will Israel be MORE inclined to relax border control after the event if Hamas stays in power? Hardly. Life would be terrible and Hamas needs it that way in order to maintain control. Things will get worse, not better, for the average Palestinian. Now what is required to weaken Hamas so much that it cannot hold power?
That is relatively easy to answer. Israel has already accomplished some of it. First, removal of Hamas' ability to control the Egyptian border and to smuggle. It is not weaponry that keeps Hamas in power, but its ability to smuggle in other things and to functionally prop up the economy through clandestine efforts that bring it income while at the same time destroying the hope of others to acquire prosperity by means outside of Hamas' control. If the borders were truly open and goods could truly flow, Hamas would be far weaker. It is therefore in Hamas' interest to threaten Israel's security to the point that it must shut its borders. By removing Hamas' supply lines, you eliminate the financial and political gain obtained by forcing Israel to shut the borders.
Second, in order to weaken Hamas, you need to empower an alternative. Right now, I know of only one, the PA. The PA must be brought back into Gaza and given enough support not only to defend itself but to further weaken Hamas. The PA also must be empowered with funds and goods so that it can undermine Hamas' control of the economy.
The real question is not "Is there a desire to create a lasting peace?" but instead "Is there a will to make it happen?" The answer to the first question is "Yes." I'm not sure what the answer to the second question is.
-David
Let's talk about the end game in Gaza. I have since this operation began said that Israel's goal cannot be the cessation of rocket fire from Gaza. The very moment that the last Israeli soldier who entered during this conflict leaves Gaza, rockets will be launched into Israel. It is like children fighting about who will have the last word. Hamas will have the last word, or Islamic Jihad, or frankly, some unknown guy who happens to have been a part of a rocket squad and knows where to find or how to make a rocket.
Israel's goal cannot possibly be to leave Hamas in power with any long term ability to increase that power and I would argue strongly that it cannot leave it in power with any long term ability to maintain power at all. Further, IF Israel gets to a point wherein it finds itself needing to withdraw, I see no reason whatsoever that it should not change the rules on the ground in Gaza first.
Why is Israel not bringing Fatah back into Gaza? Why not say, "We will not negotiate with Hamas at all? We will only negotiate with the leadership of the Palestinian Authority?" Why not empower the PA? Only negotiate with the PA? If there is a true civil war in Gaza, why not help the side you prefer? I would suggest that Israel demand that the PA reoccupy Gaza before it withdraws a single soldier. Why not have an entire force of Fatah allied troops enter Gaza under Israeli cover into the areas under Israeli control now? Why not demand as Egypt did that the PA take control over all of the border crossings? Let Fatah battle Hamas. If the answer is that the PA can't or won't, SAY THAT publicly. Better yet, hold a press conference with Abbas and demand that he say it publicly. There is no reason for Israel to protect an entirely failed governmental system from scrutiny.
If the PA is not willing to reenter Gaza, the first result would then be the nullification of all previous agreements. Furthermore, the result would be either a far stronger Hamas, not worried about being removed from power, or a power vacuum that could well be filled by another of Israel's enemies. The end game cannot simply be Israeli withdrawal. It must be stability in Gaza or at least instability with the hope of attaining stability.
Leaving Gaza without removing Hamas or at least weakening Hamas so much that it cannot hold power for long would be catastrophic both the hopes for peace and for the Palestinian people who will have no hope of improvement in their lives. Will Israel be MORE inclined to relax border control after the event if Hamas stays in power? Hardly. Life would be terrible and Hamas needs it that way in order to maintain control. Things will get worse, not better, for the average Palestinian. Now what is required to weaken Hamas so much that it cannot hold power?
That is relatively easy to answer. Israel has already accomplished some of it. First, removal of Hamas' ability to control the Egyptian border and to smuggle. It is not weaponry that keeps Hamas in power, but its ability to smuggle in other things and to functionally prop up the economy through clandestine efforts that bring it income while at the same time destroying the hope of others to acquire prosperity by means outside of Hamas' control. If the borders were truly open and goods could truly flow, Hamas would be far weaker. It is therefore in Hamas' interest to threaten Israel's security to the point that it must shut its borders. By removing Hamas' supply lines, you eliminate the financial and political gain obtained by forcing Israel to shut the borders.
Second, in order to weaken Hamas, you need to empower an alternative. Right now, I know of only one, the PA. The PA must be brought back into Gaza and given enough support not only to defend itself but to further weaken Hamas. The PA also must be empowered with funds and goods so that it can undermine Hamas' control of the economy.
The real question is not "Is there a desire to create a lasting peace?" but instead "Is there a will to make it happen?" The answer to the first question is "Yes." I'm not sure what the answer to the second question is.
-David
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Update on Gaza - What Next?
Shalom All,
I thought it a good idea to provide a bit of an update. Israel seems to be on track to functionally reoccupy Gaza. Within days, it will have full control of all border crossings, including smuggling tunnels, and will have isolated Hamas to the point that its remaining fighters will be more concerned with their own lives than with achieving Hamas' objectives.
Israel has done a tremendous job of limiting the rocket fire coming from Gaza into Israel. How? First, it struck Hamas' ability to coordinate strikes by essentially taking down the cell phone system in Gaza. Second, it took out smuggling tunnels which limited Hamas' ability to rearm. Third, struck weapons depots and eliminated a substantial percentage of Hamas fighting force in initial attacks. Fourth, it invaded the North of Gaza first which functionally prevented the use of Grad rockets aimed at the more populous cities along that border, leaving only those aimed at those Israeli cities off of southern Gaza that are already hardened. Fifth, it split Gaza up so that arms and militants could not move from the North to the South without grave difficulty. Sixth, it has forced Hamas' rocket squads into densely packed areas where civilians are FINALLY demanding that rockets not be fired from their midst for fear of Israeli retaliatory strikes. Thus, Israel has reduced Hamas' ability to fire rockets and limited the use of those that they are willing to launch.
The question on the table now is what will happen next. Clearly, Israel has no reason to simply withdraw from Gaza now and numerous reasons not to do so. Hamas is on the defensive and Israel with only slightly more effort can create a situation in which Fatah and the PA can return to Gaza to govern it, removing Hamas from power in fact. This is even more likely with Israel in control of the Egypt/Gaza border. Israel will only relinquish control of that area if it is assured not by word but by an established military regime that the border will be secured from weapons smuggling. It will not trust Hamas at all and therefore will never give Hamas control of that border. Neither does it trust Fatah, under whose rule many of the smuggling tunnels were created to begin with. Israel doesn't trust Egypt to prevent smuggling because it has not in the past. Thus, the only possibility of an Israeli withdrawal will require an international force led by US or US and EU soldiers patrolling that border, NOT under UN auspices. The UN has failed in its efforts in the South of Lebanon with Hizballah, which has rearmed with ease. The US may well need to lead this force and this decision could be a President Obama's first major contribution to Middle East Peace.
I do not believe that this can be accomplished until Hamas no longer has a functional ability to fight Fatah when it returns, which will need to be brought back into Gaza. This means that Israel needs to continue to destroy weapons caches and deplete Hamas' soldiery until Fatah can return without significant threat. Clearly, this plan from the start involved removing Hamas' ability to remain in government of Gaza. Leaving with that accomplished is the only end that makes sense at this time. Other solutions will result in ongoing and worsening conflicts that will not end in peace between the people of Gaza and Israel and will entrench Hamas for decades to come. If there is any solution that will result in a good situation, it does not involve Hamas ruling Gaza either legally or in fact.
My belief is that Israel will have accomplished its military objectives within a week and that it will be ready to negotiate a workable solution when President Obama takes over. Meanwhile, protests are growing around the world and getting uglier all the time. Jews in Europe are feeling very threatened by angry mobs.
-David
I thought it a good idea to provide a bit of an update. Israel seems to be on track to functionally reoccupy Gaza. Within days, it will have full control of all border crossings, including smuggling tunnels, and will have isolated Hamas to the point that its remaining fighters will be more concerned with their own lives than with achieving Hamas' objectives.
Israel has done a tremendous job of limiting the rocket fire coming from Gaza into Israel. How? First, it struck Hamas' ability to coordinate strikes by essentially taking down the cell phone system in Gaza. Second, it took out smuggling tunnels which limited Hamas' ability to rearm. Third, struck weapons depots and eliminated a substantial percentage of Hamas fighting force in initial attacks. Fourth, it invaded the North of Gaza first which functionally prevented the use of Grad rockets aimed at the more populous cities along that border, leaving only those aimed at those Israeli cities off of southern Gaza that are already hardened. Fifth, it split Gaza up so that arms and militants could not move from the North to the South without grave difficulty. Sixth, it has forced Hamas' rocket squads into densely packed areas where civilians are FINALLY demanding that rockets not be fired from their midst for fear of Israeli retaliatory strikes. Thus, Israel has reduced Hamas' ability to fire rockets and limited the use of those that they are willing to launch.
The question on the table now is what will happen next. Clearly, Israel has no reason to simply withdraw from Gaza now and numerous reasons not to do so. Hamas is on the defensive and Israel with only slightly more effort can create a situation in which Fatah and the PA can return to Gaza to govern it, removing Hamas from power in fact. This is even more likely with Israel in control of the Egypt/Gaza border. Israel will only relinquish control of that area if it is assured not by word but by an established military regime that the border will be secured from weapons smuggling. It will not trust Hamas at all and therefore will never give Hamas control of that border. Neither does it trust Fatah, under whose rule many of the smuggling tunnels were created to begin with. Israel doesn't trust Egypt to prevent smuggling because it has not in the past. Thus, the only possibility of an Israeli withdrawal will require an international force led by US or US and EU soldiers patrolling that border, NOT under UN auspices. The UN has failed in its efforts in the South of Lebanon with Hizballah, which has rearmed with ease. The US may well need to lead this force and this decision could be a President Obama's first major contribution to Middle East Peace.
I do not believe that this can be accomplished until Hamas no longer has a functional ability to fight Fatah when it returns, which will need to be brought back into Gaza. This means that Israel needs to continue to destroy weapons caches and deplete Hamas' soldiery until Fatah can return without significant threat. Clearly, this plan from the start involved removing Hamas' ability to remain in government of Gaza. Leaving with that accomplished is the only end that makes sense at this time. Other solutions will result in ongoing and worsening conflicts that will not end in peace between the people of Gaza and Israel and will entrench Hamas for decades to come. If there is any solution that will result in a good situation, it does not involve Hamas ruling Gaza either legally or in fact.
My belief is that Israel will have accomplished its military objectives within a week and that it will be ready to negotiate a workable solution when President Obama takes over. Meanwhile, protests are growing around the world and getting uglier all the time. Jews in Europe are feeling very threatened by angry mobs.
-David
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Cease Fires and the Palestinian People
Shalom All,
"Hey! Let's call for a cease fire between Hamas and Israel. Israel will withdraw its troops and the Hamas can continue firing! Its not like Israel will be able to invade again. A cease fire is a win for Hamas."
You can hear these words being said in homes and capital cities around the Arab world. Hamas would never abide by a cease fire if the consequences of violating that cease fire are all to its advantage: worldwide condemnation of Israel, pressuring Israel to increase concessions to Palestinian people, demonstration of Hamas' ability to weather Israel's military storm which increases its prestige and ability to raise money, increased Hamas control of its borders including imports and exports through smuggling tunnels and the ability to utilize any cease fire to simply increase its military capabilities.
Hamas has demonstrated that it cares not at all about the lives of Palestinians, much less Israelis. Palestinian dead are martyrs and according to Hamas, achieve the highest goal that any good Palestinian could hope for, the death of a shahid (you only need to watch Hamas' children's television programming to see that).
Taken from www.PalestineMediaWatch.org:
The following is the full text of the comments by Hamas representative Fathi Hamad:"For the Palestinian people death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the Jihad fighters excel, and the children excel. Accordingly [Palestinians] created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the Jihad fighters against the Zionist bombing machine, as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: We desire death as you desire life."
[Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas) Feb. 29, 2008]
I can't even begin describe the sick videos for children that Hamas produces which encourage them to seek martyrdom which you can find on the web site above. You just have to see them for yourselves.
So, of course, Hamas cannot be counted upon to abide by a cease fire for any length of time. Cease fires are merely strategic pauses in an ongoing war.
What is even more troubling to me is the constant association of Hamas with "The Palestinian People" in the media and even from Palestinian Authority spokesmen. If Hamas is indeed the representative of the Palestinian people then Israel has every right to go to war with the entirety of the Palestinian people. If Hamas is the legitimate government of the Palestinians then the Palestinian people are in a state of declared war against Israel and the Palestinian people do not desire peace with Israel. I have tended to believe that there were really two PEOPLES among the Palestinians fighting to represent the whole. One supported Fatah's efforts to make peace. The other supported Hamas' efforts to wage war. I'm not certain of that anymore.
You cannot have it both ways. Either Hamas is an enemy both to Israel and to Palestinians as a whole or Palestinians as a whole are enemies to Israel. Personally, I'd open door number one. Listening to the news last night with Mustafah Barghouti speaking for the PA and Hanan Ashwari, and other Israel demonizers leaping to the defense of Hamas, I believe that door number two has been broken down by angry mobs of militants and leftists working hand in hand, both Palestinian leaders and western leaders and is being trumpeted by the world's media.
If I took what was on television yesterday as the reality, I would say that the PA has abandoned leadership to Hamas and that hope for any substantial peace is a long way away.
-David
"Hey! Let's call for a cease fire between Hamas and Israel. Israel will withdraw its troops and the Hamas can continue firing! Its not like Israel will be able to invade again. A cease fire is a win for Hamas."
You can hear these words being said in homes and capital cities around the Arab world. Hamas would never abide by a cease fire if the consequences of violating that cease fire are all to its advantage: worldwide condemnation of Israel, pressuring Israel to increase concessions to Palestinian people, demonstration of Hamas' ability to weather Israel's military storm which increases its prestige and ability to raise money, increased Hamas control of its borders including imports and exports through smuggling tunnels and the ability to utilize any cease fire to simply increase its military capabilities.
Hamas has demonstrated that it cares not at all about the lives of Palestinians, much less Israelis. Palestinian dead are martyrs and according to Hamas, achieve the highest goal that any good Palestinian could hope for, the death of a shahid (you only need to watch Hamas' children's television programming to see that).
Taken from www.PalestineMediaWatch.org:
The following is the full text of the comments by Hamas representative Fathi Hamad:"For the Palestinian people death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the Jihad fighters excel, and the children excel. Accordingly [Palestinians] created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the Jihad fighters against the Zionist bombing machine, as if they were saying to the Zionist enemy: We desire death as you desire life."
[Al-Aqsa TV (Hamas) Feb. 29, 2008]
I can't even begin describe the sick videos for children that Hamas produces which encourage them to seek martyrdom which you can find on the web site above. You just have to see them for yourselves.
So, of course, Hamas cannot be counted upon to abide by a cease fire for any length of time. Cease fires are merely strategic pauses in an ongoing war.
What is even more troubling to me is the constant association of Hamas with "The Palestinian People" in the media and even from Palestinian Authority spokesmen. If Hamas is indeed the representative of the Palestinian people then Israel has every right to go to war with the entirety of the Palestinian people. If Hamas is the legitimate government of the Palestinians then the Palestinian people are in a state of declared war against Israel and the Palestinian people do not desire peace with Israel. I have tended to believe that there were really two PEOPLES among the Palestinians fighting to represent the whole. One supported Fatah's efforts to make peace. The other supported Hamas' efforts to wage war. I'm not certain of that anymore.
You cannot have it both ways. Either Hamas is an enemy both to Israel and to Palestinians as a whole or Palestinians as a whole are enemies to Israel. Personally, I'd open door number one. Listening to the news last night with Mustafah Barghouti speaking for the PA and Hanan Ashwari, and other Israel demonizers leaping to the defense of Hamas, I believe that door number two has been broken down by angry mobs of militants and leftists working hand in hand, both Palestinian leaders and western leaders and is being trumpeted by the world's media.
If I took what was on television yesterday as the reality, I would say that the PA has abandoned leadership to Hamas and that hope for any substantial peace is a long way away.
-David
Saturday, January 3, 2009
What did Israel learn in Lebanon? Eighteen lessons.
What did Israel learn in Lebanon? Eighteen lessons.
1. Israel cannot fight wars through public opinion. The other side can fabricate lies that the press and too many others will leap to believe. People around the world are anti-Jewish and very anti-Israel. (Fox News' interview of the NYTimes correspondent in Gaza demonstrated an embarrassing bias that virtually negates any possibility of truth being contained in NYTimes reports from Gaza, what a surprise).
2. The moment the first shot is fired, the clock is ticking on how long Israel has to accomplish its aims before the US gives in to demands for a cease fire, which US allies will demand immediately, and pressures Israel to give in.
3. The moment anyone dies, Palestinians will claim that a "Massacre of Civilians" has occurred. This will shift world opinion against Israel and will press Israel into a cease fire regardless of whether or not a "massacre" ever occurred. Twice in Lebanon alone Israel was forced to end its operations because of fabricated "massacres" of civilians. In its last real incursion into Gaza, Palestinians fabricated the "Jenin Massacre" which never happened in order to sway public opinion against Israel. There is a virtual guarantee that at least one "Massacre" that did not happen will be blamed upon Israel during this current event.
4. Hamas and Hizballah will hide militants and weaponry in civilian targets and among civilians so as to discourage Israel from attacking those targets and guaranteeing immunity for anything and anyone so surrounded. Condemnation has never come from the world press against either Hamas or Hizballah for deliberately endangering civilians.
5. Damaging Hamas or Hizballah accomplishes nothing significant. Fundamental harm must be done. Leaders must be eliminated and the ability for these organizations to rearm must be curtailed dramatically.
6. Avoiding civilian casualties and harm to civilian infrastructure enables militants to avoid critical blows and therefore both Hamas and Hizballah overwhelmingly concentrate their forces and arms caches in civilian areas.
7. In order to win, Israel has no chance but to attack those elements in those areas regardless of civilian casualties. Why? Because it cannot allow organizations to hide essential military targets among civilians and civilians need to make sure that they do not allow themselves to become human shields. Those who choose to endanger themselves by protecting military assets become, by the way, combatants and no longer should be seen as civilians at all. Someone who protects a military asset is by definition a combatant.
8. In order to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible ground forces are essential.
9. The press in Gaza is entirely biased against Israel and must be weathered. Israel cannot allow the war to be one over hearts and minds. It must be fought based upon the real logistics on the ground.
10. The goal of any ground incursion must be the installation of a new regime in the area. Leaving Hizballah in place was a disaster. Israel cannot leave Hamas as the de facto rulers of Gaza. Following this incursion, Israel and Egypt must take over control of the Western border and the PA, including significant troops, must be reinstated in Gaza. This must be done in order to demonstrate that Israel was not fighting the Palestinians, but only their oppressors and its enemies, Hamas.
11. Israel cannot allow any fight to be a fair fight. It needs to use overwhelming force, disproportionate force.
12. Its goal should be, as any army's should be, to limit its own casualties while inflicting not a minimum on its enemy, but a maximum upon its enemies.
13. The end here needs to be either Hamas surrender or its functional death. Nothing short of that will result in a true victory.
14. The concept that "it cannot be won militarily" is not true and the alternative "it can be won diplomatically" has proven dramatically false.
15. Arab nations support Israel against Hamas but cannot do so publicly or else they will face militant attacks in their own nations.
16. News media will equate the truth as reported by presumably unbiased reporters with lies fabricated by known to be biased ones. Where only likely biased reports are available, the media will tend to limit their exposure. Thus, it is better to prevent unbiased reporters from reporting along with the biased ones than to allow biased reporters to be challenged as the conflict develops.
17. The United Nations is entirely useless as far as the Israelis are concerned, because the UN will stand up for Israel's enemies.
18. When Israel needs something done, it has to do it itself and cannot rely on its allies, including the United States, to support its actions.
1. Israel cannot fight wars through public opinion. The other side can fabricate lies that the press and too many others will leap to believe. People around the world are anti-Jewish and very anti-Israel. (Fox News' interview of the NYTimes correspondent in Gaza demonstrated an embarrassing bias that virtually negates any possibility of truth being contained in NYTimes reports from Gaza, what a surprise).
2. The moment the first shot is fired, the clock is ticking on how long Israel has to accomplish its aims before the US gives in to demands for a cease fire, which US allies will demand immediately, and pressures Israel to give in.
3. The moment anyone dies, Palestinians will claim that a "Massacre of Civilians" has occurred. This will shift world opinion against Israel and will press Israel into a cease fire regardless of whether or not a "massacre" ever occurred. Twice in Lebanon alone Israel was forced to end its operations because of fabricated "massacres" of civilians. In its last real incursion into Gaza, Palestinians fabricated the "Jenin Massacre" which never happened in order to sway public opinion against Israel. There is a virtual guarantee that at least one "Massacre" that did not happen will be blamed upon Israel during this current event.
4. Hamas and Hizballah will hide militants and weaponry in civilian targets and among civilians so as to discourage Israel from attacking those targets and guaranteeing immunity for anything and anyone so surrounded. Condemnation has never come from the world press against either Hamas or Hizballah for deliberately endangering civilians.
5. Damaging Hamas or Hizballah accomplishes nothing significant. Fundamental harm must be done. Leaders must be eliminated and the ability for these organizations to rearm must be curtailed dramatically.
6. Avoiding civilian casualties and harm to civilian infrastructure enables militants to avoid critical blows and therefore both Hamas and Hizballah overwhelmingly concentrate their forces and arms caches in civilian areas.
7. In order to win, Israel has no chance but to attack those elements in those areas regardless of civilian casualties. Why? Because it cannot allow organizations to hide essential military targets among civilians and civilians need to make sure that they do not allow themselves to become human shields. Those who choose to endanger themselves by protecting military assets become, by the way, combatants and no longer should be seen as civilians at all. Someone who protects a military asset is by definition a combatant.
8. In order to avoid as many civilian casualties as possible ground forces are essential.
9. The press in Gaza is entirely biased against Israel and must be weathered. Israel cannot allow the war to be one over hearts and minds. It must be fought based upon the real logistics on the ground.
10. The goal of any ground incursion must be the installation of a new regime in the area. Leaving Hizballah in place was a disaster. Israel cannot leave Hamas as the de facto rulers of Gaza. Following this incursion, Israel and Egypt must take over control of the Western border and the PA, including significant troops, must be reinstated in Gaza. This must be done in order to demonstrate that Israel was not fighting the Palestinians, but only their oppressors and its enemies, Hamas.
11. Israel cannot allow any fight to be a fair fight. It needs to use overwhelming force, disproportionate force.
12. Its goal should be, as any army's should be, to limit its own casualties while inflicting not a minimum on its enemy, but a maximum upon its enemies.
13. The end here needs to be either Hamas surrender or its functional death. Nothing short of that will result in a true victory.
14. The concept that "it cannot be won militarily" is not true and the alternative "it can be won diplomatically" has proven dramatically false.
15. Arab nations support Israel against Hamas but cannot do so publicly or else they will face militant attacks in their own nations.
16. News media will equate the truth as reported by presumably unbiased reporters with lies fabricated by known to be biased ones. Where only likely biased reports are available, the media will tend to limit their exposure. Thus, it is better to prevent unbiased reporters from reporting along with the biased ones than to allow biased reporters to be challenged as the conflict develops.
17. The United Nations is entirely useless as far as the Israelis are concerned, because the UN will stand up for Israel's enemies.
18. When Israel needs something done, it has to do it itself and cannot rely on its allies, including the United States, to support its actions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
