The wisdom of retaliation
Posted by James Chettle on December 31st, 2008
By refusing to renew its six month truce with Israel and launching hundreds of rockets across the border, Hamas has provoked Israel into a devastating and tragic reaction. Yet following the embarrassment of its incursion into Lebanon in 2006, the question remains as to why Israel has responded in the manner it has. Is the aim to stop Hamas launching more rockets into Southern Israel? If so, surely Israel has failed to learn the lessons of two years ago; like Hezbollah, even substantial losses will not deter Hamas from its aims to undermine the Israeli state at every opportunity. Indeed the ‘disproportionate’ nature of the Israeli response will undoubtedly bolster Hamas’ recruitment.
Fewer than ten Israelis had been killed by Hamas’ rockets; other options were undoubtedly open to the Israeli government. Was this show of force really the best option for advancing Israeli interests in the peace process? International condemnation will follow, the rockets will continue and the peace process will not be advanced. Hamas will not disappear, even if the people of Gaza return Fatah to power. The world, and not even Iran, needed reminding of Israel’s military might or its readiness to use it upon provocation. Israel may have been justified in striking back, but it is hard to see the wisdom of doing so.
Filed under: arabisraeliconflict, iran, jameschettle, middle east, terrorism on December 31st, 2008
“Was this show of force really the best option for advancing Israeli interests in the peace process?”
It’s a big question. I have no idea — and nor does anyone else. As with Afghanistan and Iraq, we can best judge the wisdom of the venture by its long-term results.
One way to advance the peace process is to eradicate Hamas and bolster Fatah, and it’s easy to see how Israel’s current offensive *might* achieve this aim. But if it has the opposite effect, Israelis may rue this decision.
A tit for tat / two for one response might well have been cleverer for Israel than it might seem.
It would not have caused international censure that has now occurred. In due course it would have convinced the reasonable people in Gaza of the stupidity of the Hamas efforts and thus they could eventually dispose of them democratically.
But the only real way to deter Israel is for the US to withdraw its vast support until such times as Israel treats its neighbors as equals (not vermin) and it abides fully by its original borders and all the outstanding UN resolutions that it flouts.
A peace settlement was brought very close by Clinton’s efforts. But never forget that possibility was so intolerable to Ariel Sharon and his colleagues that he deliberately destroyed all hope on 28 September 2000 when he and an escort of over 1,000 Israeli police officers visited the Temple Mount complex.
Why should Israel treat its “neighbours” as “equals” — if by neighbours you mean Hamas-controlled Gaza as a political entity? Of course the civilians are human beings who ought to be respected, but their gangster government is a menace to its own people.
I don’t have a workable solution — and indeed one can’t really expect one to magically appear in the comments section of the Clare Politics website — but I do wish people would wait before weighing in against Israel. I think a liberal democracy in the Middle East is a precious thing.
People forget that 20% of Israel’s internal population comprises Arab Muslims who enjoy full democratic rights — more rights than they would receive in Iran, Syria, Jordan, Saddam’s Iraq or Gaza. There is no “Holocaust” against them, despite what those disgusting placards say.
Israel is not the problem. Its failure is in not finding a solution.
Okay, not quite “full democratic rights” at the moment. I don’t want to defend much of what Israel does… I only want to defend it from blinkered criticism.