In today’s editorial. the New York Times offers this advice to the Israeli goverment:
. . . even when acting justifiably in the face of aggression, Israel best serves its long-term security interests by acting wisely and proportionately. Its guiding principle must always be to focus military actions as narrowly as possible on those individuals, organizations and governments directly complicit in the attacks, while sparing the civilian populations that surround them.
That is, of course, far easier said than done. Military actions in inhabited areas cannot be fine-tuned. Yet surely the repeated lesson of recent history is that inflicting pain and humiliation on Arab civilians does not make them angry at the terrorists who provoked the violence. It makes them angrier at Israel.
I read the “lesson of recent history” differently. Acting “wisely and proportionately”—for instance, by withdrawing from Gaza—has at best produced a lull followed by renewed violence on the part of Israel’s enemies. By witholding the big stick, Israel inflicts “pain and humiliation” without preventing Arab militants from regrouping and launching new attacks. Peace may not be possible but, if it is, it will come about when the Arabs are convinced that the costs of violence exceed any conceivable benefits. History has shown that surgical military operations don’t meet this requirement.
Latest developments:
- A few minutes ago on ABC’s Nightline, it was reported that Israel has bombed the Beirut airport’s runways. The big stick may have been unleashed.
- The Jerusalem Post reports that the Israeli Cabinet also approved plans to target other strategic infrastructures inside Lebanon, including power plants.
Be sure to read Iraq the Model’s analysis and check out the links at Pajamas Media.
UPDATE: President George W. Bush and U.S. diplomats, distracted by threats from North Korea to Iraq, are playing a minor role as an escalating confrontation between Israelis and Arabs risks wider Middle East violence. David Welch, U.S. assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, and Elliott Abrams, deputy assistant to the president, only arrived in the region yesterday, 17 days after the abduction of an Israeli soldier in the Gaza Strip set off the crisis. Bush hasn’t spoken to any Middle Eastern leaders in the past couple of weeks, according to National Security Council spokesman Frederick Jones. [emphasis added]
“Up until now the administration’s been on the sidelines,’’ said Dennis Ross, the senior U.S. Middle East broker for President Bill Clinton. “They’ve made a conscious decision to let this play out and let others take the lead. The administration is preoccupied.’’
As far as I’m concerned, nobody is taking the lead
This appears to be one of those situations where a rude awakening may be necessary. Just as after WW1, Germany could pretend it wasn’t actually defeated (since its cities weren’t in ruins and most of the country avoided becoming a battlefield) and it required decisive and devastating defeat to shift their mental paradigm, so may the Palestinians require painful and shocking destruction before they can move past their current terrorism/negotiation/more-terrorism mindset.
Very early in his first term, Pres Bush stated that the peace process bewteen Isreal and the Arabs could not be forced, but depended on the people there being ready. The Clinton Admin’s policy of pleading and pandering proved that.
Each time renewed hopes for peace in the region have followed a massive military defeat for the Arabs. The Palestinians did not really get serious about negotiating until after Desert Storm, where the guy they backed lost. A decade of diplomatic reversal of the effects of that victory followed, and finally Israel built the wall and Saddam went down for the last time – and the peace effort was renewed again.
“Because of the political arrangements with the international community, it was decided to let them shoot first – and the consequences are now very clear. If you don’t take the initiative, and you allow the enemy to shoot whenever and wherever he wants, then even if he fails 20 times, at the end he succeeds.” Amidror, former Deputy Chief of IDF Intelligence and the head of its Research and Assessment Department.
I just saw the press conference with Merkel at Stralsund. Bush said he supported Israel’s right to defend itself. With regard to Lebanon, he cautioned that Israeli actions should not weaken the Lebanese government.
Karen: Best outcome for this would be for Lebanon to appeal to Israel for help in ousting the terrorists and Syrian agents from its territory. Iran issues more threatening announcements and steps up aid to Hizbolah. Israel nukes Iran and Baby Doc Assad moves to Switzerland while a U.N.-sponsored protectorate reduces Syria to Somalia-on-the-Med over the next few years.
And that nightmare scenario is the best outcome I can come up with….
Face it, Israel has never had a moments peace in it’s entire existence and it never will. it may have seemed logical at a time, but it’s no longer feasible. Islam has united the arab world in a way pan arabism never could. people say “this is like 1938” and I agree. the logical thing to do then was leave Nazi Germany. Spiritual Zionism will never end, political zionism can’t go on. just my two cents.
And worth exactly that, Lester. You would have let the Nazis conquer all of Europe, just as you are advocating that we let Islam do whatever its most extreme purveyors can think of. Won’t happen, son.
who are the nazis in your analogy today?
The entire situation is a no-win sitaution for either Israel or “the West” (whomever they may be). Despite the fact that Israel (a) vacated the entire Gaza area (though, they continued to control the entry/exit locations) and (b) retreated to the “Blue Line” with (southern) Lebanon, it is being blamed for the escalation of hostilities. Seriously, what’s a proportional response to the kidnappings and incursions/bombings/murders? Is Israel supposed to send over long-range missles into civilian territories, dug a tunnel under the ‘border’ (as in the case of Gaza) or fire upon a Hezobollah patrol and then capture four of their “soldiers” and call it even?
The world is givig lip service to calling for the return of the hostages. If they had a real backbone and were serious about being evenhanded, they would refuse to provide ANY support—financial, political (in the UN and other international forums) for the Arabs and Palestinian ‘causes.’ Maybe then, once the Arabs realize that the West and rest of the world actually values a real peace, maybe then the region will cease to be so violent.
Im a norwegian, reading american press reports from time to time. Here inn Norway Israel is a hated state. Editorials,and the “editorial carton”,often describe Israel as nazi-stat, or even worse, as consetration camp chiefs. Inn one of norways three leading newspapers,Dagbladet, Ehud Olmert was drawn,last week,as the Ralph Fiennes caracter,Amon Goeth, inn Shindlers List sniping palestinians,from the balcony,with just his pants on.
The goverment at the moment is a sosialist one,condeming Israels every move. Just today, they “strongly condemd” Israels respons to Hezbolla.
Its is “verboden” to buy israeli wepons, or sell Israel wepons.
The SV party, whom controll the finance department, spoke up for a totale boycott of Israel(Condi notisted that.)
The USA if never mentioned inn a positiv tone.
More as a strange,christian and stupid nation.
So imagine my anger every time I read a newspaper, hear my goverment ministers speek and so on..The US got some fine friends hehe
MartyBob, this sort of attitude (not yours, but the one you talk about) is why a great number of Americans, perhaps the majority now, really don’t care even a tiny bit about what the rest of the world thinks of us. Many of us fully expect Europe to come to us begging us to solve their problems yet again, sooner or later. Our inclination is to tell Europe to go pound sand. I’ve seen some Europeans get very hurt looks on their faces when I tell them that we don’t give a crap what they think of us, they aren’t important on the world stage anyway.
Israel has every right to defend itself against any and all who deny it’s right to exist.
Their is no fair way to FIGHT. If you choose to impose your will on any country with kidnapping,terrorism,and rocket attacks you will be become part of Isaac Newton’s fundamental law. For every action,their is an equal and opposite reaction.
It is sad to see that the countries of Europe are supporting terrorism. Israel is surrounded by fanatical groups in Syria,Iran,and Lebanon who relentlessly kill innocent Israelis day after day, year after year.
I’m sorry,but if you kidnap even one Israeli, you should expect to be annihilated.
There is NO book of rules for killing. If killing is your only way to communicate, be prepared for the barbaric action in return a million times.
America Alone: the neo con plan. Personally, I miss being part of the world
The problem in my opinion is that there is one set of rules for the jews,anonther for the rest of the world. I said to one friend yesterday “How many dayes does it take for our goverment and our newspapers to start to condem Israels
legitime respons to this killings and kidnapings made inn an attack from a foregin nation?” Not more than a day hehe it sickens my soul. One set of rules for the world, but another for the jews..what do you call this? This “thing” that makes killings of jews acceptable by standard? What does this mean for the middel-east? Every time an arab terror org. attacts Israel the world condems Israels respons and Israel leaders and so on. Giving them motivation to continue this cycel.
“Kill jews and get it all,they forget the jews killed inn a day(littarly speeking)!”.
Its a win win situation for them,they get the kill,the p.r and the moral support.
Therefore the european media and the european leaders are deeple responsible for the killings inn the middel-east. They encourage this.
I should say western media and western leaders,thou the US is generly nicer to Israel, its “nicer” words has much more influence over Israel than the harser words from Europe. Like a sweet talker with a big stick…
The Muslim Brotherhood And Hezbollah Detonate The Political Bomb
Today, we face the ugly reality, that the world at large has been successfully duped to believe that Israel is the aggressor and all the Islamic terrorist organizations are her victims. Now that Hamas has joined the ranks of other terrorist organizatio…
MartyBob,
It is acutely obvious that your quaint little European country needs to seriously rethink their political agenda.In America, we call it armchair quarterbacking(You’ve never played the game yourself,but know how to play and have all the right answers).
Sir, you people need to wake the hell up over their because,they won’t stop after they conquer and kill every man woman and child in Israel.
Israeli’s are surrounded by a number of Muslim countries that deny them the right to even breathe air,and your country has the audacity to critcize them for protecting themselves.
Well it’s good to know that we shouldn’t count on Sweden as an ally or for support, but we can fight our own battles, how about Sweden?
Sweden, Norways big brother so to speak, is a neutral contry. But inn Sweden you at least got an existing conservative press and a more balanced media inn general compered to Norway. But of course, they to got a soscialt goverment to,whom more or less “invited” Hamas represantativs when the rest of Europe had decided not to do that. The US wasnt happy about that. Then the same representativ was allowed inn to Norway. The US dident like that at all. I dont no the problem of Norway, think it has to do with the 1980s and back when the goverment dident allow more than one tv-channel,the state owned NRK, whom middel-east reporters from the 80s and on worked like hell to present Israel as the devil of the earth and still do. Before this propagande offensiv of the 80s Norway was one of Israels true friends, even helping them get the materials they needed to build the bomb(hehe) and so on..
[...] Ignatius is representative of a widely-held viewpoint that could prove fatal to the West: there are no circumstances that can justify a level of violence capable of eliminating security threats. This view either forgets or purposely ignores the lesson of World War II: that the policy of unconditional surrender resulted in a peaceful Germany and a peaceful Japan. Instead, this view takes it cues from the successful outcome of the Cold War. The problem is that the war in the Middle East is hot, not cold. ________________ Two days ago, I took exception to a New York Times editorial asserting that “Israel best serves its long-term security interests by acting wisely and proportionately.” My view was and is that acting “wisely and proportionately” has at best produced a lull followed by renewed violence on the part of Israel’s enemies. [...]
[...] I set forth a similar viewpoint in a July 13th post, in which I asserted that [...]