And Then What?

[bemildred]

AND THEN WHAT?....Marc Lynch went to a lecture this morning given by Israel's Ambassador to the United States, Sallai Meridor:

It was a profoundly dismaying experience. Because if Ambassador Meridor is taken at his word, then Israel has no strategy in Gaza.

Asked three times by audience members, Meridor simply could not offer any plausible explanation as to how its military campaign in Gaza would achieve its stated goals....As to a political strategy tied to the military campaign, nothing. No guidance as to whether Israel would re-occupy Gaza, or on what terms it would accept a cease-fire. No thoughts as to whether the campaign would cause Hamas to fall from power or help the Palestinian Authority regain political power.

....In short, Meridor quite literally offered no strategy beyond hitting Gaza hard and hoping for the best. "In terms of creating damage we are certainly on the right path," noted the Ambassador. Few would disagree with that assessment, at least. But some might hope that the bloody, battered path might actually be leading somewhere.

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2009/01/and_then_what.html

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

1. I disagree. Israel has a strategy.

And from what it appears to be, it's total annihilation of the enemy at all costs. Anything less would produce more Hamas resisters and sympathizers.

There are two flaws with the strategy. First, there will be international backlash. Israel can only claim self-defense for so long before people stop believing that the destruction of schools and mosques are entirely necessary for the defense of Israel and her people. Second, the enemy is much larger than Israel is anticipating. By striking down Hamas it is giving a clarion call to other Islamist organizations and unsympathetic Arab nations to strike against Israel whether it be through terror, economics, or diplomacy. This current campaign will come back to haunt Israel.

[Vegasaurus]

2. Oh for heaven's sake

"total annihilation of the enemy at all costs"?

Are you out of your mind?

If Israel really had that goal, they would have killed half a million people in the last week, not 500.

Israel could have annihilated the Palestinian population a hundred times by now.

Instead, there are fewer casualties, civilian and terrorist, of Palestinians in the past 60 years than in any other ongoing war in history.

Read some facts before you state nonsense.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

3. Nonsense nothing.

And if you read my post and comprehended it, Palestinians aren't being defined as the enemy - Hamas is although conflation between the two is understandable given the media environment we're in. And we both know Israel simply couldn't summarily execute an entire population without causing major backlash. It's a military tactic as old as humanity itself - eliminate a threat by destroying it entirely. Whether it's always worked or not is another thing.

So before flying off the handle, try to understand what someone is saying first.

Oh, and if you'd like to be a pro-Israel (or pro-Palestine) apologist to me, don't bother. I'm simply not open to it. Both sides have enough blame to go around. We're just seeing the latest round (and probably not the last one, either).

[Vegasaurus]

4. Israel does not have the goal of getting rid of Hamas

only of the rockets.

Hamas could end this tomorrow, or could have never had it start, had it chosen to stop the rockets.

They goaded Israel and lost.

Today they shot another 30 rockets.

This will go on a good while longer, and the innocent Palestinian population has a lot more to lose.

Curse Hamas, for their callousness.

[HeraldSquare212]

8. The stated goal a few days ago was to destroy Hamas "brick by brick"

I realize the spin changes....

[Mike 03]

9. Sorry I don't understand: Aren't Hamas and the rockets basically the same? NT

[azurnoir]

11. So Hamas is making Israel bomb Gaza

Israel has no other choice but to bomb schools, herd entire families into houses and then shell them, changing the game as Barack put it the list goes on but Israel has no other choice?
When will the attempt to transfer responsibility for the actions that Israel chooses stop?

[Chulanowa]

13. I love this argument

"They COULD have killed millions, but instead only killed several hundred" (paired with thousands of casualties and tens of thousands now homeless)

There are 1.5 million people in Gaza. In population ratios, this is about the same as having killed 121,800 Americans, or 3,000 Israelis.

If someone killed 121,800 of your fellow Americans in four days, would you call it a massacre?

[daleo]

6. I think the strategy is just to perpetuate the status quo indefinitely

I think there is no real agreement about the Palestinian situation within Israel, so the default policy is just to maintain the status quo indefinitely. That means subduing the Palestinians, but not much else. They are afraid to give the Palestinians a real state, they can't assimilate them within a Jewish state, and the world would recoil at expulsion.

The status quo can't last forever, though. I think the U.S. is slowly evolving away from unconditional support of Israel, and it is questionable whether the status quo can be maintained without American support. Eventually some sort of reasonable accommodation will have to be made, but I can't guess how long it might take. At one time I was hopeful it wouldn't take long, based on the progress in South Africa and Northern Ireland, the other two intractable situations of my lifetime. Now, it looks like my optimism was premature.

[bemildred]

7. It's a lot like the US.

The only way to rule is to do nothing much. But that sort of goes with divide-and-rule politics.

WRT your argument, which I somewhat agree with, there is another issue, which is that the support of the USA is not going to be worth as much as it once was.

The Israelis would be wiser to negotiate while they still have a good hand.

[daleo]

10. Yes, U.S. power seems to be waning somewhat

If we suppose that China fills in some of that power vacuum, then it is unlikely that they will feel any religious kinship with either side. Since Arabs outnumber Israelis (and have the vast majority of the oil reserves), China is more likely to favor the Arab side, when these issues arise.

[Mike 03]

5. That sounds a lot like how Lebanon turned out.

I'm just a person on the sidelines at this point who is feeling more and more depressed that there cannot be some sort of meeting of minds between these two countries.

I see both sides. It's just a terrible, awful situation, and I just pray that before long there can be some breakthrough. It's a hideous and almost ridiculous tragedy that two nations cannot exist side by side. Human beings will have so many crises to face over the next decade, the last thing we need now is be attacking each other.

On Edit

And I am not blaming anyone. I just feel so sad and repulsed tonight for some reason.

[azurnoir]

12. No exit strategy

hmmm sounds familiar once again Bush should be flattered