NYRB: Sharon's Phony War

[BurtWorm]

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/16831


Sharon's Phony War
By Henry Siegman

...




Sharon and those closest to him have often expressed their surprise over how easy it has been, in the name of fighting terrorism, to "push the envelope" of what the international community finds acceptable Israeli behavior. During Israel's last presidential election, Sharon's son Omri explained to a group of Likud faithful how cleverly his father has handled the US and other nations:


Today...we are located in the Palestinian areas, we are violating international agreements, and no one is saying anything. So we talk Palestinian state, Palestinian state, but in the meantime not even Area A exists any longer.<*> And there is no Orient House, no Palestinian representation in Jerusalem, and Palestinians are afraid to walk around with weapons in their own cities. Obviously we all want peace, who doesn't want peace. But <my father's> statement about a Palestinian state is a very remote statement.

What Omri Sharon was describing is an incremental approach by which his father has managed to obtain US acquiescence in Israel's gradual obliteration of Palestinian self-government in the Occupied Territories, and even in targeted assassinations. At first these assassinations were supposedly limited to "ticking bombs," but they were gradually extended to political leaders of Hamas and Jihad as well. They inevitably and consistently kill large numbers of Palestinian civilians.


...


<*> "Area A" refers to the parts of the West Bank that were placed under the rule of the Palestinian Authority following the Oslo agreements.

[Muddleoftheroad]

1. Phony War?

Boy, sure fooled me. I guess all those suicide bombings and Israeli civilian deaths were my imagination.

As for "political leaders" of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, they are part of terrorist organizations and as such legitimate targets.

[bluesoul]

2. Then so is Sharon

...

[Muddleoftheroad]

3. Not likely

Sharon heads a state, not a gaggle of terrorists. You remember the term state, it's what the Palestinian people aspire to when they grow up and set aside the terror gangs.

[bluesoul]

4. State

terrorism...

[Muddleoftheroad]

9. Planning ahead?

For the time when the Palestinians get a state?

[bluesoul]

10. I am talking about what is already happening

Sharon and the gang

[Classical_Liberal]

40. Sharon won't give them a state even if they behave!

He has made that clear.

[lefty_mcduff]

7. Looks like you missed the point of the article.

Not that I'm surprised.

[Muddleoftheroad]

8. I get the point

Don't have to agree with it.

[BurtWorm]

17. It might be useful if you spoke to the points in the article,

for example that damning brag from Omri Sharon about what his father has been able to get away with. It's right out there, naked and shameless, what Sharon is up to. His agenda has much more to do with territory than with terrorism.

Please answer the charge that Palestinian terror is more of an ally than an enemy to Sharon's policies.

[Gimel]

28. Omri Sharon

So you believe that Omri Sharon's statement is a basis for determining the Israeli justice in combating terrorism? The author hardley explores anything else. That is like focusing on a childish insult to start a war, which is not far from the truth from some of the terrorists own statements.

[BurtWorm]

31. What part of what Omri said isn't an accurate portrayal of his father's

government's policies and the international response to it?

[Classical_Liberal]

39. The innocence that were killed along with them

because of Sharon's reckless disreguard weren't!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=36421

[Saudade]

5. Phony

Phony in the sense that a war for land acquisition is fought under the guise of "self-defense" in which the aggressor is portrayed as the victim and vice-versa.

It's every bit as phony as Bush's "defensive" invasion of Iraq.

[bluesoul]

6. Amen

...

[BurtWorm]

15. Well said!

Excellent summation. Muddle is missing the point, or refusing to address the point, which is exactly as you stated it.

:toast:

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gimel]

30. A futile essay

This seems to be the entire reason for writing the essay. It may fill a space in the NY Times Book Review section, but it is hardly worth the print.

[BurtWorm]

38. Thanks for sharing.

Your post certainly filled space on DU!

[Violet_Crumble]

53. Any reason why it's hardly worth the print?

As opposed to the right-wing articles you've praised profusely in this forum? What in the article did you have a problem with? I read it and it was a well-written article that put the finger on the pulse of how Sharon operates and what his goals are. I guess this is the sort of stuff that the Sharon faithful wouldn't like seeing in the US mainstream media, and I'm sure they'd all be loudly decrying it without actually trying to rebut a single point as well...

Violet...

[Violet_Crumble]

52. Thanks for explaining that...

I don't really understand how anyone who'd read the article could not have understood the sense 'phony war' was being used in, but using the US War On Terror and Iraq specifically spells it out so well that there's no way anyone could miss the point now...

Violet...

[Saudade]

11. Great article

This article is one of the best, most succinct summations of the current situation I have read.

"The notion that the war against terror cannot be won by military measures alone but must also provide Palestinians with prospects for a political solution is hardly revolutionary. It is a view that Sharon's own security advisers have advocated. Sharon has been accused of many things by his critics, but stupidity is not one of them. Why, then, hasn't Sharon reached this conclusion on his own?

The inescapable answer to this question is that the war that Sharon is waging is not aimed at the defeat of Palestinian terrorism but at the defeat of the Palestinian people and their aspirations for national self-determination. In this war, Palestinian terrorism has been not an enemy but an indispensable ally, providing Sharon with the pretext that has enabled him to proceed relentlessly with the implantation of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza. Over the years, Sharon has made no secret of his conviction that these settlements must be built so extensively as to create facts on the ground that no future Israeli government will be able to undo. Sharon's assurances that he is committed to the launching of a peace process once Palestinian terrorism is vanquished is a lie intended to gain time for securing the irreversibility of the settlement enterprise."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[bluesoul]

12. Words of truth

indeed. Some see through people like Sharon, some don't...

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[edzontar]

13. Great article, great response...

Sharon's real motives are slef-evident, and I don't see how anyne can defend his policy unless they also accept his terms.

By which I mean--his expansionist, Greater Israel agenda.

By any other measure, the policy has been such a disastrous failure that the old man should have been kicked out long ago.

[Muddleoftheroad]

14. His agenda

As far as most Israelis are concerned is their defense. And the people who keep him in power are the terrorists. Every terror attack, every suicide bombing, etc. keeps him in power that much longer.

[bluesoul]

16. Palestinians can say the same for Arafat

for every house demolished, every illegal settler and every year the occupation goes on...

[BurtWorm]

18. What's your basis for that assertion?

What makes you so sure "most" Israelis care more about defense than peace?

[GabysPoppy]

20. Would you be bothered if Muddle stated it this way

Most Israelis care about defense first then peace.

Something he has said forever.

And in that regard he is 100% correct and the reason Sharon is currently the PM.

Something he has also said forever.

[BurtWorm]

21. What's the basis for THAT assertion?

According the NYRB article, it isn't clear what "most Israelis" want, but they seem to be getting tired of Sharon's tack, which is to weaken the will of the Palestinian people and make them feel utterly defeated. Do you think "most Israelis" want that?

[Muddleoftheroad]

23. Nations turn to generals for war

Why is anyone surprised by that?

Under normal circumstances, pushing your enemy and making them see that a protracted fight is not to their benefit would force most enemies to the peace table. Arafat and his terror cronies are unique. They just don't seem to care.

[edzontar]

25. As the article makes clear--Sharon's policies are not only

Dishonest, thay have also FAILED to provide security.

[Muddleoftheroad]

26. ANY policies would have failed under these circumstances

Perhaps other policies would have failed far worse.

Either way, just as the terror war has been horrible for Israel, it has been horrible for the Palestinians, the vast majority of which seem to support terror.

Every state that is attacked wishes to defend itself. Israelis know for certain that Sharon will do just that. At this point, many might assume that there is nothing they can do to end terror. If that is the case, then it is simply as I have called it in another thread, the Forever War.

[edzontar]

37. Blah blah blah...

Sharon is a faillure if peace and security are the goals.


Who knows how another government migth ave fared?

[Classical_Liberal]

42. never know unless you try

Sharon doesn't try. Should be ditched. Clearly his present policies don't work.

[BurtWorm]

27. How many turned out to vote for Likud in the last election

compared to the size of the electorate? In the US, voting participation is down to 40% in the biggest, national elections. What's the figure in Israel. How "turned to," really, is Sharon? I was under the impression he was PM by default, because Israelis have pretty much decided they don't give a shit who runs the government anymore because no one is able to fix the problem.

[GabysPoppy]

29. Is that a serious comment?

[BurtWorm]

32. Why do you doubt that?

[GabysPoppy]

33. Clue # 1

"I was under the impression he was PM by default, because Israelis have pretty much decided they don't give a shit who runs the government anymore because no one is able to fix the problem."

[BurtWorm]

34. Well how do you explain the low voter turnout in the last two elections?

Fear? That's the only plausible explanation besides disgust and apathy.

[GabysPoppy]

45. Turnout was down in the last election

Final Results of Elections to the 16th Knesset

Voting statistics:


Total number of ballot boxes counted: 7,697

Total number of registered voters: 4,720,074

Total Ballots: 3,200,773

Invalid Ballots: 52,409

Valid Ballots: 3,148,364

By my calculations, the results approximate 2/3 of eligible voters went to the polls. Fear of terrorist attacks probably were a factor for the comparatively low turnout. Of course when measured by statistics in the US, low is a relative term. The other possible reason for the lower percentage was the enormous amount of eligible Arab voters who boycotted this election.

[edzontar]

46. Whatever, as for me, I hope they vote Sharon OUT, and soon....

Heck, even BUSH is starting to get impatient with the creep.

[Classical_Liberal]

41. Nations also turn to generals when mislead by authoritarian states

look at Latin America! Dare I say Germany in the 40's. They elected Hitler because of terrorism against the Reichstag.

[dai]

47. Not surprising at all.

If nations turn to generals for war, as you have said, a general desirious of power requires a war.

Hence - "Sharon's phony war".

[sushi]

50. You can put

whatever spin you want on it, Muddle. Israel's PM also needs to be forced to the peace table. He is clearly stalling, and you know it!

[Classical_Liberal]

43. Israelis need to wake up to the fact that Sharon isn't defending them

He is provoking enemies.

These airforce pilots have

"Our government's policy is to maintain fear in the public," Capt Assaf L said. "We're not weak. It's not 1967 or 1973, with the Syrian army on the border waiting to attack us. This is maintaining a war to maintain the occupation. .."Our fight to keep the settlements and suppress the Palestinian people is killing us. It is killing our right to live safely in the country of Israel. A very small group of radical Israelis is leading the sane majority to catastrophe.".."In our eyes, what we did is a very Zionist act. We did it to save Israel."...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=124&topic_id=36421

[sushi]

51. Exactly

He's just making more enemies for Israel. How strange that the people of Israel don't realize it.

[edzontar]

19. That is the tragic irony of the situation...

Sharon's actions breed support for the terrorists.

The terrorists' action breed support for Sharon.

[Toronto Ron]

22. Most Israelis...

are against the settlements and are for a Palestinian state. Then why was Sharon re-elected? Because the Israeli Left stayed home, last election. Lowest turnout ever, I think. My relatives are included in that lot. Too depressed to vote, due to the terrorism casualties. But there are signs of rejuvenated optimism; we'll see what happens.

[edzontar]

24. We can only hope--and there are signs...

Of increasing dissatisfaction with Sharon's failures...

[Muddleoftheroad]

35. Why?

Do you think Sharon leaving the scene will result in peace? I sure don't.

[edzontar]

36. Perhaps not immediately, but yes...

I think he is an obstacle to peace.



Read the article?

[Classical_Liberal]

44. Yep

, particularly if the settlements stop and promptly abandoned or given the Palestinian state.

[Violet_Crumble]

54. Israelis opposed to the settlements...

Has anyone got any reliable figures on what % of the population do oppose the settlements?

Sorry, but I disagree with you on the reasons why Sharon was re-elected. He won the election for the same reasons as right-wing governments elsewhere are riding high and looking invincible. It's because the Left has been put in a position where it must either support the right-wings farcical plans to 'fight terror' or be portrayed as supporting or going light on it. Most voters don't look too deeply into the motives and plans of any party, and if the Right can divert attention away from domestic issues by keeping The War On Terror at the forefront of their election campaigns. No matter how good Mitzna was and how well his policies would have brought about a peace, he had it against him from the start, because voters weren't looking at his policies. They opted for the simplistic and dishonest crap from Sharon instead. And, the same as I would feel about any Democrat in the US voting for Bush next election, I have nothing but the deepest contempt for anyone who voted Labor in the past, who was stupid enough to vote Likud this time around....

Violet...