No matter what you think of the current conflict between the Israelis and Hamas, it is clear that neither side seems willing to give even a little. Israel’s ability to outweigh Hamas in its attacks by what looks like a 15 to 1 margin may be justifiable in the face of rocket attacks from Gaza and Hamas’ refusal to accept Israel’s right to exist, but it will not end the conflict.
I was reading an article this morning by progressive Rabbi Michael Lerner. His perspective began with a comparison:
If Mexico had a group of anti-imperialist South Americans bombing Texas, imagine how long it would take for the United States to mobilize a counterattack.
I can agree with him there.
He goes on, however, to criticize Israel for the size of the assault which it made on Gaza after Hamas’ initial rocket attacks:
Before Israel’s massive bombing, the Hamas bombings that began when the previous cease-fire ran out had not (thank God) killed anyone. The reason is obvious: Hamas has no airplanes, no tanks, nothing more than the weapons of the powerless–limited range mortars with limited accuracy. Hamas can harass, but it cannot pose any threat to the existence of Israel. And just as Hamas’ indiscriminate bombing of population centers is a crime against humanity, so is Israel’s massive attack against civilians (in addition to those killed thus far in Gaza, there are the thousands killed by Israel in the years of the Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza).
There was a short period of time when there was a real cease fire, but Lerner blames both sides in it’s collapse:
Hamas had respected the previously negotiated cease-fire except when Israel used it as cover to make assassination raids against Hamas and other Palestinian leaders. Arguing that these raids were hardly a manifestation of cease-fire, Hamas would, as symbolic protest, allow the release of rocket fire (usually hitting no targets). But when the issue of continuing the cease-fire came up, Hamas wanted a guarantee that these assassination raids would stop. And it asked for more. With hundreds of thousands of Palestinians facing acute malnutrition bordering on starvation, Hamas insisted that the borders be opened to counter Israeli attempts to starve the Gazans into submission. And in return for the captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, it asks for the release of a thousand Palestinians imprisoned in Israel.
All of this, of course, with the Gazans vowing never to recognize Israel, even if a 2-state policy was actually worked out (this is an ongoing pain in the ass… however it made me think: what if the Sioux Indians swore never to recognize the United States as we defied treaty after treaty by settling on their lands and confining them to “Gaza-like” reservations? Wouldn’t we be in the same situation? It’s a good thing that situation happened in the 19th Century with 19th Century weaponry.)
Lerner outlines a seven-step solution that he proposes to solve the ongoing problem. You can view them here. He makes it clear, however, that Israel, being the greater power, really has to take the first positive actions.
I don’t believe it will happen. In the long run I have great sympathy for Lerner as he makes his final conclusion:
Meanwhile, it breaks my heart to see the terrible suffering in Gaza and Israel, as it does when witnessing the suffering brought to Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Darfur–and the list goes on. For me as a religious Jew it is all the worse, because under the guise of serving God, both Jews and Arabs are actually acting out their accumulated pain in ways that will generate future suffering.
WE have not been occupping Mexico for 40 years and slowly starving them to death. Killing all their leaders, massacring families, stealing their land, stealing their water, kidnapping at will, shooting and killing peaceful demonstrators, killing fisherman, burning their 1000 year old olive and orange groves, and shooting their children in the head as target practice.
hm.
ENDGAME: (none / 0)
“As I watch Israel behaving in ever increasing savage and irrational ways, am reminded of this interview with Israeli military historian Martin van Crefeld”:
Interviewer: Some maintain that it is Israel’s foreign enemies that keep the country unified.
Creveld: That’s right. I only wish that there were foreign enemies, but that isn’t the case. We’ve fought our external enemies for so many years. Each time there was a war, we took a mighty hammer to our foes, and after being defeated a few times, they left us alone. The problem with the Palestinian revolt is that it doesn’t come from without, but rather from within. Therefore we can’t avail ourselves of the hammer.
Interviewer: Is the solution, then, to keep the Palestinians outside the borders?
Creveld: Exactly, and right now there’s nearly unanimous agreement on that. We ought to build a wall “so high, that not even a bird can fly over it.” The only problem is: where to put the border? Since we can’t decide whether the territories conquered in 1967 should be included, for the time being we improvise a little. We’re building a series of little walls, which are much more difficult to defend. From a military standpoint this is very stupid. Every supermarket has gradually acquired its own living wall of security guards. Half the Israeli population is guarding the other half-unbelievable. Aside from the fantastic waste, it’s almost totally useless.
Interviewer: Does that mean that the Palestinians stay within the borders?
Creveld:
No, it means that they all get deported. The people who strive for this are waiting only for the right man and the right time. Two years ago only 7 or 8 percent of Israelis were of the opinion that this would be the best solution, two months ago it was 33 percent and now, according to a Gallup poll, the figure is 44 percent.
Interviewer: Will that ever be possible?
Creveld: Sure, since desperate times give rise to desperate measures. Today there’s a fifty-fifty split on where the border should run. Two years ago 90 percent wanted the wall built along the old border. That has completely changed now, and if things continue, if the terror doesn’t stop, in another two years perhaps 90 percent will want to build the wall along the Jordan. The Palestinians talk of “summutt,” meaning hang tough, cling to the ground and the soil. I have enormous respect for the Palestinians. They fight heroically. But if we in fact want to strike across the Jordan, we would need only a few brigades. If the Syrians or the Egyptians were to try to stop us, we’d wipe them out. Ariel Sharon is leader. He never improvises: he always has a plan.
Interviewer: A plan to deport the Palestinians?
Creveld: I think it’s quite possible that he wants to do that. He wants to escalate the conflict. He knows that nothing else we do will succeed.
Interviewer: Do you think that the world will allow that kind of ethnic cleansing?
Creveld: That depends on who does it and how quickly it happens. We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force.
Interviewer: Wouldn’t Israel then become a rogue state?
Creveld: Let me quote General Moshe Dayan: “Israel must be like a mad dog, too dangerous to bother.” I consider it all hopeless at this point. We shall have to try to prevent things from coming to that, if at all possible. Our armed forces, however, are not the thirtieth strongest in the world, but rather the second or third. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen, before Israel goes under.
Interviewer: This isn’t your own position, is it?
Creveld: Of course not. You asked me what might happen and I’ve laid it out. The only question is whether it is already too late for the other solution, which I support, and whether Israeli public opinion can still be convinced. I think it’s too late. With each passing day the expulsion of the Palestinians grows more probable. The alternative would be the total annihilation and disintegration of Israel. What do you expect from us?
This interview was conducted by Ferry Biedermann in Jerusalem. [Source: http://www.de.indymedia.o rg/2003/01/39170.shtml]
Van Creveld must be aware that with the sole exception of 1973, every one of Israel’s wars was a instigated by Israel, not her “enemies”. Even in the case of 1948, which was originally someone unclear, it is becoming increasingly less ambiguous that this was a war chosen by Israel to to accomplish two goals, ethnic cleansing and territorial expansion. When I think of the 1948 war and its origin I am always reminded of Ben Gurion reassuring his comrades with the statement that “the war will give us the land“.
We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen, before Israel goes under.
The Samson Option
Thanks to Rabbi Lerner for his remarks, and to you for publishing them here, and for adding your own very good ones. And (surprise, surprise!) I have some things to add:
The latest cease fire began on June 19. Israel violated it multiple times daily in the first week. The cease fire was specificially with Hamas. There are three recorded incidents in which Palestinians fired during the first week. Two are confirmed NOT to be by Hamas (one by Islamic Jihad, and one by the military wing of Fatah, the party of Mahmoud `Abbas, Israel and the U.S.’s hand picked “partner”). There is not one confirmed incident of Hamas firing during this week of multiple daily violations by Israel.
June 20, 2008
June 21
June 23
June 24
– Islamic Jihad militants fired rockets into southern Israel, the militant group and the Israeli army said. No casualties. The rocket fire followed Israel’s killing of two Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, an area not covered by the ceasefire.
June 25
June 26
– Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, a militant group belonging to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah faction, fired one rocket into southern Israel, the group and the Israeli army said.
After that, the Israelis quieted down and for a few months Sderot was spared the frightening rockets. Until that is on November 4, while the attention of the world was riveted on the U.S. elections, the Israelis made an unprovoked major attack inside Gaza, murdering six Palestinians. Then over a three day period Israel made several attacks in which they murdered a total of 26 Palestinians, including a number of children, and women. It was only after that that Hamas resumed the rocket attacks.
We know that Israel has a right to defend itself after Hamas fires a few pathetic, mostly harmless home made rockets that haven’t killed anyone. In fact, we know that Israel has a right to spend 33 days devastating an entire country in response to the capture of a couple of soldiers who may or may not have intruded onto that country’s territory. So, the question is how many Palestinians do the Israelis get to murder, and how much destruction of civil infrastructure, businesses, dwellings do the Israelis get to do before the Palestinians have a right to defend themselves, or retaliate?
– “the Gazans vowing never to recognize Israel, even if a 2-state policy was actually worked out“. This is factually incorrect. First, there is no such monolithic entity as “the Gazans”, just as there is no such monolithic entity as “the Jews”. The Gazans, who are actually quite a diverse lot, including, believe it or not, a Christian population, have vowed no such thing. Undoubtedly there ARE Gazans who cannot bring themselves to recognize Israel (and it seems that is something you can understand), but that does not add up to “the Gazans vowing never to recognize Israel”.
Hamas itself has officially declared that it could accept a two state solution with Israel existing inside the green line, and an Independent State of Palestine in the West Bank and Gaza. Unfortunately, that kind of news seems not to get much play in the U.S., so most people continue to believe that Hamas is committed to destruction of Israel and the annihilation of the Jews (or some version of that).
And thanks for your analogy with the Sioux. Obviously you do get it.
And finally, Rabbi Lerner appears to equate the “suffering” of Israelis with that of the Palestinians when he refers to the “terrible suffering in Gaza and Israel“. Come on! WHAT “terrible suffering” in Israel? I am in regular contact with a number of Israelis in different cities there, and they are not suffering whatsoever. On the contrary, in fact. And it is even an overstatement to refer to “suffering” in the case of Sderot. It would be reasonable to say the residents of Sderot are being terrorized by the rockets, but to suggest that this is in any way remotely equivalent to anything endured by the Palestinians over the last 60 Years.