Where Dreams of Reconciliation Go To Die
6 Comments Published by Tom Gara on Wednesday, January 7 at Wednesday, January 07, 2009.
Jeffrey Goldberg, who writes about Israel and the Jewish world better than anyone, has been in blogging paralysis during the Gaza war. His explanation:
"Gaza has overdetermined me into paralysis. I actually feel too close to this problem, a problem that symbolizes all problems. It's true: I have friends in Gaza about whom I worry a great deal; I've seen many people killed in Gaza; I've served in the Israeli Army in Gaza; I've been kidnapped in Gaza; I've reported for years from Gaza; I hope my former army doesn't kill the wrong people in Gaza; I hope Israeli soldiers all leave Gaza alive; I know they'll be back in Gaza; I think this operation will work; and I have no actual hope that it will work for very long, because nothing works for very long in the Middle East. Gaza is where dreams of reconciliation go to die. Gaza is where the dream of Palestinian statehood goes to die; Gaza is where the Zionist dream might yet die. Or, more to the point, might be murdered. I'm not a J Street moral-equivalence sort of guy. Yes, Israel makes constant mistakes, which I note rather frequently, but this conflict reminds me once again that Israel is up against an implacable force, namely, an interpretation of Islam that disallows the idea of Jewish national equality.
My paralysis isn't an analytical paralysis. It's the paralysis that comes from thinking that maybe there's no way out. Not out of Gaza, out of the whole thing."
I'm not sure why Jeffery Goldberg warrants the high praise you adorn him with. He pretty well toes the Israeli government line with the odd policy criticism and a bit of sympathy for the Palestinians thrown in to endear him to 'liberal' types. Any suggestion that Israel might seriously be in the wrong, might be the root of the problem, might be the major stumbling block to peace is met with hysterics and cries of anti-semitism. He's a slightly more palatable Alan Dershowitz.
His posts are chock full of apologetics for Israeli state violence, this is a tiny selection:
"For the record: I defend Israel's right to defend itself, but I fear that Gaza will quickly become a quagmire."
"Hamas terrorists unblinkingly and ostentatiously use their own civilians as human shields. "
"Early reports indicate that Hamas mortar teams were firing from the UN School. This shouldn't surprise anyone."
Firstly, It's blatantly obvious this incursion isn't about defense or security, I think a 5 year old presented with the facts would come to that conclusion.
Secondly, Christopher Gunness of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency - who is currently in Gaza and who I think has been a real voice of reason - has confirmed that there have been no mortar teams firing from the UN school (which the Israeli army just shelled), furthermore he's stated that he has not seen or heard any reports of civilians being used as shields by Hamas.
There is nothing wrong or untrue in three points you selected.
- Israel has a right to defend itself and Gaza is quickly becoming a quagmire
- Hamas and similar groups have a long history of using civilian cover, and have proudly spoke about how they will lure the Israelis into street-to-street, house-to-house fighting in this war. By definition, that is using civilians as human shields.
- Early reports did say Hamas were firing from the school. Maybe they were wrong, but they did say it. And as mentioned above, Hamas choosing to fire from areas where there are a lot of civilians would not be a surprise to anyone.
Question: If this war isn't about defense or security, what is it about?
Re the UN school - if it turns out that there was no firing happening in the area and the Israeli's just shelled the place (and this would not surprise me) then it is a war crime and shame on them. And I'm pretty sure Mr Goldberg would agree.
Israel certainly has a right to defend itself, but no state has the right to claim defense against occupied territories. Gaza and the West Bank are recognized by Israel, the UN, and the United States to be a unit. The UN definition of occupation includes maintaing control of borders, air space, and maritime routes. Therefore, Israel still occupies Gaza, and cannot claim self-defense.
As far as the war being about security, take a look at the Israeli planning record from 1967 to 1973. That is the period in which the Israeli policy of rejecting peace was established, which continues to this date. If you go through it, you'll find no reference to security. That was not a concern. The reason is explained, explicitly, by Israeli military leaders such as General Harkabi. The issue is holding on to the territories at all costs. You see much more discussion about access to water than about security.
Israel is more insecure trying to hold a hostile population inside it than it would be under a political settlement which would reduce tensions and leave a demilitarized Palestinian state on its borders. Israel along with the US has constantly blocked a diplomatic settlement either by outright walking out of negotiations or by demanding concessions that the Palestinians simply cannot make. This is a measure of their dedication to peace and security.
What this offensive will achieve is a significant increase in jihadi-style terrorism, anger and hatred directed against the Israel. There is enough scholarly literature on how populations react to attacks on civilians to be sure of it. The people who planned this attack are not idiots, they know this.
As far as the actual motives for this specific attack, I don't know. I'm don't have access to current Israeli planning documents. One can make a guess though. The upcoming Israeli elections and the upcoming Obama administration are probably factors in the timing. I'm sure the loss of military prestige from the Hezbolah slap down is also foremost in the planners minds. Ultimately though, it's just a continuation of the long standing Israeli policy of putting the Arabs in their place and keeping them there.
Perhaps the history of the creation of Israel needs to be studied, in order to obtain a clear understanding of today's complex problems
Maybe the giving of Palestinian land to the house the Jews in the first place is a major contributing factor, along with major military and economic support from the great US of A.
Israel's wickedness has been tolerated and supported for far too long. What has been happening in Gaza is obscene.
Perhaps we should all try not eating, sleeping or drinking for five days and live with the constant fear of a mortar landing on or around your shelter. This is a reality in Gaza and the suffering is unspeakable.
I think Tom's question of what is this war all about is a good one and a learned response would be an interesting read.
Every birth of a nation is always problematic from Australia, USA, most of Asia, part of the countries in the Middle East, India-Pakistan, Indonesia, Singapore, etc.
Mostly they are bloody.
There is no nothing unique with the story of the birth of Israel.
A touch simplistic Dody. In relation to the birth of Israel, it is very different. It remains "bloody" and has had United Nations involvement to get peace agreements, which have been broken by both sides (Arabs and Jews) over a long period of time.
There are other significant differences. Other nations were not dealing with Muslims and Jews, both of whom have God on their side and religious claims on Jerusalem.
It seems to have been a mess since the departure of the Ottomans.....
This is just a very distressing situation, breeding more and more hate.