Posted on 12/29/2008 8:24:24 AM PST by ksm1
For the hundreds of thousands of Israelis within range of the rockets that Hamas and its junior partners in terror have been firing for more than seven years now - thousands of missiles in total - the aerial assault that the Israeli air force waged on the Gaza Strip on Saturday was a lot of things: a surprise, a relief, a welcome change from an irresponsible and cowardly policy of restraint that only encouraged the terrorists and abandoned Israeli civilians to their fate. One thing it was not, though, was a solution.
I say that not because I believe in the tired old adage that "there is no military solution in Gaza" - I don't - but because the prime minister and defense minister have said as much themselves.
IN DEFINING the goals of this (ridiculously named) Operation Cast Lead, Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak stated that they were seeking an end to the rocket fire that has pummeled the South and an end to weapons smuggling from Egypt. Yet these are things that Hamas can not give - at least, not openly, not in response to military pressure and not for any significant period. Simply put, Hamas needs to commit these acts, because fighting Israel is what the organization is all about. One might as well ask a frog not to jump.
Although the army is now calling up reservists to support the effort, there is no reason to believe that this operation will be anything but limited in scope and duration. All indications thus far are that Israel wants Hamas hurt, but still in place, so that it can come to an agreement on how to live together. What Olmert and Barak are attempting, essentially, is to "manage" Hamas, to establish a sort of "understanding" in which both sides remain committed to the other's destruction but do as little as possible to antagonize each other.
IF THAT seems familiar, it's because it was precisely Israel's policy toward Hizbullah for years. For much of the past two-and-a-half decades, Israel and Hizbullah observed a sort of de facto truce in which neither side acted beyond certain bounds of aggression, or minimized the scale and arena of confrontation between the two.
All that changed, though, in 2006. In contrast to Ariel Sharon, who retaliated against Hizbullah for kidnapping Israeli soldiers but then reverted to the status quo and negotiated for their return, Olmert responded to the kidnapping of soldiers in a cross-border raid by declaring the crippling of Hizbullah and "changing the rules of the game" once and for all as his goals for the Second Lebanon War.
With the poor result from that war still reverberating in the public consciousness, much of the talk since Saturday morning's bombing raids has centered on "the lessons of the Second Lebanon War" and whether Olmert and the defense establishment have learned them. The limited goals of this campaign, everyone seems to believe, show that those lessons have been learned. But they have not. That campaign was misguided, and this one appears to be, too.
HIZBULLAH WAS a formidable foe, a well-trained, well-armed, well-funded guerrilla force. It was deeply entrenched in difficult terrain, across a large area, with a sizable territory at its back to which it could retreat. It was a small player in a larger state structure that, despite serious divisions and difficulties, was nonetheless part of the community of nations and functioned as such. It had on its border a large, cooperative and supportive neighbor that eagerly transferred weapons, funds and credibility to the Islamic Resistance.
In these circumstances, destroying Hizbullah - without a massive war that would have ultimately destroyed Lebanon as a state and required a full-scale war with Syria as well - was an impossible goal. "Managing" the conflict with Hizbullah was the right approach, and abandoning it was the first of several crucial mistakes that Olmert made.
In Gaza and Hamas, however, Israel faces a very different situation. Despite swelling from a total of a few hundred men under arms just a few years ago to as many as 15,000 now, Hamas remains light-years away from Hizbullah as a fighting force. Its training, its arms and its funding are less than what Hizbullah had in 1996, to say nothing of Hizbullah's position in 2006.
FURTHER, HAMAS stands on a comparatively tiny patch of land, flat and exposed, with nothing but the sea at its back. It is alone in ruling its territory, and its rule is neither effective nor recognized as legitimate, nor even fully autonomous in the community of nations. On its border stands an uncooperative, perturbed neighbor that wants nothing more than to be rid of it and of the Hamas thugs who sprouted from the Muslim Brotherhood movement that poses the greatest threat to the Cairo regime.
In these circumstances, destroying Hamas is a goal that, although difficult, is feasible. Targeting the top echelon of political leaders such as Ismail Haniyeh and Mahmoud Zahar, as well as at least half of the Hamas cadres, might be a tricky proposition, but it is ultimately the only correct strategy.
"MANAGING" THE conflict with Hamas, on the other hand, is the wrong approach, and its failure is inevitable. Seeking an "understanding" with Hamas perpetuates the problem at the benefit of only a brief period of quiet, allows and encourages the organization to continue to grow and to fire more rockets at us and prevents any real progress toward a two-state solution by paralyzing Mahmoud Abbas and his inferior forces.
What Israel is currently trying to do in Gaza, it should have tried in Lebanon two years ago, and what Israel attempted against Hizbullah then, it should be trying against Hamas now. Until that realization sinks in in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, the achievements of Operation Cast Lead will remain just a good beginning... to a sorry ending, which the weary residents of Sderot and Ashkelon have seen coming from kilometers away.
This whole situation is stupid. It doesn’t take a genious to figure this out. If the US were being attacked with thousands of rockets from Mexico, we would level their country. Israel needs to make up their minds. Either get rid of the problem or move out of the area. Talking with Hamas is not going to accomplish a thing and just drag it out. If Israel is being controlled by the US, we need to get out of the mix and let them do what they must.
“If the US were being attacked with thousands of rockets from Mexico, we would level their country”.
No we’d just keep moving our border till they hit Canada.
It is clear this is a lie already.
Any commander in an "all-out war" would have cut off the strategic rear of his adversary: Land invasion across the south of Gaza on the border with Egypt.
Everything else can happen in good time. But the bombing should have coincided with tanks rolling East to West to the sea.
Having not seen that, I suspect the Israelis are going to pull another South Lebanon, in which they failed to encircle their enemy first before destroying them.
Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war!
Where is Iran in all this?
All sides in Israel seem to be missing the boat, in going to great lengths to maintain the status quo. Retaliation is not offense, it is just a stronger defense. And a soccer team that only plays defense will always lose.
Israel also fails because it keeps trying to negotiate with Palestinians who want only one thing: the land of Israel. They are indifferent to anything else, and will not settle for anything else. This is because land is their single, religious prerogative.
It is the one thing they are truly honest about, and they say it over and over again. And they will not be satisfied with some land, they want it all, and are convinced that it is only a matter of time until they get it.
This means that negotiations with them are meaningless. But this is not the status quo, this is the impasse. And there is one way only to break this impasse. Take progressively more Palestinian land.
This will end things, one way or another. Either they stop attacking, or else they are pushed out of Gaza entirely.
If Israel could not abide just taking that land, they should pay the owner a fair amount for it. But he cannot turn down the offer.
Alternatively, Israel might take over all of Gaza, and push the Palestinians into Egypt. Since most Israelis shudder at doing this, offer $10B to be divided evenly between every one of the 1.5 million Gazans.
This works out to $6,600+ dollars per man, woman, or child. The average annual wage in Egypt is $1,500. If Israel was extra nice, the US would probably double the amount, so the new Egyptians would be a wealthy class of people, and Gaza would be empty.
And there would be no more attacks.
As icing on the cake, Israel might even resettle those Arabs living in Israel proper into Gaza, with a much better standard of living than they now enjoy.
Backing Hezbollah, which in some ways is a rival to Hamas, which is largely Sunni
The only thing Hamas understands is violence. Inflict it on them -- until none are left!
“If the US were being attacked with thousands of rockets from Mexico, we would level their country”
No, we wouldn’t. Not under Obama.
There’s only one solution. I could tell you about Him - - -
simple solution...march in, destroy everything, bus all the civilians to the walled off west bank area, annex gaza for good, close the borders....
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.