Posted on 03/22/2004 10:39:07 AM PST by veronica
By killing Hamas leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin on March 22, Israel eliminated the most important terrorist leader who has been waging war against it.
Yassin always made it clear that he was dedicated to destroying the State of Israel and killing its citizens wherever they could be found. He reaped the whirlwind he had created.
Yassin founded Hamas in the mid-1980s as a radical Islamic group opposed to any compromise or peace with Israel. The organization's charter is full of hatred against Jews using the most anti-Semitic language.
While among Palestinians Hamas engaged in educational and social work to win adherents for its cause - and principally to identify and psychologically manipulate young people into becoming suicide bombers - the group's political tactic was terrorism, aimed at killing the maximum number of Israelis.
As a result of his activities, Yassin was jailed by Israel. But Yasser Arafat, the leader of the Palestinian Authority who was simultaneously Yassin's main ally and rival, campaigned for his release. "I know him," Arafat told Israel. "He will call for an end to the violence."
In 1997, during the Oslo peace process, Israel gave Arafat's claim a try. But while Arafat feted Yassin, the Hamas leader made clear his support for war against Israel and opposition to any peace deal. When Yassin was allowed to travel abroad, he went to Saudi Arabia and other countries to raise money for his armed struggle. Even the European Union condemned the actions of Hamas as terrorist.
After Arafat rejected peace proposals in 2000, Yassin rallied to his side. What followed was a 40-month-plus war on Israel using anti-civilian terrorism as its main instrument. The decision to launch and continue this war—and the strategy used—has brought great suffering and hundreds of casualties on both sides. This decision has actually delayed an end to Israel's occupation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, brought the destruction of Palestinian infrastructure, and lost an opportunity to establish a Palestinian state.
Was Yassin merely the "spiritual guide" to Hamas and did he lead merely a "political wing" as opposed to a "military wing"? Certainly, the group was not organized along rigidly hierarchical lines. Obviously, Yassin did not plan out specific terrorist attacks in detail. But he did set the policy, sanctioned the killings and praised the attacks. Yassin was as much the leader of Hamas and responsible for its terrorism as Osama bin Laden is the leader of al-Qaida and a terrorist. Moreover, the title of "spiritual guide" is also the one generally given to the dictator of Iran and the leader of the Lebanese Hizbullah group.
Why did Israel act against Yassin now? There are two main reasons. First, as Israel plans a withdrawal from the Gaza Strip it wants to show that this does not mean a retreat or surrender. To ensure domestic support for the move and to show Palestinian radicals that such a step is not an invitation to escalate terrorism, it is necessary to show that Israel still can and will strike against those attacking it.
Second, Yassin is the only unifying and charismatic leader possessed by Hamas. Without him, the organization is more likely to split and to be incapable of effective political action, though everyone knows it can still carry on terrorist attacks. In large part because of Arafat's disinterest in disciplining his own men, Hamas' power is growing. With Yassin as leader, Hamas stood a good chance of taking over the Gaza Strip. Whatever militant slogans, demonstrations, and threats Hamas can flourish in the immediate aftermath of Yasin's death, the group will be weakened by it.
In defending itself during the last three years, Israel has had to deal with the fact that its situation is a very unusual one and hence hard for others to understand. International law is premised on the existence of authorities willing to enforce it. What does a country do if its neighbor not only refuses to stop or arrest terrorists attacking it on a daily basis but actually encourages and supports them? There is no alternative to direct action against such a safe haven.
Equally, international diplomacy generally assumes that any dispute is ultimately resolvable through compromise and negotiation. What does a country do when the other side—Hamas, even if one were to believe that Arafat might ever make peace—openly expresses an intention to destroy it and implements that policy?
Another international assumption is that by targeting terrorist leaders, Israel provokes them to attack. But no such encouragement is needed. The attacks will continue any way and they do so more effectively with a leadership that enjoys immunity from punishment for its deeds.
Finally, it should not be forgotten that Israel has tried the route recommended to it by other countries and their various politicians, experts and media. It spent seven years trying to make a peaceful compromise negotiated agreement. The result is the existence of the Palestinian Authority as a safe haven that incites, finances, organizes, and permits terrorist attacks against Israel. In an attempt to moderate Hamas, Israel even released Yassin himself, who then became the leader of a more intensive terrorist campaign against it.
Whether or not the killing of Ysasin was the right thing to do at this time, it was a step legitimized by the situation that he created.
The writer is the director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal
BTTT
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.