I see that the Soviets, oops, Russians and others are condemning the "disproportionate" nature of the Israeli response to the Hamas/Hizballah/Lebanese/Syrian/Iranian acts of war.
That raises the obvious question: Disproportionate to precisely what? If it is disproportion to the narrow acts themselves, taken out of the larger context, well, maybe and maybe not. But is the Israeli response disproportionate to the need for long-term deterrence of Arab terror? I think not; indeed, it is too mild by far, so far.
That raises the obvious question: Disproportionate to precisely what? If it is disproportion to the narrow acts themselves, taken out of the larger context, well, maybe and maybe not. But is the Israeli response disproportionate to the need for long-term deterrence of Arab terror? I think not; indeed, it is too mild by far, so far.
2 comments:
"Israel has felt fine kidnapping palestinians (including government members!) and lebanese with no due process."
Are you referring to Israeli due process, or to formal extraditions between two states? Because the Israelis have often demonstrated a willingness to uphold their own judicial responsibilities, even for terrorists (giving them one up on us). How reasonable is it to expect due process with another state when that state actively shields the people you pursue?
Indeed, that is precisely part of the problem. Both Hamas and Hezbollah enjoy the protection their official status as democratically elected parties in two of the region's three democracies affords them. They additionally enjoy state support from Syria and Iran. I don't see what recourse Israel has. Turning the other cheek won't work. These militant Palestinians have been given what they asked for, unilaterally, and still they persist. This is because the provocation, the excuse they claim for their actions, isn't any single act, it is a facet of their world view: Their provocation is eternal and entirely in their minds, where it can never be reasoned with or defeated.
These Palestinian militants are quite unlike their forebearers of the last few decades. They have supplanted the old goal of Palestinian statehood with an Islamist agenda.
Tlaloc: We could select any arbitrary point in the cycle and say, “See!” For example, I could point out how you left out all the rocket attacks into Israeli territory since Hamas was elected. Such endless nitpicking does us no good. Let us not forget what this current conflict is about. The militants in Gaza are hardly unconnected to the government - they are directly enabled, funded, and encouraged by the government. To call them “unconnected” is like saying Sinn Fein had f***-all to do with the IRA. In fact, it’s directly analogous - imagine that in the ‘80s and ‘90s Sinn Fein had won parliamentary majority in Ireland. You’re a very smart guy; you have to be able to see that.
It’s about Iran flexing its geopolitical muscle. They’re reminding the West why they’ve been handled with kid-gloves all these years. Iran is demonstrating how they do not need nuclear weapons to create instability in the region. By doing so, they show how they can mess with Western economies and play us against Russia and China. They are reminding the G-8 about Tehran’s reach through their proxies in Hamas and Hezbollah.
Iran’s goal is simple. Ever since the Shah, Iran has had dreams of being the regional hegemon of the Middle East. To do so, it needs to intimidate the Western powers with the ability to interfere - demonstrating their ability to ignite a regional conflict with 130,000 Coalition soldiers hunkered down in the middle is a pretty good way to do that. Further, this demonstrates their ability to threaten the lifeblood of the world’s economy: oil. That is the realpolitik side of their campaign. On the flip-side, domestically (by which I mean in the Arab world), Iran needs to win the war of ideas. It does this in two ways: First, it wants to win the sectarian war that’s been simmering for about 1,500 years. By waging that sectarian war via proxies in Iraq, it can secure its position as the most resource-rich actor in the region. By altering and embracing an Islamist agenda, it co-opts a lot of festering popular support in other regional threats, such as Syria, while adopting a language that will allow for reconciliation with the larger Arab world at the end of the sectarian conflict.
Now, I’m all for calling a spade a spade when Israel does something out of line. But Israel has focused largely on the Hezbollah-ruled mini-state in southern Lebanon or Hezbollah-controlled neighborhoods in Beirut. It has only attacked those parts of the Lebanese infrastructure necessary to prevent the removal of its soldiers to an unfriendly nation - also preventing easy entrance by Iran or Syria’s forces. The Israeli military, having learned from the ‘90s, has demonstrated admirable humanity, going so far as to drop leaflets 24 hours in advance advising civilians to leave areas that will be attacked. Lebanon could end this conflict tomorrow by evicting Hezbollah from its southern regions, where Lebanese officials have not been seen for a decade. Doing so would have the further advantage of distancing Lebanon from Syria and Iran and encouraging the West to invest in its nascent resurgence.
Post a Comment