Where is Bush? Where is Obama?
Over 500 civilians have been killed in the last few days of the Israeli invasion and bombing raids in Gaza. One Israeli soldier has been reported killed during the fighting.
500 civilians to 1 soldier.
And for those that are about to jump on the “Israel is protecting its borders from rocket fire!” bandwagon, let’s take a look at the context, and roll back a few months:
Last summer, Egypt brokered a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas is Gaza. This ceasefire lasted through October. By November, the ceasefire continued (for the most part) to be upheld on both sides. Israeli casualties during this period were zero according to reports I’ve seen.
Hamas offered repeatedly to extend the truce, even after Israel failed to meet its side of the bargain, which included allowing in humanitarian aid. Israel only did so after pressure from outsiders, including the U.S., yet didn’t permit as much aid as was agreed and rejected outside NGO workers, so the supplies were poorly distributed and likely never made it to the people that needed them most.
On November 4, Israel broke the ceasefire and invaded Gaza, directing attacks at “militants in Gaza.” Several Palestinians… civilians and “suspected militants” alike were killed. Home-made rocket fire from Gaza began sailing over Israel’s borders again in response.
The Obama team seems content to carry on the Bush torch and re-write history regarding Israel and Gaza:
First, they remain silent despite the enormous bombardment, aggression and violence perpetrated by Israel, hiding behind the “There is only one president.” bullshit line that hasn’t held up for the economy, the Mumbai massacre or nearly anything else that has come up during the transition. Yet it’s conveniently used now so Obama doesn’t have to publicly condemn the actions of Israel.
Second, an Obama spokesperson reported on the news that it was Hamas who broke the ceasefire, apparently forgetting the Nov. 4 attacks by Israel into Gaza.
So why is Israel attacking now? Why have they been mentally preparing the Israeli public for a large military operation through daily news reports and other means for nearly a month now?
Elections are coming up in Israel soon and it’s chillingly customary for the incumbent to show their toughness with an often horrific and deadly military display just prior. And, since Lebanon was such a failure in 2006 to wipe out Hezbollah (even though, like this massacre, the Lebanese civilian-to-Israeli soldier casualty ratio was off the scale), it’s always good to wipe away the failures of past military ventures with new ones before the voters hit the polling booths.
For those that need a refresher on 2006:
The Lebanese top police office and the Lebanon Ministry of Health, citing hospitals, death certificates, local authorities, and eye witnesses, put the death toll at 1,123 — 37 soldiers and police officers, 894 identified victims, and 192 unidentified ones.[145] The Lebanon Higher Relief Council (HRC) put the Lebanese death toll at 1,191,[26] citing the health ministry and police, as well as other state agencies.[145] The Associated Press estimated the figure at 1,035.[145] In February 2007, the Los Angeles Times reported that at least 800 Lebanese had died during fighting,[147] and other articles have estimated the figure to be at least 850.[148][149] Encarta states that “estimates… varied from about 850 to 1,200″ in its entry on Israel,[150] while giving a figure of “more than 1,200″ in its entry on Lebanon.[151] The Lebanon Higher Relief Council estimated the number of Lebanese injured to be 4,409,[26] 15% of whom were permanently disabled.[152]
The death toll estimates do not include Lebanese killed since the end of fighting by land mines or unexploded Israeli cluster bombs.[145] So far, these have killed 29 people and wounded 215 — 90 of them children.[153]
Cynical as that might sound, you can look at Israel’s election history and it’s usually peppered with some sort of military incursion a month or two before voting day.
Fast forward to today: The BBC is reporting 500 civilians dead in Gaza and the first Israeli soldier was killed this weekend… after 7 days of fighting.
500:1 is a massacre, people. It’s time to stand up and speak out.
Sure, Israel has a right to defend its borders… and no one is denying them that right… but invading another territory and (clearly) killing indiscriminately is not a legitimate way to secure its homeland or reach its goals.
Write your Congresspeople or your elected officials or whatever representatives you have and demand action from your leaders. There needs to be a resounding voice from the world that puts an end to this bloodshed.
Would we tolerate any other country invading another territory and killing civilians in a 500:1 or even a 50:1 ratio? No, we wouldn’t no matter the supposed “cause” or “reason” for the aggression.
Obama’s first foreign policy test is on the docket and right now he’s failing. If we speak up now and he might not flunk the thing altogether.
“Sure, Israel has a right to defend its borders… and no one is denying them that right… but invading another territory and (clearly) killing indiscriminately is not a legitimate way to secure its homeland or reach its goals.”
What is the legitimate way, then?
Well one way is to take a page from other countries that have dealt with terrorism:
Nicaragua went to the World Court instead of bombing Washington when the U.S. was funding the Contras and the CIA was mining Nicaragua’s harbors and ports. That’s one way.
Another is to examine what has worked for the British and Irish. Both sides realized that answering violence with violence never worked so they put aside their one-up-manship and focused on careful police work. By routing out their own terrorist cells they thwarted attacks. And, by using the justice system and putting criminals behind bars, they were able to legitimately stop the violence. It wasn’t a perfect system, but it was far less costly in terms of human life and, since they were using the courts instead of a murkily-defined military tribunal, there wasn’t a backlash similar to what we’ve seen with the U.S.’s use of Guantanamo or Abu Gharib.
Can you get a better example? The question was, what is the legitimate way for Israel to secure its homeland, assuming the Gaza invasion is not legitimate.
Comparing Nicaragua x USA to Israel x Hamas is laughable. I doubt that Nicaragua could drop bombs in DC and occupy Maryland with ground forces as a response to American terrorism. If they could, they would. Besides, Palestine isn’t a member-state of UN, it isn’t even a state per se.
The Irish example is just not comparable. You start by saying “both sides realized”, which right away shows it’s not the same scenario here. Also, if the Irish focused on police work to rout their terrorist cells, can anyone expect the Palestinian government to rout Hamas terrorist cells, given that the Palestinian Authority has no control over Gaza since June ‘07? Besides, that is an entirely Palestinian solution, which doesn’t say much about what Israel should do now.
I don’t think there is a cookie-cutter solution and I also don’t pretend to have all the answers.
However, with some involvement from the international community, I think both sides could at least agree that violence begets violence and finding a different route would be worthwhile. Israel and the Palestinians have been at this crossroads many times, as the Nov. ceasefire was hardly the first one throughout this conflict.
Still, the options I mentioned are legitimate even if they don’t perfectly fit the scenario. I agree that a straight 1:1 comparison is silly and was not intended.
Israel wants to fight terrorism? Fine. The best way to do that is through careful police work, not through bombing another territory to bits. While the UK v IRA example doesn’t fit, it is a scenario of successfully stamping out terrorism. I’m also quite certain both sides didn’t wake up one morning and decide to call a truce. These things came about over time and had external pressures.
Most Palestinians simply want freedom from oppression and occupation. Others are fanatics and are so far gone they will probably never settle for anything that doesn’t end in Israel’s total destruction.
Still, it is the U.S. and Israel (often standing alone in the UN) that continually denies any hope of an end to the conflict by rejecting U.N. 242 or raising the stakes so high that accepting a resolution (like Oslo or Oslo II) would be like agreeing to Apartheid for the Palestinians.
So one thing Israel could do is to stop breaking their agreements. They might also want to stop invading, occupying and razing areas of Gaza and the West Bank since that only fuels recruitment to the fanatical cause bent on Israel’s destruction.
Since I’m a U.S. American, I can protest the U.S. weapons and armor deals that keep the advantage of weaponry and intel so mindbogglingly in the hands of the Israelis. This disproportion is probably a factor in the 500:1 bodycount ratios like we’ve seen over the last few days and saw previously in Lebanon. We could also use our wallets to protest the manufacturing of a special brand of over-sized Caterpillar bulldozer that is designed to level houses in the occupied territories. In short, the U.S. and Israel could stop committing state-sponsored terrorism.
I think that would go a long way to hammering out a lasting peace and would help to secure Israel’s borders.
[...] under strange new world | Tags: gaza, israel, palestine, terrorism | Steve Huff has a very well-thought criticism of the late Israeli attacks on [...]
wow, i thank the Goliathvt who wrote this, thanks for actually looking at what is really going on,