Hezbollah and Pericles

[question everything]

The Wall Street Journal

Hezbollah and Pericles
By FANIA OZ-SALZBERGER
July 18, 2006; Page A14

War does not preclude clear thinking. When Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon six years ago, to the last inch, and from Gaza one year ago, to the last inch, scenarios of over-the-border hostilities were high on the public agenda. Thus, even as smoke rises over northern Israel, Lebanon and Gaza, some clearheaded points are being made on the Israeli side of the border. Here is a brief selection. Hostilities were initiated by militias strongly associated with the elected governments in both regions, targeting IDF personnel strictly on the Israeli side of the border. Since many media consumers have short memories, a reminder is in order: Over the last five months, some 800 Kassam rockets were fired at towns and villages in southwestern Israel. The town of Sderot alone was hit several hundred times. Israel occupied not an inch of Gaza at that time.

(snip)

Which leads to a second clearheaded point. Why is Israel's response not "proportional," and why don't we rush to negotiate with the kidnappers, as so many peace-lovers in the Western world would like us to do? Let me be blunt: A "proportional" response would please many Europeans no end, but would scarcely move a hair in the beard of a Hamas or a Hezbollah leader. They are not set to be gently pushed into moderation, or to hammer out an exquisite compromise with the Jewish state, but to wipe it out as soon as they can. If we shoot a little, they will shoot back all the way into Islamic eternity. If we "negotiate," cave in to blackmail and release Hamas and Hezbollah militants held in Israeli prisons in return for our three kidnapped soldiers, they will send them back to bomb schools and buses and pizza parlors in no time at all.

Negotiation? For sure. It worked with Egypt and Jordan. It would work with Saudi Arabia. It would work with moderate Palestinians -- as soon as they recapture their own polity from Hamas and Hezbollah. But it would not work with the latter, who along with their Iranian allies openly declare that they want us dead, not merely complacent. Possible lesson: Compromise with ultra-extremists usually misfires.

(snip)

Are these men and women hostages of live-in terrorists, dumb natives managed by shrewd colonialists, or are they perhaps accountable civil agents who made a very bad choice in one of their first democratic performances? Possible lesson: Reread Pericles. Arab democracy is not hopeless, a fourth clearheaded reflection suggests. The Middle East is divided between those who jeer with any rocket hitting Haifa, and those -- in Lebanon, Palestine and Saudi Arabia -- who secretly hope for both Hamas and Hezbollah to vanish into the limbo of lost lunatics and make way for better and saner Arab regimes.

(snip)


Ms. Oz-Salzberger is a senior lecturer at the University of Haifa.

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115318772562109435.html (subscription)

[BillZBubb]

1. Thanks for the Agitprop "Question Nothing"!

Pure Israeli propaganda--which you seem to have an affinity for. The WSJ? What's next, the Moonie Times?

Not one square inch huh? How many Palestinians and Lebanese are in Israeli jails? How much of the West Bank does Israel lord it over?

There is not one clearheaded point in that bullshit.

[question everything]

3. Such a tunnel vision that I doubt I'd be able to crack it

but will try, for the sake of others who may read it.

The one last inch refers to Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000 and from Gaza last year. Or do you consider these facts Israeli propaganda?

This means that neither Hamas nor Hezbollah not even you and the other hot headed on this board can provide an excuse for them to shell Israeli cities and to cross the boarder and grabbed soldiers.

What is so hard to understand here? But like a good demagogue - too many here when the topic of Israel comes - you conveniently change the topic to fit your tunnel vision.

This is an op-ed published by the WSJ. It is not even the WSJ own editorial.

Israel was going to withdraw from the West Bank after it did so in Gaza but, of course, it is not going to do it now when it is clear that the Palestinians will just use this to attack Israel.

Have you even seen the map of Israel? It is not the size of Texas; it is the size of Rhode Island.

[tocqueville]

2. the problem is that this "strategy" doesn't work

and it never did, except at the times when genocides were "acceptable". Israel isn't dealing with a regular army as it did in previous wars, thus peace settlements with Egypt et al. Israel is dealing with a guerilla. You don't kill a fly with a hammer, you kill it with glue, that is to say cutting it's base through political deals. But Israel is caught in its own glue and the massacre of innocent civilians will only exacerbate the anger against it. There are plenty of historical parallells and Iraq is the latest.

check for example the sentence

"...release Hamas and Hezbollah militants held in Israeli prisons in return for our three kidnapped soldiers, they will send them back to bomb schools and buses and pizza parlors in no time at all."

this is completely idiotic. Even if it could happen in some cases, the Hizbollah and others doesn't need released prisoners to go and do suicide attacks. They have plenty in reserve and new ones are streaming in everyday, the ones they are creating by the indiscriminate bombing of a civilian infrastructure.

The professor that wrote that is either giving sweeping "excuses" or completely ignorant of the reality. Or maybe both.