Friedman's latest on Israel/Palestine NYT Op-Ed

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
CNN
Have you noticed how often Israel kills a Hamas activist and the victim is described by Israelis as "a senior Hamas official" or a "key operative"? This has led me to wonder: How many senior Hamas officials could there be? We're not talking about I.B.M. here. We're talking about a ragtag terrorist group. By now Israel should have killed off the entire Hamas leadership twice. Unless what is happening is something else, something I call Palestinian math: Israel kills one Hamas operative and three others volunteer to take his place, in which case what Israel is doing is actually self-destructive.

Self-destructive is, in fact, a useful term to describe Israelis and Palestinians today. "Both sides," notes the Israeli political theorist Yaron Ezrahi, "have crossed the line where self-defense has turned into self-destruction. When self-defense becomes self-destruction, only an external force can bring people back to their senses. And that force is President Bush. I think he is the only reality principle left that either side might listen to, and I hope he understands that."

You know that both sides are in self-destruction mode when you can look at their military actions and say that even if they succeeded they would be worse off. The question is not whether Israel has a right to kill senior Hamas officials. They are bad guys. The question is whether it's smart for Israelis to do it now.

The fact is, the only time Israelis have enjoyed extended periods of peace in the last decade has been when Palestinian security services disciplined their own people, in the heyday of Oslo. Unfortunately, Yasir Arafat proved unwilling to do that consistently. The whole idea of the Bush peace process is to move Mr. Arafat aside and replace him with a Palestinian prime minister, Mahmoud Abbas, who is ready to rebuild the Palestinian security services, and, in the context of an interim peace settlement, corral Hamas.

Hamas knows this. So its tactic is to goad Israel into attacks that will unravel the whole process. The smart thing for Israel to do -- and it's not easy when your civilians are being murdered -- is not to play into Hamas's hands. The smart thing is to say to Mr. Abbas: "How can we help you crack down on Hamas? We don't want Israel to own Hamas's demise. Palestinians have to root out this cancer within their own society. If Israelis try to do it, it will only metastasize."

Israel's supporters argue that if America can go after Osama bin Laden, Israel can go after Hamas. Of course Israel is entitled to pursue its mortal enemies, just as America does, but it cannot do it with reckless abandon, notes Mr. Ezrahi, for one reason: America will never have to live with Mr. bin Laden's children. They are far away and always will be. Israel will have to live with the Palestinians, after the war. They are right next door and always will be.

The fact is, Ariel Sharon's two years of using the Israeli Army alone to fight terrorism have not made Israelis more secure. He needs a Palestinian partner, and he has to operate and negotiate in a way that will nurture one. And the people who get that the best are Israelis. In a Yediot Ahronot poll released Friday, two-thirds of Israelis were critical of Mr. Sharon's tactic of targeted assassinations of Hamas officials and said they wanted Mr. Abbas to be given a chance to establish his authority.

It may be that Mr. Abbas can't step up to this. It may be that the Palestinians are capable only of self-destructive revenge, rather than constructive restraint and reconciliation. But surely Israel has more to gain in the long term by giving Mr. Abbas every chance to prove otherwise, and to empower him to do so, rather than killing one more Hamas "senior official," who will only be replaced by three others.

Because if the two sides cannot emerge from this dead end, then you can forget about a two-state solution, which is what both Hamas's followers and the extremist Jewish settlers want. They each want a one-state solution, in which their side will control all of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. The one-state solution would mean the end of the Zionist enterprise, because Israel can rule such an entity, in which there would soon be more Arabs than Jews, only by apartheid or ethnic cleansing. It would also mean the end of Palestinian nationalism, because the Israelis will crush the Palestinians rather than be evicted. That is the outcome we are heading toward, though, unless the only reality principle left, the United States of America, really intervenes -- with its influence, its wisdom and, if necessary, its troops.

Thomas L. Friedman is an op-ed columnist for the New York Times.

 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Have you noticed how often Israel kills a Hamas activist and the victim is described by Israelis as "a senior Hamas official" or a "key operative"? This has led me to wonder: How many senior Hamas officials could there be? We're not talking about I.B.M. here. We're talking about a ragtag terrorist group. By now Israel should have killed off the entire Hamas leadership twice. Unless what is happening is something else, something I call Palestinian math: Israel kills one Hamas operative and three others volunteer to take his place, in which case what Israel is doing is actually self-destructive.

I'll respond to your post, Doc. You bolded it so . . .

1. Hamas is hardly a rag tag terrorist group. My understanding is that they are much more "militaristic" than other terrorist groups. So . . .
2. The positions are probably quickly filled although . . .
3. I would guess the Israelis are probably spinning it.

Both sides seem to have an inexhaustable supply of people, bombs and the willingness to use them.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,265
126
"That is the outcome we are heading toward, though, unless the only reality principle left, the United States of America, really intervenes -- with its influence, its wisdom and, if necessary, its troops. "


Now that is the frightening point of this whole thing.


1). Influence? What is it? About the only thing we can do is to cut off money to Israel. That might at least start something in earnest, but don't depend on it.

2). Wisdom? I'll be charitable and pass.

3). Troops? I hope this is a joke. Instead of Israelis being blown up, our troops are. Iraq is bad enough, but this is a roach motel. We will never check out. Talk about VN all over again.


This "solution" is foolishness.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
UQ, I posted Friedman's Op-Ed in its entirety. The linked article on CNN bolded the initial paragraph . . . I was attempting fidelity to the source.

Both sides seem to have an inexhaustable supply of people, bombs and the willingness to use them.
Israel doesn't really have the people to spare . . . not that anyone's life is disposable. Not to imply anyone is honest or just in the Middle East . . . but we might have a slight chance to convince Middle Eastern countries to cut off the flow of arms to the militants if the US cut off Israel. Wishful thinking . . . both of which are sorely lacking in this conflict. I imagine the typical Palestinian and the typical Israeli think this situation sux and that leadership has failed them. The Israelis claim to live in a democracy so they have no one to blame except themselves. The Palestinians do not get a pass but they chose neither Arafat nor Abbas.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
UQ, I posted Friedman's Op-Ed in its entirety. The linked article on CNN bolded the initial paragraph . . . I was attempting fidelity to the source.
Sorry. The bold tags seem to have caught your eye in the last few weeks, I thought you were maintaining proficiency.

Israel doesn't really have the people to spare . . . not that anyone's life is disposable. Not to imply anyone is honest or just in the Middle East . . . but we might have a slight chance to convince Middle Eastern countries to cut off the flow of arms to the militants if the US cut off Israel. Wishful thinking . . . both of which are sorely lacking in this conflict. I imagine the typical Palestinian and the typical Israeli think this situation sux and that leadership has failed them. The Israelis claim to live in a democracy so they have no one to blame except themselves. The Palestinians do not get a pass but they chose neither Arafat nor Abbas.

I agree although I wonder if our cutting the flow of arms would really amount much more than symbolism at this point. The Israeli defense industry is quite formidable on it's own, is it not? Anyway, Friedman suggest putting American troops there. My gut tells me that is exactly the wrong thing to do even under the blue beret.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Sorry. The bold tags seem to have caught your eye in the last few weeks, I thought you were maintaining proficiency.
Yeah, I've received a bit of chastisement over the bold . . . it could be worse . . . somebody here is attached to the word 'oligophrenic'.

I agree although I wonder if our cutting the flow of arms would really amount much more than symbolism at this point. The Israeli defense industry is quite formidable on it's own, is it not? Anyway, Friedman suggest putting American troops there. My gut tells me that is exactly the wrong thing to do even under the blue beret.
If not for US opposition . . . and sometimes in spite of . . . Israel would be one of the top arms proliferators. I doubt the typical Israeli would tolerate arms sales as their primary export industry, particularly if their customers were the world's most unsavory regimes. If Israel lost our support they would become the 21st century version of apartheid-South Africa. Yet another aspiration most Israelis would reject. In any case, the US sending an unqualified message that weapons of minor and mass destruction are not the answer would allow countries working on the DL (Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait . . . jury is out on Saudi Arabia) to openly support a Pan-Arab peace plan. Once they end all extra-authority aid to Palestine the PA can establish a real security force to crush terrorist remnants in the West Bank and Gaza.

I agree that Friedman has a good article until he mentions a US presence. It's probably just Friedman being pragmatic. The US/Bush has decided on a One World Order which does not include the UN (or any other organization which doesn't receive it's marching orders from the Executive Branch). Therefore, the only power capable of acting would be the US.



 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,983
0
0
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
UQ, I posted Friedman's Op-Ed in its entirety. The linked article on CNN bolded the initial paragraph . . . I was attempting fidelity to the source.

Both sides seem to have an inexhaustable supply of people, bombs and the willingness to use them.
Israel doesn't really have the people to spare . . . not that anyone's life is disposable. Not to imply anyone is honest or just in the Middle East . . . but we might have a slight chance to convince Middle Eastern countries to cut off the flow of arms to the militants if the US cut off Israel. Wishful thinking . . . both of which are sorely lacking in this conflict. I imagine the typical Palestinian and the typical Israeli think this situation sux and that leadership has failed them. The Israelis claim to live in a democracy so they have no one to blame except themselves. The Palestinians do not get a pass but they chose neither Arafat nor Abbas.

yes cut off the flow of Russian AK's and night vision, French Jets and precursor chemicals, Chineese and German missile systems, etc.........
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
yes cut off the flow of Russian AK's and night vision, French Jets and precursor chemicals, Chineese and German missile systems, etc.........
If such weapons existed in the Occupied Territories the ground would be soaked with the blood of Palestinians and Israelis. This conflict is decades old b/c most if not all other Middle Eastern nations have done little to establish statehood for Palestinians while the rest of the world has stood idly by watching Israel give the Palestinians the rod on a regular basis.


Israelis by a slight majority chose a hard-arse war turd like Sharon b/c fear always brings votes and the appetite for venegenace is insatiable. It is curious they do so b/c I doubt any US president since Nixon has wavered in support for Israel. Israeli pols want to give an air of strength and independence but the only way Israel survives as a democratic, Jewish state is with a lot of friends . . . particularly in the neighborhood.
 

LunarRay

Diamond Member
Mar 2, 2003
9,993
1
76
BBD,
I used the word "oligophrenic" at the auto garage the other day. Told the mechanic I wanted to oligophrenic the ignition. He tossed a wrench at me... I can't imagine why. It saves on the gas I'm told... At least that's what I garnered from the threads here that contain that word.
 

Alistar7

Lifer
May 13, 2002
11,983
0
0
The ground is soaked....

The US has taken Israel to task lately under Bush, who is also leading the effort in the peace plan......
 

etech

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
10,597
0
0
There is still hope, this is the first time that I remember the Egyptian's really trying to get Hamas to stop its attacks.

Palestinians Say Truce Announcement Near
20 minutes ago

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip - Egyptian mediators summoned all Palestinian militias Monday in a final push to persuade them to halt attacks on Israelis, and Palestinian officials said they expect a truce to be declared very soon.
...

"