'A dark fog has enveloped us' - Israel-Palestine article

[Professor Yaffle]

I know this will probably turn into the usual polarised debate, but I wanted to share an article from a personal perspective I read today.

...
Most Israelis I know think Hamas wants to annihilate Israel. A lot of Jews over here think that too. I don't know if that's what Hamas wants: it depends what you read. I was over there when they blew up buses on Dissenghof Street in Tel Aviv in 1996. That act seemed to turn Israel right wing just at the moment the country was mourning the death of Rabin and was, I believe, genuinely committed to peace. But Hamas is now part of the political process whether Israel, Britain and America likes it or not and dialogue is the only way forward. Would hatred for Israel stop if it were to return to its 1967 borders? Of course not, but Israel has to do it anyway. It has to do the right thing, to help build a strong Palestinian state where people can live normal lives, work, feed their kids, be happy, safe, have dignity. That's what most people want in life isn't it?
...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jan/16/gaza-first-person-israel

 

[gumboot]

I suspect if Israel actually withdrew to the 1967 borders (at a minimum) and put a concerted effort into rebuilding the Palestinian territories (with the help of the international community) as the quality of life of Palestinians increased support for groups like Hamas would drop.

Talking to a conservationist heavily involved in saving the African lion and the tiger, he explained that the game park (the successful model) worked by making a live animal a more valuable asset than a dead animal to the local people.

If Israel can show that the Palestinians are better off working with Israel than fighting Israel, they will have peace.

 

[WildCat]

I don't see what role Hamas can play in that.

1967 borders? Didn't stop Black September from crashing the Munich Olympics and the neighboring Arab states from trying to invade in 1973.

Israel has more peace since the 1973 war (in terms of lives and materiel lost) than they had at any time prior to that. So what's the incentive really to go back to the borders that saw them get attacked time and time again?

 

[fuelair]

I suspect if Israel actually withdrew to the 1967 borders (at a minimum) and put a concerted effort into rebuilding the Palestinian territories (with the help of the international community) as the quality of life of Palestinians increased support for groups like Hamas would drop.

Talking to a conservationist heavily involved in saving the African lion and the tiger, he explained that the game park (the successful model) worked by making a live animal a more valuable asset than a dead animal to the local people.

If Israel can show that the Palestinians are better off working with Israel than fighting Israel, they will have peace.

First, you have to get their attention.*







The Palestinians - or, more precisely, their leaders.

 

[gumboot]

I don't see what role Hamas can play in that.

1967 borders? Didn't stop Black September from crashing the Munich Olympics and the neighboring Arab states from trying to invade in 1973.

Israel has more peace since the 1973 war (in terms of lives and materiel lost) than they had at any time prior to that. So what's the incentive really to go back to the borders that saw them get attacked time and time again?

It would seem totally illogical to assume the attacks were directly related to the borders. Israel has not avoided being attacked since 1973 because of its borders, but because of a shifting political climate.

 

[WildCat]

It would seem totally illogical to assume the attacks were directly related to the borders.

I agree, that's why I don't understand what's so precious about the 1967 borders, or the 1948 Armistice line, or any other line in the sand you want to draw.

Israel has not avoided being attacked since 1973 because of its borders, but because of a shifting political climate.

It doesn't hurt they got the bomb about that time either. Now their neighbors attack by proxy via Hezbollah, Hamas, etc.

 

[WildCat]

In related news, Israel will vote on a cease-fire tomorrow:

The truce would begin a phased process in which Israel stops the assault and gauges the reaction from Hamas militants. Israel would resume the offensive if the militants continue to fire rockets, the government official said.

Under the deal, Egypt would shut down weapons smuggling routes with international help, and discussions on the opening of Gaza's blockaded border crossings would take place at a later date.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...01/16/AR2009011600738.html?hpid=moreheadlines

The US will offer technical assisstance to detect and destroy the tunnels.

I still think a deep (below the water table) ditch running the length of the Egypt-Gaza border and filled with sea water would be the best way to shut down the tunnels. The tunnels would be flooded and useless. A berm could be built on the Egypt side of the border with the excavated earth to prevent land incursions. Might be the cheapest option in the long run.

Perhaps this incident will make the Palestinians realize that war will not make their lives easier. Hamas sure seemed surprised by the Israeli reaction!

Two captured terrorists interviewed by Maariv/NRG say that Hamas was not expecting Israel's response to the escalation in missile attacks on Israeli targets that preceded Operation Cast Lead. One of them, a 52-year-old victim of a premature detonation who had already done time in an Israeli jail, said, "Hamas took a gamble. We thought, at worst Israel will come and do something from the air - something superficial. They'll come in and go out. We never thought that we would reach the point where fear will swallow the heart and the feet will want to flee. You [Israel] are fighting like you fought in '48. What got into you all of a sudden?"

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/129461

We'll see.

 

[a_unique_person]

I know this will probably turn into the usual polarised debate, but I wanted to share an article from a personal perspective I read today.



http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/jan/16/gaza-first-person-israel

I think it's people asking questions that results in answers. A simple black/white approach has achieved little.

 

[dudalb]

No matter what Israel does, the political Left will find reasons to attack it, I am afraid.


I don't see any improvment in the basic situation as long as HAMAS is in power,unless HAMAS changes considerably. And I got a feeling any HAMAS leader who advocated that would end up being killed by the more radical elements. And people would find a way to blame that on Israel.
Israel should withdraw to the 67 borders, with a few modifications: The GOlan Heights should be put under the control of a Peacekeeping force and the Old City of Jerusalem should be put under some kind of international control ( I suggest the Japanese since they don't have a horse in this religious race) but the settlements in the Occupied territories have got to go. They were a stupid idea to begin with.

 

[a_unique_person]

No matter what Israel does, the political Left will find reasons to attack it, I am afraid.


I don't see any improvment in the basic situation as long as HAMAS is in power,unless HAMAS changes considerably. And I got a feeling any HAMAS leader who advocated that would end up being killed by the more radical elements. And people would find a way to blame that on Israel.
Israel should withdraw to the 67 borders, with a few modifications: The GOlan Heights should be put under the control of a Peacekeeping force and the Old City of Jerusalem should be put under some kind of international control ( I suggest the Japanese since they don't have a horse in this religious race) but the settlements in the Occupied territories have got to go. They were a stupid idea to begin with.

I don't know why. I agree with most of what you have suggested.

 

[gdnp]

I don't know why. I agree with most of what you have suggested.

Works for me too.

The hard line Hamas leaders will probably not change, but if the rest of the Palestinians choose a different path, then Hamas can enjoy a peaceful retirement in Syria.

Until Assad gets fed up with them.

 

[gumboot]

I would make one amendment to dudalb's suggestion, which I otherwise agree with completely. I believe the Palestinians are currently trapped in a cycle of violence because the figures in authority have been creating a climate of hatred for quite some time. Children are raised in schools to hate. You cannot blame people for taking a path of hate if that is all they have ever known. The cycle is a death trap because the culture of hate leads to attacks on Israel which leads to security measures by Israel which leads to more hate.

Removing organisations like Hamas will not be successful on their own, because other similar organisations will simply rise in their place.

I believe that it is in the interests of the Palestinians to hand over control of Gaza and the West Bank to an international UN peacekeeping force for a period of time, in order to provide a stable and peaceful environment in which they can be weaned off the cycle of hatred. Such an authority would have a number of crucial roles:

1) Humanitarian aid distribution
2) Rebuilding of vital infrastructure and industry
3) Reconstruction of a government infrastructure
4) Maintenance of peace and security
5) Maintenance of Palestinian sovereignty against Israeli action
6) Removal of extremist teachings or attitudes in government and education systems

Israel would have no justification for becoming involved in a UN-run territory, and the UN could actively ensure aid is delivered to civilians, not taken by extremists for propaganda purposes. The UN could also prevent attacks against Israel.

Israel would have no choice but to revert to being simply a neighbour of Palestine, rather than an oppressive jailer. Presuming Israel lived up to their side of the bargain, the Palestinians would be able to see they were interested in peace, changing attitudes. If they failed to meet their side of the bargain they would find themselves in conflict with the international community.

On the palestinian side, the regular populace would finally be protected from the thugs who have controlled their territory, and the source of the common man's animosity towards Israel will have vanished. With international control of schools indoctrination of children will cease, and the UN will be able to better manage the distribution of aid and reconstruction to benefit the populous.

We have seen, countless times, that you simply cannot expect a failed state to magically turn itself into a functioning state. First considerable effort has to be made to build up a stable state, then it can be handed over to the local people to run.

I believe that temporary UN control of Gaza and the West Bank is crucial to achieving a two-state solution.

 

[Ziggurat]

I believe that temporary UN control of Gaza and the West Bank is crucial to achieving a two-state solution.

What in the entire history of the UN makes you think they are even remotely capable of performing the duties needed to make a project like that succeed?

 

[gumboot]

What in the entire history of the UN makes you think they are even remotely capable of performing the duties needed to make a project like that succeed?

The UN are easily capable of doing it - hell any one of the five permanent UNSC members is easily capable of doing it on their own. It's a question of will, not capability.

 

[WildCat]

What in the entire history of the UN makes you think they are even remotely capable of performing the duties needed to make a project like that succeed?

Exactly. The militant groups will steal the aid to sell for profit, infiltrate the UN, and aid money will disappear into Swiss bank accounts.

In other words, exactly as has been happening for the last 20 years.

 

[Ziggurat]

The UN are easily capable of doing it - hell any one of the five permanent UNSC members is easily capable of doing it on their own.

The UN is far less capable than any of the five permanent members. If you had proposed one of said five members taking up this duty, I would have taken the proposal far more seriously, but you did not. If this is attmpted through the UN, the full capabilities of those member states cannot and will not be used.

It's a question of will, not capability.

If you do not have the will to do something, you are not capable of doing it. So I repeat: what in the entire history of the UN makes you think they are even remotely capable of performing the duties needed to make a project like that succeed?

 

[Skeptic]

Most Israelis I know think Hamas wants to annihilate Israel. A lot of Jews over here think that too. I don't know if that's what Hamas wants

Gee, perhaps you should listen to what they say, write, do, and claim, then.

Oh wait -- it's an article from Al-Guardian. Nevermind...

 

[Professor Yaffle]

Gee, perhaps you should listen to what they say, write, do, and claim, then.

Oh wait -- it's an article from Al-Guardian. Nevermind...

Written by some anti semite married to an Israeli... who has been critical of anti Israel bias in the media.

 

[gdnp]

I'm sure that Hamas wants to eliminate Israel, just as Israel wants to eliminate Hamas. No, this is not a statement of moral equivalence.

A better question is whether either or both would be satisfied with the achievement of lesser objectives.

There is evidence Hamas would like to kill or convert every non-believer in the world, starting with the Jews, and install a worldwide Islamic state under sharia law. I doubt, however, that this is their bottom line position.

 

[Skeptic]

Who said anything about the author being "anti-semitic"? Simply totally naive and willfully blind to Hamas' goals, actions, ideology and raison d'etre -- which makes them perfect for Al-Guardain's "in depth analysis" pieces.