Tuesday, July 18, 2006
"The most just war" in Israel's history
Ari Shavit, writing in Haaretz, makes the best case I have seen for a temporary unilateral cease fire by Israel. "Start over":
The war is being managed badly. Intelligence is faulty, the army is clumsy and uncreative. The prime minister is not addressing the nation properly; the foreign minister is not addressing the world at all. The entire national leadership - civilian and military - is perceived as lacking inspiration, lacking direction and lacking focus. As a result, one aggressive Israeli maneuver follows another aggressive Israeli maneuver, without logic, without order and without a defined strategic objective. By the by, Israel is taking a heavy beating. The initiative is in the hands of Hezbollah. The haughty arrogance of the Israeli leadership does not convey strength, but rather weakness.
But the main problem is political. Israel is currently waging the most just war in its history. Not a war of occupation, but rather a war of defense. Not a settlements war, but rather a Green Line war. A war over the validity of an international border that was drawn, defined and recognized by the United Nations. Therefore, anyone who yearns for Israel to withdraw in future from occupied territories to recognized permanent borders must stand by Israel in this war. Anyone who wants peace, stability and an end to the occupation must back up Israel in its just war. The alternative is a violent and hemorrhaging Middle East chaos.
This simple and clear political truth is neither understandable nor clear today to anyone in the international community. Not even to the United States. And when you wage a 21st-century war whose political and moral rationale is vague and blurred, there is no chance of winning it. Failure is not an option; failure is a certainty.
This being the case, the war should be started over: Hold fire. Declare a unilateral cease-fire for 72 hours. Make the international community responsible for resolving the problem of the northern border by nonviolent means within that period. Make it clear that Israel is not an unthinking bully that lashes out in every direction, but rather a responsible, orderly country, which is demanding that a zealous terrorist organization be removed from its border, that it stop threatening the lives of Israel's citizens and that it release the soldiers it kidnapped entirely unprovoked from Israel's sovereign territory.
Such a cease-fire, accompanied by an all-out political and informational campaign, would restore to Israel the moral high ground it lost over the past few days, when it attacked airport runways, bridges and civilian buildings. Such a cease-fire would enable the Israel Defense Forces to plan thoroughly and meticulously a crushing and focused military campaign that will lead to Hezbollah's defeat.
It would enable the establishment of an emergency cabinet that would include Ehud Barak as the master-strategist, Benjamin Netanyahu as the master-explicator, and Yossi Beilin as the new ambassador of Israeli resoluteness. But, above all, the cease-fire would serve to redefine what is now mistakenly perceived as a savage war between two savage and bloodthirsty tribes. It would serve to make clear to Israel's civilians, to Israel's soldiers and to the international community what we are killing for in this war, and for what we are being killed. We are killing and being killed for our border. We are killing and being killed for our liberty. We are killing and being killed for our very existence as a free society.
Commentary
Unfortunately, Shavit's best case is not good enough. I must confess that I wish so much that the world worked the way Shavit imagines that I almost agreed with his proposed demonstrative cease fire. But the world that Shavit worries about -- Europe, really -- will not appreciate Israel any more tomorrow for having shown that restraint, and meanwhile Hezbollah will gain valuable time to prepare its defenses, line up more human shields, or flee the battlefield. Ralph Peters knows what Ari Shavit does not, that the morality of this war will not ultimately influence Europe's view of Israel:
Another iron rule that applies to this and every Israeli attempt to strike back at Islamist terrorists is that, just when the Israeli Defense Forces really start to hurt the enemy, the world community - including the United States - intervenes to save the terrorists from destruction.
Europeans have more sympathy with Iran's nuclear program than they do with Israel's attempts at self-defense. But, then, the only thing continental Europeans regret about the Holocaust is that they didn't get to finish the job. Even as Europe suffers its own attacks by Islamist terrorists, Europeans defend the selfsame terrorists against Israeli retribution.
Brutal to say and unfair to many Europeans, but in the main true, I'm afraid.
Still, Peters gives the United States short shrift. At this moment we are led by a president who is stubborn as a mule, and Israel is implicitly backed in this war by the Sunni Arab regimes who fear the rise of Iran. Israel does not need any more moral authority from George W. Bush, and will never get more from Saudi Arabia and Egypt. It will, however, improve security for all of us if it weakens and discredits Hezbollah and its clients.
Faster, please.
5 Comments:
By 
Dusty, at
Tue Jul 18, 12:18:00 AM:
Ari Shavit sure emptied his adjectival shotgun in that first paragraph, didn't he.
And I suppose Shavit sounds reasonable to anyone who hasn't heard a thing Olmert has said. But Olmert has been blunt and specific in goal(s). And Olmert has defined clearly his strategic objective. It almost makes you wonder if Shavit has heard anything Olmert has said.
I found myself grinning several times. "This is a just war" and anyone who wants peace, stability and an end to the occupation must back up Israel", so the first thing we must do is what? Call for a cease fire? Let's have a cease fire so we can create an emergency cabinet so that there are more voices contributing to the din of clarity of this and the focus of that? Not bloody likely.
Israel doesn't have the presence nor the clout of the US on the world stage to politically prep the battlefield as we did for Afghanistan, and even moreso for Iraq, which gave us time to prepare militarily and then act when we felt it was time. Israel is militarily prepping the battlefield while the standard initial diplomatic "dialogue" phase runs it course. Let's just say Israel is multi-tasking, for lack of better word And a refreshing first move, I might add, in this age of talk 'til it's too late.
And, obviously, Shavit penned this prior to Bush explaining in clear and understandable terms at the G8 dinner.
Finally, "the war should be started over?" I have to tell ya he seems a bit naive to think any state can take a mulligan like that in war.
Besides, Israel didn't "start" it. So much for his desire for clarity, focus and inspiration -- he can't even get it right.
By 
, at
Tue Jul 18, 01:02:00 AM:
Excuse me, but this gentleman thinks like a left wing moonbat (i.e., not at all). Just wars are not fought so that other people (nations) will like you, they are not fought so that you get the 'moral high ground', they are not fought for international recognition. They are fought to preserve your country and it's citizens safety. The continual attempt of 'progressives' and those who reason like them to grasp the brass ring of international apptobation is both delusional and futile, they will never get it, either by waging a just war or through surrendering by degrees.
By allen, at
Tue Jul 18, 01:52:00 AM:
This is a joke, right? I did not think so.
Where to begin? Jews make up about 0.25% of the world’s population. Jews hold nearly 20% of its Nobel Prizes in math, applied science, and medicine. Ashkenazi Jews are the most intelligent genotype on earth. That said, as with any demographic, we have our fair share of morons.
Ehud Barak as master-strategist, he says. Doubtless, he found Al Gore a master-debater as well. Would this Ehud Barak, perchance, be the same Barak who withdrew Israeli security forces from the Lebanese border in 2000, leaving northern Israel open to Hezbollah’s predation? Yes, I thought so – master-strategist, indeed!
As an addendum to Mr. Shavit’s article may I add, “Can’t we all just get along?” I “feel” so much better now.
Godspeed, IDF!
By Robert, at
Tue Jul 18, 11:21:00 AM:
The only just war is one that destroys the people who want to kill you. Anything less is actually unjust as well as futile.
By , at
Tue Jul 18, 04:39:00 PM:
I was reading somewhere that Iran is conducting war by proxy using terrorist groups like Hezbollah and that a defeat in Lebanon would be a blow to its prestige.
There is a lot more riding on the Israelis work than just defence of Israel.
