It behooves the author of this blog to add a disclaimer to this specific post; so here it is:
1. I do not condone the killing of innocent civilians.
2. No one could abhor terrorism more than me.
3. This post isn’t about what’s right or wrong, it’s about what’s expected and unexpected.
4. The author of this post is neither Israeli, nor Palestinian; neither Jewish, nor Muslim, and he does not live in a country bordering Israel, the West Bank or Gaza Strip; so the only bias this post might have is a personal one.
When I first met the late Stanford Shaw at a concert in Ankara, I was so thrilled the only thing I could talk about was the maestro. After a couple of days, when I could pull it together and yap endlessly about what I thought I knew about the Middle East, seeing him watch patiently, I couldn’t help but ask his views on the Middle East. “Well,” he said, “you wanna know what I say? I say a plague to both their households!“
That was 2003. Prof. Shaw had long been in Ankara, teaching at Bilkent University, long after his house in Calif. was blown up by terrorists. Now it’s 2008, and little in the Middle East has changed.
There are mainly two different – and sadly, extreme – views on anything between Israel and Hamas, Fatah, or Hezbollah. Unfortunately, both focus on normative, ethical, or even historical basis of their argument and the status quo. On the one hand, you have Israel and its fervent supporters, who are only too happy to see Gaza or southern Lebanon levelled; and on the other, well, Islamic extremists, plain and simple. Their system of thought is simple too: If Israel’s the one who did something, that something is surely wrong. Most adherents to this view also believe that the world is secretly ruled by Jews and freemasons.
A paragraph that follows the introduction of the two arguments and that would attempt to analyse or discuss the views is precisely the point where any reasonable way out is inadvertently blocked. There is absolutely no point in discussing the mutually-demonizing views of the Israelis and Arabs, since both sides enjoy opulence in evidence against their enemy. Last week alone saw very eloquent propaganda by both Israel and Hamas, in that any loyal viewer of CNN or BBC would see Hamas the defiant firing rockets at Ashkelon and as far as Beersheba, and IAF flying sortie after sortie, with planes delivering their payload to one of the most densely populated areas of the world.
In the summer of 2006, I told my friends that Hezbollah was to blame for the beginning of hostilities with Israel. Their initial reaction was one of disbelief. After all, why should Hezbollah shoulder the blame for the destruction of Beirut? And this is where they failed. This is where people of the same opinion fail today, as Israel pounds Gaza.
Any scholar of politics would tell you that a snowball in the Sahara has more chance than Hamas/Fatah/Hezbollah against Israel in conventional warfare. The best either could use, in conventional warfare, is AK-47, or Qassams or Katyushas. The IDF has the Merkava, F-16s, and a very well-equipped navy. It does not shy from using chemically enhanced ammunition. In symmetric, conventional warfare, Israel’s always the winner. Go read your 20th century history if you don’t believe me. Thus, what H/F/H would choose, if they wish to gain an upper hand against Israel, is terrorism. Terrorism, regardless of its being a crime and a horrible one, is a strategy, especially for the underdogs.
But no, in 2006, Hezbollah, and a few days ago, Hamas chose to launch rocket attacks against Israel. Well, Gaza hadn’t been occupied, and waging a conventional war against Israel is a 100 per cent reliable method of suicide. Just look at the figures! Almost 400 dead! As I write, the UN Security Council is debating on a resolution, which will very probably be vetoed by the United States, and the Gazans will be left to Israel’s mercy. That mercy has never been terribly abundant. This is where the beast analogy kicks in.
Israel is a very powerful actor in the Middle East. It enjoys such an unprecedented support in the United States that even academics face strong pressure when they attempt to publish a book against the Israel Lobby. It has one of the most well-equipped armies in the region, has won the wars of ‘48, ‘56, ‘67 and ‘73 against coalitions of Arab nations. By Middle Eastern standards, Israel is indeed quite a powerful country.
Israel is a beast. It has little value for civilians hurt or killed as collateral damage, and has done little do restrain itself in the face of international pressure before recalling its planes and troops from Lebanon in 2006. Despite the IDF’s sophistication, it has failed to minimize incidents involving civilians killed while sunbathing in Gaza. Israel is hardly a rational actor, and if it is, it is a ruthless one.
So why would Hamas, in the face of all odds against it, provoke Israel into this bloodshed? With the hospitals full, roads inaccessible, and people left without basic supplies and services, is it a really worthwhile sacrifice for an ambiguous settlement in the future?
Or, had Hamas thought it would get away with firing a few rockets on Israeli civilians, and not get punished by the IDF? Did they really, seriously expect the beast to sit down idly while it was being poked by a much smaller and weaker creature holding a thin but sharp stick?
No.
Call me a lunatic, but I am afraid they, or their masters, if any, would know better than that. They had seen what happened in Lebanon in 2006. Yes, Israel eventually backed down and retreated, but at the expense of countless lives and half of Beirut. Any conflict is prone to escalation unless severely and seriously limited to surgical operations. Clearly, Operation Cast Lead has been anything but surgical so far. With the BBC reporters astonished by the persistence of Israeli statesmen trying to explain the deaths of hundreds and more than a thousand injured by the mere notion of self-defense, there’s very little to suggest a close end to the atrocities that marked the end of 2008.
—
This is where I saved a draft of this blog, on January 1. Everything below this line is written on January 11.
–
Now it’s well past the lines of sanity. The death toll is already above 800, and the IDF is throwing leaflets in Gaza, warning people of an impending third wave of attacks. I don’t feel like I can, or should say more about the political aspect of all this bloodshed. With the first ladies creating a photo-op for themselves in Istanbul, the Arab countries utterly incapable of a united stand, and a Europe so devoid of any military presence inside their continent, let alone the Middle East, there’s little for ordinary people like the humble author of this blog to do.
Past days saw a few rockets being fired from southern Lebanon, allegedly by Hezbollah, into Israel. As any student of politics or conflict resolution would remember, wars, once they begin, have this unpleasant tendency to escalate horizontally and vertically, i.e. across the surrounding region and with greater and more diverse firepower. To me, the risk of Iran joining this conflict, though nominally low at this stage, is much higher than when we didn’t see hundreds of people being killed in and around Gaza.
A moral of this conflict? I’m sure we’re all convinced that none will be taken. Apart from breeding hatred amongst Palestinians and Arabs and Muslims of the next generation against Israel, this latest conflict in Gaza has done little do damage Israel. With the awareness of Israel’s ruthless tactics and ease of finding excuses to exercise military force, Hamas should blame itself just as much as it blames Israel for all this…
Let’s hope this doesn’t get any worse than it already has. And please consider donating to a humanitarian relief organization of your choice.
