Page 1 of 1

#1 In Israel, Some See No Option but War

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:40 pm
by frigidmagi
WashingtonPost
Aharon Peretz has spent most of his 51 years in this cactus-fringed, working-class town, and he would like to stay.

But his wife and six children feel differently: Daily retreats to the basement during rocket strikes from the nearby Gaza Strip have frayed their nerves, and an attack that cost an uncle both his legs has convinced them it's time to go.

Peace will return for his family, Peretz has decided, only if Israel chooses to go to war with his neighbors.

"There is no other option," he said. "Israel must enter Gaza and deal seriously with those who are launching these Qassams," as the crude rockets are known.

That sentiment is gaining currency across Israel, and the political rhetoric is growing more bellicose. With each new barrage of rockets, the government comes under greater pressure to conduct a massive military operation that might improve conditions in Sderot, but could also entail heavy casualties on both sides and further undermine the already anemic U.S.-backed peace process.

The government has so far resisted the calls for a wider war beyond its present Gaza strategy of intense political pressure, a crushing economic embargo and frequent military strikes targeting those suspected of responsibility for the rockets. A full-scale invasion, officials say, could backfire and benefit Hamas, the armed Islamic movement that controls the territory. Israel also insists it does not want to be drawn back into Gaza less than three years after it withdrew its settlers and troops.

But Defense Minister Ehud Barak said this month that the military had been ordered to draw up plans for a ground assault in Gaza, and other top government officials have talked openly of toppling Hamas. Politicians on both the right and the left say that they expect a major operation and that all it will take to trigger one is for a Qassam to fall in the wrong place.

"Time is running out," said Defense Ministry spokesman Shlomo Dror. "One of these days, a Qassam will hit a bus, and then what do we do? Can the Israeli government stand against the people of Sderot?"

Still, Dror said, the cost of an invasion would be high. Gaza is one of the world's most densely populated places, with likely military targets scattered throughout civilian areas. The military estimates that in a full-scale invasion, about 100 Israeli soldiers and 1,000 Palestinians would die, he said.

The Qassams have made life difficult in Sderot, a desert town of 20,000, and other areas near the Gaza border. But so far, casualties have been limited.

By contrast, over the first two months of the year, Israeli military operations involving both ground troops and airstrikes have resulted in the deaths of 126 Palestinians, according to health officials in Gaza. The Israeli military says that in the past three months, 180 Palestinian fighters, as well as 13 civilians, have died during its operations.

"What's coming out of Gaza is not a strategic threat," said Shalom Harari, a former top Israeli military intelligence official. "It's terrible. It puts political pressure on the government. But it's not a strategic threat."

Harari is concerned it could soon become one, however, as Hamas gains military strength through support from Iran. That assistance could in time mean rockets with much longer range and far greater accuracy and lethality, he said. The government's critics on the right raise the same concern in arguing for the Israel Defense Forces to go into Gaza as soon as possible. The number of Israelis under threat from the rocket fire, they say, is bound to grow unless the military acts.
This Story

*
In Israel, Some See No Option but War
*
Multimedia: Two People, Divided

"Soon enough, they'll also threaten Tel Aviv if we do nothing to stop them," said Yuval Steinitz, a lawmaker from the Likud Party, which advocates a hard-line policy in dealing with the Palestinians.

Steinitz said the military would have to occupy Gaza for, at most, a few months. In that time, he said, Israeli forces could eliminate Hamas's weapon stockpiles, destroy the rocket launch sites and reassert control over the Egyptian border, where explosives are smuggled in. The casualties may be high, he said, but the operation would save lives in the long run.

"I'm not saying it will be easy. The world, at the beginning, might condemn us," Steinitz said. "But this is the only real solution. This war of attrition is not good for us. No state would tolerate daily rocket attacks on its soil."

There is no guarantee, however, that a major military operation would succeed in stopping the attacks. It could increase them. Military analysts and government officials also worry that Israeli troops would get stuck in Gaza, locked in urban warfare with a guerrilla force that has been preparing for just such a fight.

"You start this operation, and I don't know how you can end it," said Dror, the Defense Ministry spokesman.

Matti Steinberg, a former adviser on Palestinian affairs to Shin Bet, Israel's domestic security agency, said there is a far less costly way to stop the attacks: a cease-fire.

Without one, Steinberg said, Israel is on a path toward war, which could have disastrous consequences for the U.S.-backed peace process that began in Annapolis late last year. "The entire rationale of Annapolis would be doomed," he said.

An invasion, he said, would ultimately strengthen support for Hamas and undercut Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who leads the more secular Fatah movement.

Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum agreed. He said the group was expecting a major Israeli offensive and warned that it would only lead to more armed resistance. "Any military operation against Gaza will not give security to the occupation," he said. "It will just increase the popularity of Hamas."

Israeli military sources said that much about the invasion plan remains undecided, including its exact timing, size and duration. The plan would also hinge on support from the United States and key nations in Europe, officials said.

Israel's Gaza policy has already drawn intense international criticism, particularly for its reliance on economic pressure, which U.N. and European Union observers have warned could lead to a humanitarian crisis.

Mark Regev, spokesman for Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, said Israel's response has been "proportionate and, within the confines of international law, what is considered justifiable self-defense."
This Story

*
In Israel, Some See No Option but War
*
Multimedia: Two People, Divided

But it has not stopped the rocket fire.

On Friday, thousands of Israelis demonstrated their solidarity with Sderot's residents by streaming into the city to shop. Despite the threat, the cloudless winter day took on a carnival-like atmosphere, with DJs spinning dance music and shoppers walking the streets seemingly unconcerned by the possibility of an attack.

"We don't have many days like this," said Michael Amsalam, 58, a town councilman. But he was not optimistic there would be many more.

When a nearby motorcyclist unexpectedly revved his engine, Amsalam flinched, then described what it was like to hear a rocket fall on his town, with nothing to do afterward but brace for the next one.

"Only the ones who live here know the feeling of the Qassam, the feeling of fear," he said.
Before the screaming starts. Ask yourself this, if the US was being hit by missiles from Cuba or Mexico, what do you think our reaction would be? What was Russia's reaction to attacks from Central Asia? What would happen if German towns were being blasted from Poland? Or British towns from Ireland?

NYTimes
Israel appeared to face a heightened threat from Palestinian suicide bombings on Tuesday after the military wing of Hamas officially claimed responsibility for a lethal blast the day before at a shopping center in the southern town of Dimona.
Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Back Story With The Times’s Isabel Kershner (mp3)
Enlarge This Image
Rina Castelnuovo for The New York Times

Police inspected the body of one of two suicide bombers following a double bombing attempt in the southern Israeli town of Dimona on Monday.
Ariel Schalit/Associated Press

Israeli police at the scene of a suicide bombing in Dimona, Israel, on Monday.
The New York Times

No suicide bombings had ever before occurred in Dimona.
Abid Katib/Getty Images

The mother of Louai al-Aghwani, one of the attackers.

The claim by the Qassam Brigades wing of Hamas, the militant Islamic group, signaled a possible end to its self-imposed moratorium on such attacks that had lasted more than three years.

Hamas said its bombers came from the city of Hebron in the southern West Bank, contradicting earlier accounts that the Dimona bombers were from Gaza. But Israeli officials also expressed concern that potential attackers may be making their way into the country from the Egyptian Sinai, taking advantage of a recent 11-day breach of the border between Gaza and Egypt. Egyptian forces resealed the border on Sunday.

Shortly before the Hamas claim was made public, seven of the group’s policemen were killed in an Israeli airstrike against a Hamas police post near Khan Yunis in southern Gaza. Israeli soldiers killed two more Hamas militants before dawn in the south of the strip. Army officials said the soldiers had shot two suspicious people who approached them while they were on a routine operation inside the strip, which is controlled by Hamas.

An Israeli Army spokesman said the airstrike was a response to Qassam rockets fired from Gaza at Israel on Tuesday morning. Those rockets damaged two factories in the Israeli border town of Sderot. After the airstrike, militants from Gaza fired another barrage of rockets, hitting a house in Sderot. A teenage girl was wounded by shrapnel and several other residents were slightly hurt, Israeli officials said.

The Dimona attack, in which one Israeli woman was killed along with two bombers, was the first to hit Israel in a year.

The last suicide bombing claimed by Hamas was in August 2004. A smaller group, Islamic Jihad, has been behind the attacks carried out since then, Israeli officials have said.

The Hamas claim was made amid growing confusion in Israel and in Palestinian cities and towns over the true identity of the Dimona bombers and their dispatchers. Soon after the bombing, the Aksa Martyrs Brigades militia in Gaza, which is loosely affiliated with Fatah, the mainstream rival of Hamas, claimed responsibility for the attack in conjunction with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and a third, unknown group.

The Aksa Martyrs Brigades, particularly in Gaza, often contravene the instructions of Fatah leaders in the West Bank who are engaged in peace talks with Israel.

Those groups identified the bombers as two Gaza residents: Louai al-Aghwani, 21, a resident of Gaza City, who was said by his family to have been a Fatah supporter; and Musa Arafat, 23, a Popular Front activist from a village near Khan Yunis.

There were conflicting statements from the Aksa Martyrs Brigades about whether the two bombers had entered Israel via Egyptian territory or directly from Gaza.

But Hamas identified the bombers as Muhammad al-Hirbawi and Shadi al-Zaghair, both from Hebron.

While Israel had not disclosed the results of its own investigation by Tuesday evening, officials hinted during the day that the bombers had indeed come from Hebron. Speaking to army cadets at a base in southern Israel, the defense minister, Ehud Barak, said the defense establishment would find solutions to “terror from Hebron and Qassams from Gaza.â€

#2

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 1:56 pm
by Rogue 9
Hamas is the ruling party of the Palestinian Authority. As I said way back when they were elected to the PA parliament, if Hamas carried on bombing Israel after taking power, it would no longer be a simple terrorist action; it would be an act of war. Israel has every right to respond accordingly.

#3

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:17 pm
by SirNitram
I'd say a near-constant air campaign with an attempted invasion were responses to an act of war. This has not improved the situation for Israel.

#4

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:20 pm
by Cynical Cat
Let's be realistic. The PLO and Hamas are fighting a civil war over control of a territory whose government, when it has one, has to rely on Israel to send them tax money and who sends in its military whenever it feels like. The PA isn't a sovereign country when it isn't in the middle of a civil war, let alone now. This is the latest stage in a long cycle of bloodshed over the same pieces of land and neither side has been shy about spilling it. It's going to continue until both sides can agree to a real peace and that isn't going to happen in the foreseeable future.

#5

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:44 pm
by General Havoc
Abba Eban (former Israeli ambassador to the UN) once said that the Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. I couldn't agree more. Hamas has (or had) widespread support in the Palestinian territories not because of their Israel-stance, but because they were perceived (and rightly so, I think) as being much less corrupt and more concerned with the welfare of the people than Abbas and his PLO cronies. They elected them overwhelmingly. Of course the US and the EU branded them terrorists and refused to deal with them, and what else could they do, as Hamas plainly ARE terrorists and the like.

Remember, that even the Taliban got their popularity from somewhere, and it wasn't anti-American rhetoric, it was promises of cleaning up corruption and oppression from warlords.

Hamas had a chance to shake their legacy and, even if they couldn't come to terms with Israel publicly, at least ignore Israel while they set Gaza in order and established their credentials as a real organization by doing what they could to fix Gaza. They could have stopped the corruption that is rife within the Palestinian leadership, gained legitimacy among the western powers, and made the claim that the US was being hypocritical by not supporting them as they were democratically elected.

Instead? Rockets.

The article is correct. One of these days a rocket is going to land in the wrong place. Not long ago, an 8-year old Israeli boy had his legs blown off by one of said rockets. I'm not citing this as an example of Hamas' inhumanity (for which there are plenty of better ones), but as a means of illustrating a point. Those kinds of images and stories cause a groundswell of opposition to the peace plan from within Israel, and it won't take many more photos of crying, bleeding Israeli children before the Israeli people push their government into invading Gaza to root out the damned rockets.

Remember, this is the only country I've ever heard of where the students at a modern, western, liberal arts university held a major protest to object to the LACK of a war.

What will happen then? Probably more of the same. Lots of deaths, most of them Palestinians. Yet more destruction and infrastructural damage to Gaza. Messages of condemnation (and nothing else) from the rest of the Arab governments. Lots of rioting around the Arab world. The US will make some vague statement about how it supports peace in the Middle East that everyone will ignore or condemn for being too soft on one side or the other. The UN will pass a resolution condemning Israel and Israel alone as the source of the evils of this war, because a war could break out between Singapore and Belgium, and the UN would find a way to condemn Israel for it (Remember the Durban resolution?). Israel will quite sensibly ignore all of these things and do what they must, claim a victory, and leave once more. Hamas will survive the war, claim a victory for having survived it, and start picking up the pieces and importing more rockets. Lots of Palestinian civilians will die in the fighting, partly because Hamas will use civilian institutions to fight from, and then accuse Israel of assorted evils when they bomb them.

Just another year in the Middle-East...

#6

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 2:46 pm
by frigidmagi
(Remember the Durban resolution?).
Let's say I don't, how about you share?

#7

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 3:08 pm
by Cynical Cat
Israel kills its fair share of Palestinians to keep the cycle of violence fed. That many of the casualties are collateral rather than targeted doesn't mean much to those who are losing friends and relatives. Of course their enemies are going to hide among civilians. Israel crushed Arab armies en masse until the Arabs got tired of losing and stopped coming. If fighting head on only results in defeat then your enemies are eventually going to learn to fight another way. That makes the whole thing messier, but when neither side is ready to give up that's the way things are going to be.

#8

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:08 pm
by General Havoc
The 2001 World Conference against Racism, held in Durban, South Africa under UN Auspices, was supposed to be a conference on how to end racism in the world. It (predictably) turned into an Israel-bashing session that equated most of the world's evils with Israel. In it, an attempt was made to ressurect UN resolution 3379, which was the one in which Zionism was equated with racism and declared the sole source of all tension and violence in the Middle East. Canada, Australia, the US, and a host of other countries all eventually withdrew from the conference in protest at the hypocrisy of the UN resolutions passed there (not just this one).

It was also, incidentally, the same conference at which an assortment of NGOs got together and issued their demand that the US overturn the First Amendment of the Constitution, as well as several other sections of it, because it conflicted with various UN declarations against Hate speech, in addition to their assertion that teaching English as the Primary language of the US was racist, objecting to affirmative action should be a criminal offense, the first amendment right of free association was racist (in that people sometimes freely associated with hate groups), and that the US was at fault for refusing to publicly acknowledge that it is the only country in the world with a pervasive system of international racism in their government.

Don't get me started on NGOs...

Anyhow, my point is that the UN invariably blames Israel alone for everything that happens in the middle-east (which shouldn't surprise anyone who is familiar with the UN). If a war breaks out in Gaza, that is what they will do again. Iran could drop a nuclear weapon on Tel Aviv and the UN would condemn Israel for "pushing a peace-loving people to violence in revenge for Israel's intolerable acts of oppression."

Of course, the UN would do the same for a nuclear attack on Washington...

#9

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:10 pm
by frigidmagi
Well let's look at this way, how many Arab nations are there in the UN?

How many Jewish ones?

#10

Posted: Thu Feb 28, 2008 4:15 pm
by General Havoc
Cynical Cat wrote:Israel kills its fair share of Palestinians to keep the cycle of violence fed. That many of the casualties are collateral rather than targeted doesn't mean much to those who are losing friends and relatives. Of course their enemies are going to hide among civilians. Israel crushed Arab armies en masse until the Arabs got tired of losing and stopped coming. If fighting head on only results in defeat then your enemies are eventually going to learn to fight another way. That makes the whole thing messier, but when neither side is ready to give up that's the way things are going to be.
This is very true. I was not trying to claim that the violence is one-sided or all any one group's fault. Blood has been spilled in such quantities that everyone can be condemned for it. I was just saying that in battles between Israel and Palestine, Palestinians tend to die in larger numbers, and that part of that reason is because Hamas (and others) hide inside civilian buildings, specifically so as to engender more civilian casualties.

The Middle East is a charnel house of violence. Everyone is at fault, including us to an extent. I don't know a solution to it, but I do know roughly what will happen if there's another Israeli assault on Gaza.

EDIT: And I really should have mentioned this above, but in fairness to the NGOs, many NGOs also abandoned the conference when it became clear how radical it was becoming. Even Amnesty International (who have their own share of problems, and certainly never shirk from criticizing the US) divorced themselves from the proceedings.