web analytics
January 29, 2015 / 9 Shevat, 5775
 
At a Glance
InDepth
Sponsored Post


Avoidance Vs. Confrontation


      Last week the IDF released statistics on rocket and mortar fire from Gaza on southern Israel. During 2007, 1,150 rockets were shot at southern Israel from Gaza.

 

      Since the beginning of 2008, rocket and mortar attacks have increased over 300 percent. In the first six weeks of 2008 alone, more than 400 rockets landed in southern Israel. At the same time, the Palestinians’ capabilities have grown steeply.

 

      Until Hamas breached the border with Egypt last month, most Palestinian weapons smuggling was limited to what could be brought in through underground tunnels. During the two weeks the border was wide open, heavy weaponry was transported across the border in trucks. Senior officers in the IDF Southern Command assess that in addition to an arsenal of at least a thousand short-range rockets, the Palestinians have amassed at least 200 missiles capable of hitting Ashdod and Kiryat Gat.

 

      That means nearly a million Israelis currently live within range of rockets and missiles fired from Gaza.

 

      In the face of this steadily escalating Palestinian campaign against southern Israel, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government maintains its reliance on limited military incursions into Gaza’s border zones. IDF forces are allowed to target only the last rung of the missile campaign ladder – namely, the crews that shoot the projectiles at Israel. The rest of Hamas’s war machine – from its political leadership, through its supply lines, its logistical and training bases to its collaborators – is out of bounds.

 

      The main justification the Olmert government gives for its refusal to permit the IDF to launch a ground offensive into Gaza is that such an offensive would harm the government’s ongoing negotiations with Fatah leaders regarding a permanent peace treaty between Fatah and Israel. A major Israeli offensive in Gaza, they argue, would weaken Fatah’s standing in Palestinian society. A move to secure southern Israel would force supposedly moderate leaders like Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and his titular prime minister, Salam Fayyad, to abandon their talks with the Olmert government while strengthening Hamas’s popularity still further.

 

      Yet for all of Israel’s restraint, Fatah leaders remain unhappy. Abbas and his advisors condemn every Israeli operation in Gaza as “terrorism.” At his meeting last week with Prime Minister Olmert, Abbas demanded that Israel curtail its military operations and open Gaza’s borders to Israel for commerce and supply. Fayyad told a visiting delegation of the Council of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations that the pace of negotiations is not fast enough to satisfy him. In his words, “My own sense … is that not enough has happened over the past nearly three months that could suggest to me that a treaty per se is going to be possible [in 2008].”

 

      The main reason the Olmert government is concerned about the fate of negotiations with Fatah is that it fears being blamed by for their failure by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her counterparts in the European Union. But despite the Olmert government’s best efforts to keep the negotiations afloat, even at the price of sacrificing the security of southern Israel, both the State Department and the EU are openly condemning Israel for what they, like Fayyad, consider to be a too slow pace of negotiations with Fatah and unduly harsh Israeli military actions in Gaza.

 

      In the context of this growing American-European pressure on Israel to advance the pace of Israeli concessions to the Palestinians at the negotiating table and curtail Israeli military operations against Hamas in Gaza, Rice summoned Olmert to meet with her this week in Japan. The meeting was hastily scheduled even though Rice is set to visit Israel next week. As a prelude to the dressing-down Olmert can expect from Rice, Assistant Secretary of State David Welch, at a meeting on February 11 in Berlin of the Middle East Quartet – which includes the U.S., the EU, the UN and Russia – said the U.S. “is not comfortable” with Israel’s operations in Gaza.

 

      For their part, the Europeans passed a resolution in the European Parliament on February 21 condemning Israel for its military actions in Gaza and blaming it for what the EU and Hamas portray as a humanitarian disaster in Gaza. The resolution calls on Israel “to cease military actions killing and endangering civilians, and extrajudicial killings.”

 

      Both the State Department and the Europeans are treating Israel unfairly. But the fact is, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government opened Israel to this abuse. Israel’s leaders foolishly committed themselves to the impossible goal of reaching a peace treaty with the Palestinians by the end of the year. And they knew that it would be impossible to reach a deal with Abbas when they went to Rice’s conference at Annapolis last November and committed themselves to working toward that unachievable goal.

 

      Even Olmert’s cabinet ministers acknowledge that against the backdrop of Israel’s unilateral surrenders of southern Lebanon to Hizbullah in 2000 and Gaza to Hamas in 2005, there is no way Abbas, who lacks popular support among the Palestinians and in the Arab world as a whole, can agree to an accord with Israel. Indeed, against the backdrop of Hizbullah control of south Lebanon and Hamas control of Gaza, the only agreement Abbas could accede to is an unconditional Israeli surrender of Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, combined with an Israeli agreement to allow millions of foreign Arabs to immigrate to Israel in the framework of the so-called right of return.

 

      Olmert and his colleagues agreed to maintain the fiction that there is a deal to be had with Abbas for two reasons.

 

      First, domestically, they fear a backlash from the Israeli Left if they acknowledge there is no chance of making peace with the PA. Were the Kadima/Labor government to accept this harsh reality, it would immediately lose the support of the radical Left which controls the Israeli media and legal system.

 

      Second, they hoped that by agreeing to embrace the negotiating process with Abbas, they would avoid criticism from the Bush administration and the EU which have placed the advancement of the Israeli-Palestinian “peace process” at the top of their foreign policy agendas.

 

      The Israeli government’s preference for avoiding reality rather than confronting it has been embraced by the American Jewish establishment as well. When Fayyad addressed the Council of Presidents, Mort Klein, the president of the Zionist Organization of America, attempted to confront him about Fatah’s continued involvement in terror and glorification of terrorists. Klein asked Fayyad to explain why Fatah’s posters depict a flag of Palestine that encompasses all of Israel and why the Fatah-led PA in Judea and Samaria declared three days of official mourning when the terror master George Habash passed away last month.

 

      Rather than support Klein’s request for an explanation, June Walker, the Conference’s chairwoman, reacted with embarrassment. She angrily tried to get Klein to sit down when Fayyad refused to answer his question. After the event, other members of the Conference told Klein he “had embarrassed them in front of their guest.”

 

      Whether with the Olmert-Livni-Barak government’s decision to embrace the myth that peace is possible and confrontation avoidable or the American Jewish leadership’s preference for polite meekness over truth, those today leading the Jewish people are doing us a great disservice. It is not simply that difficult realities won’t disappear just because they wish to avoid confronting them; in their attempts to postpone the inevitable confrontation with reality they are ensuring that what Israel and the Jewish people confront will be all the more dangerous and difficult.

 

      Caroline Glick is deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. Her Jewish Press-exclusive column appears the last week of each month.

About the Author:


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Avoidance Vs. Confrontation”

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
ISIS murderers threatening Obama
ISIS: We Will Behead Obama, Make US Part of the Caliphate [video]
Latest Indepth Stories
Rabbi Berel Wein

“We Jews are the only people who when we drop a book on the floor pick it up and kiss it.”

Rabbi Sholom Klass

Though Zaide was the publisher of The Jewish Press, a big newspaper,I always remember him learning

Sheldon Silver

Speaker Silver has been an extraordinary public servant since his election to the Assembly in 1975 and has been an exemplary leader of that body since 1994.

He spent the first leg of his daylong visit to the French capital at Hyper Cacher.

Drawing Congress into the Iran nuclear debate is the last thing the White House wants.

Great leaders like Miriam and like Sarah Schenirer possess the capacity to challenge the status quo that confronts them.

Obama’s foreign policy is viewed by both liberals and conservatives as deeply flawed

Many journalists are covertly blaming the Charlie Hebdo writers themselves through self-censorship.

Why does the Times relay different motivations and narratives for jihadists in Europe and Israel?

To defeat parasites-the hosts of terrorists-we need to deny them new people, potential terrorists

Combating Amalek doesn’t mean all who disagree with you is evil-rather whom to follow and to oppose

Desperate people take what they can, seizing opportunity to advance their main goal; the Arabs don’t

There was a glaring void in the President’s State of the Union speech: Israel.

Let’s focus not on becoming an ATM for that little bundle of joy, but on what you can save in taxes.

More Articles from Caroline B. Glick
Mahmoud at an event hosted by the children of Palestine to support the efforts of the Palestinian leadership at the United Nations, in the West Bank city of Ramallah,October 1, 2011.

On November 24 Palestinian Authority Chairman and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas is scheduled to meet Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal in Cairo.

Last week at the UN, President Obama did something he had never done before. He discussed Israel and the Palestinians without once attacking Israel. He didn’t blame Israel for the absence of peace.

Imagine if 100 million Americans participated in the Tea Party movement. And then imagine that the movement had no impact on American politics. Finally imagine that in the wake of the Tea Party movement, Republicans embraced President Obama’s positions on spending and taxation.

According to Israel Army Radio, Prime Minister Netanyahu has offered to extend the moratorium on Jewish property rights in Judea and Samaria for an additional three months in exchange for Jonathan Pollard’s freedom. That is, if Obama pardons Pollard, who has served 25 years of a life sentence for transferring classified documents to Israel, then Israel will agree to extend the ten-month moratorium on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria, due to expire next week, for another three months.

According to Israel Army Radio, Prime Minister Netanyahu has offered to extend the moratorium on Jewish property rights in Judea and Samaria for an additional three months in exchange for Jonathan Pollard’s freedom. That is, if Obama pardons Pollard, who has served 25 years of a life sentence for transferring classified documents to Israel, then Israel will agree to extend the ten-month moratorium on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria, due to expire next week, for another three months.

In a much discussed article in the current issue of The American Spectator titled “America’s Ruling Class,” Prof. Angelo Codevilla describes the divide between those who run the U.S. – the politicians, bureaucrats and policy establishment – and the rest of the country.

In a much discussed article in the current issue of The American Spectator titled “America’s Ruling Class,” Prof. Angelo Codevilla describes the divide between those who run the U.S. – the politicians, bureaucrats and policy establishment – and the rest of the country.

Iran is on a winning streak. As it sprints towards the nuclear finishing line, it finds itself – and its allies and clients – being wooed by one and all. In contrast, Israel has never been more isolated.

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/analysis/avoidance-vs-confrontation/2008/02/27/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: