Some 1,800 Israelis and Palestinians, including 500 Sderot residents, sign petition calling for end to IDF operation in Gaza, renewal of dialogue between Israel, Hamas.

…Some 500 Sderot residents have recently signed a petition calling to stop the IDF operation in the Strip and renew the truce with Hamas. Arik Yalin, 43, from Sderot told Ynet that over 1,800 Israelis and Palestinians have already joined the petition.

“About a month ago we realized that the situation was about to deteriorate into total chaos,” he explained. “It’s important for us to voice an opinion that represents quite a few residents who live within the rocket range but who believe that we can, and should try to resolve this ongoing conflict in a peaceful manner. We have experienced the terrible hardship of life under rocket fire for the past eight years, and it has deeply hurt us both mentally and physically. Our need to voice a different stance stems from the strong desire to change the situation and begin negotiations with the other side in order to stop the violence,” he added.

According to Yalin, a military operation will only deepen the hatred on both sides and reduce the chances of reaching a settlement. “The underlying assumption is that eventually there would be some kind of understanding. The only question is how many innocent people would get killed along the way.”

If the ordinary citizens of Sderot and Gaza can see eye to eye then why can’t their leaders? What is it that Arik Yalin knows that Ehud Barak doesn’t?  Maybe Yalin lives in the path of the missiles and it has given him a more nuanced understanding of the issues and necessities called for to resolve this issue.  The group Yalin leads is called A Different Voice.

The fighting, death and destruction in Gaza is painful to watch. But it’s all too familiar. It’s the latest version of the longest-running play in the modern Middle East, which, if I were to give it a title, would be called: “Who owns this hotel? Can the Jews have a room? And shouldn’t we blow up the bar and replace it with a mosque?”

This is utterly inane and shows Friedman at his most reductionist.  He has this annoying habit of trying to reduce complicated issues into neat digestible concepts.  What makes it especially annoying is that he does it in a smug self-satisfed way; as if to say: “Aren’t I clever?”

Here his tendency to reduce the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to three neat syllogisms founders. I was wondering when Friedman was going to get around to pontificating on Gaza.  It only took him twelve days to figure out what he wanted to say as 600 Gazans died.  And then when he spoke it was like a hot air balloon with all the helium drained out of it.

There is a strange bifurcation going on at the Times.  The news reporting has generally been first-rate.  And I say this as someone who’s been critical of Ethan Bronner’s reporting from his start a few months ago.  But the editorial page has been AWOL: one editorial which pussy-footed around the issues and tried to be all things to all people.  Two columns written by David Grossman and Benny Morris.  The latter’s column was typically whiny and beside the point; and Grossman’s advocating a 48 hour truce was definitely not his best work.  David Brooks and Bill Kristol both sprached about Gaza in their typically neocon fashion.  No columns by anyone critical of the Gaza attack and most significantly nothing by an Arab, Muslim or Palestinian.

No liberal vision at all.  It’s a glaring gap in the Times’ coverage.  It seems to show an editorial board which is at sea and simply doesn’t know how to address this travesty.  This is not the glorious (though many would disagree), comprehenvsive approach, so superior to that of the Washington Post,  that I’ve come to expect of the Times on this subject.

I recall the Times’ coverage of the Lebanon War being much more sure-footed including editorials which analyzed the issues without fear or favor to the Israel lobby.  I don’t know what’s happened in the interim.

NOTE: After writing this I just noticed that Nicholas Kristof has finally spoken about Gaza, including this incisive passage:

Barack Obama has said relatively little about Gaza. At first, given the provocations by Hamas, that was understandable. But as the ground invasion costs more lives, he needs to join European leaders in calling for a new cease-fire on all sides — and after he assumes the presidency, he must provide real leadership that the world craves.

Aaron David Miller…suggests…that presidents should offer Israel “love, but tough love.”

So, Mr. Obama, find your voice. Fall in tough love with Israel.

So we can at last say that one of the Times’ liberal columnists has said something decent and articulate on the subject.  About time.  What took them so long?

Members of al-Samouni clan mourn their dead (AP)

A few days ago I wrote about the shelling of the Gaza home in which the al-Samouni family took refuge after it was evicted by force by the IDF from its own home earlier.  The N.Y. Times reported that 11 family members had been killed.  Apparently, this report was far from complete.

Now word has seeped out that the death toll was much larger–as high as 60 or 70 killed.  What’s worse, there were over 20 wounded who could not escape the wreckage and were left to fend for themselves with no medical attention.  The Israeli troops could’ve cared less.  In fact, when the Red Crescent made efforts to approach the home they were driven off by Israeli firing.

Just today, three days after the shelling, aid workers finally arrived and removed 15 wounded.  However, Israeli forces again fired on them and forced them to withdraw with eight wounded still remaining at the  site.  Speaking as someone who truly does want to find something that would allow me to see humanity and decency among Israelis, I am forced to concede that I am always disappointed.  Even soldiers fighting a battle must make provision for evacuating civilian wounded.  The fact that the IDF has refused is beyond bestial.  I sputter with rage and indignation as I write this.

In the Book of Exodus, it says God hardened Pharaoh’s heart so he wouldn’t empathize with Jewish suffering. Now it’s the IDF and all Israel whose heart is hardened. We should remember that at the time of the Exodus it was the Egyptians whose first born all died after they had earlier sought to exterminate Jews by killing all the male babies. Is the only way to end this madness for Israel to suffer the same trauma they’re inflicting on the Palestinians? Will the former harden its heart forever?

I propose that we from now on refer to Ehud Barak as Barak the Butcher.  Let this stain whatever legacy he hopes to have for himself.  Keep in mind this is a man who donned a woman’s dress in order to assassinate his first terrorist in Lebanon.  Mazel tov Ehud, you no longer wear a dress when you kill.  Now it’s a business suit.  But it’s still the same grisly murder.  Barak to the Hague.

The Telegraph provides more background on the tragedy here.

Father mourns his children killed at UNWRA school (Abid Katib/Getty)

If Israel is looking for brownie points for allowing a three hour ceasefire every other day for humanitarian relief to enter Gaza, they won’t find them here.  It is simply an outrage that you kill civilians almost with impunity and then seek to relieve the pressure by agreeing to a fig leaf like this.  It is no coincidence that the lull was proposed within hours of the single most devastating civilian attack of the entire war (for let’s name this by what it really is) in which 40 were killed.  Cynical doesn’t even begin to describe this.

Israel claims in its defense it was responding to mortar fire from the school, while UNWRA denies categorically that this was so.  It appears there may have been mortar fire originating in the neighborhood of the school but not from within it.  Can an Israeli tank not see innocent civilians before it fires its rounds or does the IDF simply not care when it lets loose the guns?

At any rate, let the pro-Israel apologists view this image and come up with some foolhardy defense of this crime.  It reeks to high heaven.

Barack Obama: do the eight words you released in your statement of sympathy yesterday do any of this justice??  For the love of God, man, you can do better.

Again, it is possible that the IDF shells were misdirected or some other technical error caused these deaths.  Or it is possible that the Israeli firing was willful.  In either case, the tragedy is unpardonable and again, if the UNWRA story is correct, solely the fault of the IDF.  Let them explain their way out of this.

This is the beginning of the end, my friend.  It cannot go on much longer.  As I wrote in my previous post, this may be the Qana straw that broke Cast Lead’s back.

1. the world community must coalesce around a demand for an immediate ceasefire.

2. the IDF blunders in an operation which ends in major loss of Israeli life.

3. the IDF blunders and kills a large number of Gaza civilians in a single catastrophic event.

Unfortunately, we do not yet have #1, though Barack Obama has ended his Sphinx like silence with the following almost Delphic oracle:

The loss of civilian life in Gaza and in Israel is a source of deep concern for me.

Regarding #2: yesterday, the IDF shelled a Gazan home full of its own troops killing three, wounding 20.  That unfortunately qualifies as the type of disaster which may make Israelis begin to take pause at the sacrifices their boys must make in this godforsaken enterprise.  Though I fear that this alone will not end the fighting.

Rushing survivor of UN school massacre to hospital (Ismail Zaydah/Reuters)

Regarding #3: sadly, today brings news of a Qana-like utter disaster.  The IDF fired mortar rounds directly at a UN school killing 42 and injuring 50 more several severely.  The death toll is expected to rise.  Since the UN had provided coordinates for all its Gaza facilities, the army knew it was targeting a UN building housing civilians.  This, like Qana is the disaster that will begin to turn the hearts of world opinion against Operation Solid Lead.

Israel claims mortars were fired at its forces from the school.  Even if this were true, the idea that you fire a mortar at a school crammed with 350 civilians is grotesque.  IF you want to take out 2 militants, you don’t do it by firing a mortar.  The officer who ordered the mortar round fired deserves the IDF medal for duncehood.  The only thing such weaponry guarantees is the result that we have now.

Reuters tells the story of the disaster differently:

…Two tank shells exploded outside the school, spraying shrapnel inside and outside the building where hundreds of Palestinians had sought refuge from the fighting.

I have given up hope that the Israeli government gives one solid crap about Palestinian life.  The only thing that moves them is world opinion.  That is why Obama’s statement, pathetic as it is, is a start.  It may loosen the tongues of some world leaders who’ve been sitting on the sidelines waiting to see which way the wind would blow.  For the fence-sitters, this would be the time to get off their duffs and tell their UN ambassadors to get into intensive diplomatic mode.  The time for stalling is long gone.  The UN needs to get down to business and end this thing.  Whatever Bush or Rice think is happening or that they wanted to happen, they have to end this before there is an even greater catastrophic failure.

Given Gaza is a densely populated urban enclave, you know that either the IDF is going to blunder into killing its own, Hamas is going to ambush a platoon and kill a significant number of troops, or Israel will kill massive numbers of civilians once again.  The Times even notes the IDF’s tendency toward such disasters:

Israel has been criticized in the past for the inaccuracy of its shelling…

In November 2006, Israel all but stopped firing tank and artillery shells into Gaza after 18 Palestinian civilians, most from one family, were killed by Israeli shells that missed their target and hit a row of houses in Beit Hanoun.

In another strike, during its conflict with Hezbollah in July 2006, Israel suspended air attacks in southern Lebanon for 48 hours after one of its air strikes on the southern town of Qana left dozens of civilians, many of them children, dead.

This had to happen.  The only question was how long it would take before it did.  I predicted it would from the very first day of the war.  It doesn’t take rocket science to know this.

What does take a bit of finesse is butting Hamas and Israeli heads together to engineer a ceasefire.  And I’ll repeat for the umpteenth time: the ceasefire needs to satisfy not only Israeli demands for an end to rocket fire.  It also needs to address Gaza’s need for a total end to the Israeli siege.  The blockade as a policy designed to topple Hamas has failed.  It has long been time to abandon it and take a different tack.

Latest death toll: 640 Gazans, five Israelis and five soldiers.

Suffer the little children...Hilmi al-Samuli's sons and nephew killed by Israeli shelling Monday (Mahmud Hams/AFP-Getty)

Suffer the little children to come unto Me.

–Luke, 18:16

And suffer and come unto Him they have in Gaza today.  Leila Abu Saba reports 20 children killed today.  Here is the story of the liquidation of one entire family:

The Samouni family knew they were in danger. They had been calling the Red Cross for two days, they said, begging to be taken out of Zeitoun, a poor area in eastern Gaza City that is considered a stronghold of Hamas.

No rescuers came. Instead, Israeli soldiers entered their building late Sunday night and told them to evacuate to another building. They did. But at 6 a.m. on Monday, when a missile fired by an Israeli warplane struck the relatives’ house in which they had taken shelter, there was nowhere to run.

Eleven members of the extended Samouni family were killed and 26 wounded, according to witnesses and hospital officials, with five children age 4 and under among the dead.

Hundreds of members of the clan flooded in to Shifa Hospital, all from Zeitoun, many in shock. Masouda al-Samouni, 20, lost her mother-in-law, her husband and her 10-month-old son. She said she had been preparing food for the baby when the missile struck. “He died hungry,” she said.

Haaretz reports the elimination of the Samouni family along with two others:

Over the past 24 hours, two Palestinian families were killed. In the Shati refugee camp the parents and five children of the Abu Aisha family were killed. In the Zeitun neighborhood, the seven members of the Salmuni family were killed. In another incident, a pregnant Palestinian woman and her four children were killed.

How long, O Lord? How long must this go on? Sometimes I think if I could just get Israelis supporting this Operation to visualize the effect of an F-16 missile, or tank shell tearing into a tender body of a young Gazan child, I think perhaps they could begin to feel some of the revulsion I do. But I know it’s probably a hopeless exercise. Most Israelis and their supporters have innoculated themselves with arguments and certainties that prevent them from feeling such emotions of regret or uncertainty.

But just keep this ratio in mind: 100 to 1. One hundred Gazans for every Israeli killed. That one Israeli means everything. Those 100 Gazans mean nothing. That is the moral calculus of this nightmarish war. Phil Weiss reports a commentary written by one of his readers Jules Rabin in which the latter quotes the eulogy for Jewish serial murderer, Baruch Goldstein: “A million Arabs are not worth a Jewish fingernail.” Is that what we have come to as Jews? To, in effect, accept the racist, genocidal words of a crazy settler rabbi?

Must we kill many children to ensure that our own can live? Is that part of our religious belief? I know that religion has little to do with Israel’s motivation in this war except in the propaganda sound bytes emanating from the mouths of Israeli politicians, but I can’t help but seeing this conflict as a reflection, in some way, of my religious values. I wish the generals and ministers would be thinking more of theirs.

Hilmi al-Samuli mourned his two sons and nephew killed during Israeli shelling Monday (Mahmud Hams/AFP-Getty)

An Israeli friend alerted me this afternoon:

…The Israeli news now talk about “heavy fire exchanges” which in previous conflicts has usually been codeword for “be prepared to hear of more IDF casualties soon.”

Sure enough, by early this evening he reported to me a major self-inflicted IDF disaster:

It turns out a Gaza building with a whole Golani unit in it collapsed, apparently after being hit by “friendly” IDF tank fire. 3 dead, one fighting for his life, a few badly injured, and a whole regiment busy evacuating the unit the entire night last night.

While it’s important to note that the IDF has suffered similar self-inflicted wounds in previous conflicts, it’s also important to point out that Israeli deaths in combat especially involving friendly fire have a severe impact on public perceptions of the war.

David Grossman’s speech at the Yitzhak Rabin memorial–after he’d lost his own brave son in the last day of the war–in which flayed Ehud Olmert played a major role in turning public perception against that conflict.

Unfortunately, four Israeli dead in such an incident has much more impact than the death of 400 or even 4,000 Palestinians, because Israelis are inured to the suffering of the enemy. But their own suffering they understand. Thank God they have that much human feeling.

It is customary to talk of such losses as korbanot (”sacrifices”) for the nation. I see them as sacrifices as well. But in a different sense. These soldiers are sacrifices on the altar of Ehud Barak’s folly. If Israelis begin to reconsider the costs of implementing Barak’s folly, then their sacrifice will not have been in vain.

Haaretz reports about 100 Palestinian dead today alone with many of them civilians.  This would raise the total to somewhere close to 600 dead for the whole conflict.  The IDF wiped out three entire Gazan families totalling 19 souls in separate attacks.

A friend has received the following e mail which documents both the efforts and the agency that originated them.  The solicitation to become a propagandist also includes a list of media links which the ministry would like flooded with pro-Israel comments:

Dear friends,

We hold the military supremacy, yet fail the battle over the international media. We need to buy time for the IDF to succeed, and the least we can do is spare some (additional) minutes on the net. The ministry of foreign affairs is putting great efforts in balancing the media, but we all know it’s a battle of numbers. The more we post, blog, talkback, vote - the more likely we gain positive sentiment.

I was asked by the ministry of foreign affairs to arrange a network of volunteers, who are willing to contribute to this effort. If you’re up to it you will receive a daily messages & media package as well as targets.

If you wish to participate, please respond to this email.

My friend did so and received this official communique from the ministry with talking points about Operation Solid Lead which s/he was to use in her/his propaganda efforts. Here are the links s/he was asked to respond to:

English

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/04/israel-history-comment-peter-beaumont

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5446519.ece

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2158709/posts

http://www.ireport.com/ir-topic-stories.jspa?topicId=169745 (comment on Anti-Israeli posts, post your own)

http://palestinian.ning.com/profiles/blogs/ilan-pappe-israels-righteous

http://www.nowpublic.com/world/depleted-uranium-found-gaza-victims(disinformation)

Spanish

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/ataque-brutal-y-sangriento-de-israel-contra-la-franja-de-gaza/3276528285/?icid=VIDURVENT06

Dutch

http://www.telegraaf.nl/buitenland/2925927/__Chaos_in_ziekenhuizen__.html

http://www.telegraaf.nl/buitenland/2923318/__Veel_burgerdoden_in_Gaza__.html

Material to use

http://www.bicom.org.uk/

Video - Israel history in 10 minutes -http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/middleeast/What_Really_Happened_in_the_Middle_East.asp

Amid Gaza violence, Israeli and Palestinian doctors save baby’s life -http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjqm5tzIwIQ

– CNN’s Amanpour interviews Tzipi Livni - http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.asp?ClipMediaID=3244332&ak=null

Military incursion should be seen as part of War on Terror,http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5447575.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=797093

Blog from Southern Israel, Morit Rozen - http://soundsofwar.wordpress.com/

If you visit any of those articles you will identify the hasbaraniks easily through the pseudo-polite style they adopt and the programed arguments they advance.

Remember when the defense department was paying public relations companies to insert articles praising the Iraq war in U.S. newspapers?  There rightly was a media uproar about the manipulation.  We’ll see whether the same happens over this.

I just hope the foreign ministry doesn’t get a pass on this one.  They view this as maximizing their efforts to “explain” Israel’s position in the world media.  I view it as a cynical attempt to flood the web and news media with favorable flackery in a vain attempt to tilt the war effort favorably toward Israel.  Not only does it do Israel a disservice, it stains every legitimate effort that the ministry might make to explain Israel to the world, since no one will believe a word it says knowing it engages in such outright propaganda efforts.

Not to mention that this is such cheap pennyante s(^t.  What do they gain by this?  How effective can it be and how many can be convinced?  By the way, I’ve even noticed the hasbaraniks here in this blog.  You can tell them a mile away because they’ve never published a comment before yet write something like: “I’ve enjoyed your blog for a long time, but anyone with a brain in their head knows that Hamas is out to destroy Israel blah, blah blah.”  Pretty formulaic stuff.  Also, you can Google a few phrases of the comment and if you find it appears elsewhere on the web you know you either have a hasbaranik or someone who has repetition compulsion.

In the meantime, over 500 Gazans are dead.  An entire family of seven killed in their home.  Claims are flying that Israel is using depleted uranium, cluster bombs and white phosphorus munitions.  But thank God, hasbara never sleeps.

The Gaza death count is at least 460 with 2,000 wounded.  Over 100 of the dead were women or children.  25% were civilians.  Besides the Hamas fighters killed today, Israel bombed a northern Gaza mosque during prayers and killed 13 worshippers.  This will no doubt foster positive relations with the world’s Muslim population.

In what is the finest piece Ethan Bronner has written since becoming the N.Y. Times Israel correspondent (and I have written critically of his reporting here before), he summarizes the dangers inherent in this invasion.  Most importantly, he raises the red flag question: what is Israel’s ultimate goal?

As Israel’s tanks and troops poured into Gaza on Saturday…a question hung over the operation: can the rockets really be stopped for any length of time while Hamas remains in power in Gaza? And if the answer is determined to be no, then is the real aim of the operation to remove Hamas entirely, no matter the cost?

He goes on to quote two of Israel’s most senior ministers as advocating precisely this view:

“There is no doubt that as long as Hamas controls Gaza, it is a problem for Israel, a problem for the Palestinians and a problem for the entire region.”

Vice Premier Haim Ramon went even further Friday night in an interview on Israeli television, saying Israel must not end this operation with Hamas in charge of Gaza.

“What I think we need to do is to reach a situation in which we do not allow Hamas to govern,” Mr. Ramon said on Channel One. “That is the most important thing.”

Is Israel going for regime change?  It is a chilling question for those of us who are critical of this operation. Again, Bronner poses the concerns quite acutely:

…While it may sound decisive to speak of taking Hamas out of power, almost no one familiar with Gaza and Palestinian politics considers it realistic. Hamas legislators won a democratic majority in elections four years ago, and the group has 15,000 to 20,000 men under arms. It has consolidated its rule in the past 18 months since pushing out its rivals loyal to the more Western-oriented and moderate Fatah party…

And while there are plenty of Gazans who would prefer Fatah, they seem hardly organized or strong enough to become the new rulers. [And even if they were] they would never be willing to ride into Gaza on the back of an Israeli tank. In fact, the longer Israel pounds Gaza, the weaker Fatah is likely to become because it will be seen as collaborating.

The likelier result of a destruction of the Hamas infrastructure, then, would be chaos, anathema not only to the people of Gaza but also to those hoping for peace in southern Israel.

Here Bronner presents another distressing possibility that must be seriously considered given the failures of the 2006 Lebanon war and the U.S. invasion of Iraq, whose goal was to topple Saddam Hussein–which were characterized by similarly unrealistic expectations:

…Even if Israel intends to hold back from completely overthrowing Hamas, its choice of assault tactics could head that way anyway. And the Israelis may already be facing a kind of mission creep: after all, if enough of Hamas’s infrastructure is destroyed, the prospect of governing Gaza, a densely populated, refugee-filled area whose weak economy has been devastated by the Israeli-led boycott, will be exceedingly difficult.

You’ll recall that Dan Halutz, Amir Peretz and Ehud Olmert confidently predicted the elimination of Hezbollah as a potent force in 2006.  You’ll also recall that Don Rumsfeld predicted Iraqis would welcome U.S. forces as liberators.  Neither prediction came remotely true.  So what happens if Israel gets its wish and Hamas is either eliminated from, or falls from power?

What will take its place?  Fatah?  Hardly.  Fatah was despised in Gaza BEFORE Hamas toppled it.  Even if Fatah were willing to do Israel’s dirty work and assume control, the party would be so hated it couldn’t possibly govern effectively.  If Israel does reoccupy Gaza it will become responsible as occupier for all of Gaza’s needs, unlike now when it can say it has washed its hands of the enclave.  This would also effectively nullify Ariel Sharon’s much heralded withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 thus causing Israel an even deeper black eye on the world state.  Not to mention that it would set up Israeli forces as likely target for all manner or suicide bombers and vengeance seekers of whom there would be myriads.

Recall the fact that when the U.S. invaded Iraq it faced only Iraqi army forces which it quickly subdued.  Only later did a powerful insurgency arise which made us pay the price for our foolhardy illusions about what we could accomplish there.  This is what awaits Israel in Gaza should it eliminate Hamas.

Given the grand delusion that was Israel’s strategy in 2006, any serious observer has to concede the real possibility that Israel wants to go whole hog. Regime change in Gaza would entail an even greater disaster for Israel than would a limited ground operation designed to eliminate Hamas launching capability.  The former would lead to a Lebanon-style debacle, while the latter will only lead to a failure of the operation to realize Israel’s objectives to eliminate Hamas rocket fire.

Unfortunately, it’s come to this: trying to persuade Israel to restrain itself from making an even more serious blunder than it already has made.  If the U.S., UN and world community continues to diddle and dawdle, then they will have only themselves to blame for the results…not only more bloodshed and loss of innocent life in Gaza, but a receding ever farther into the distance of a comprehensive resolution of the overall conflict.

I have written several times glowing posts about speeches and statements Rabbi Yoffie has made about Christian Zionists or Muslim-Jewish understanding.  And I have never criticized him before because I have never read anything that I felt was so far off the mark.  But this piece requires a strong denunciation since it lacks any sense of moral calculus or compass regarding the horror of this event.

He goes off the rails in his argument almost from the beginning:

I suspect that most American Jews feel the same discomfort that I feel. They support the military offensive too…

Not so fast.  Glenn Greenwald reports on a Rasmussen survey that confirms that while the American public is sharply divided on the conflict, that Democrats are overwhelmingly opposed:

Democratic voters overwhelmingly oppose the Israeli offensive — by a 24-point margin (31-55%).

Since 80-85% of Jews consider themselves Democrats that would mean that even IF a majority of Jews supported the Operation Solid Lead, that the split would be close to right down the middle (I’m conceding that the 20% of Jewish Republicans would strongly favor the assault).  This is Yoffie’s first questionable assumption.  Here is more questionable thinking:

…They [American Jews] expect Israel to be both politically wise and morally sensitive in how it fights. It is especially important to us that Israel do everything humanly possible to avoid the death of innocents and to prevent a humanitarian crisis in Gaza. There is much evidence that Israel has worked hard to limit the carnage, and the credibility of Israel’s leaders in providing assurances on these points is an important factor in assuring the continued support of American Jews — and, indeed, of all Americans — for the Gaza campaign.

This passage too is full of dubious assumptions.  Israel has killed 400 civilians in Gaza and undertaken an 18 month siege which has reduced the enclave to penury.  Eric Yoffie is an intelligent person and learned rabbi.  How can he possibly believe what he is writing?  It simply flies in the face of reality as the rest of the world (outside Israel’s most ardent backers) knows it.

Yoffie’s insinuation that the majority of Americans support the operation is also questionable.  Rasmussen finds that Americans support it by a slim plurality (44-41%).  The longer the operation continues surely the more opposition will mount among Americans.

Here Yoffie takes on J Street’s courageous position attacking the Gaza incursion:

…Not a few Jewish doves have demonstrated an utter lack of empathy for Israel’s predicament. J Street, a new Washington lobbying group and a major voice of the dovish pro-Israel community, has spoken out sharply against Israel’s actions in Gaza. While it claims to represent the moderate American Jewish majority, in this case it has misread the issues and misjudged the views of American Jews.

It is interesting to note that Yoffie’s presumption is that American Jews owe Israel the benefit of the doubt in issues like this military offensive.  The majority of our empathy must go to Israel’s “predicament” rather than to the Gazans who presumably deserve less because they simply are not Jews.  This is a stale notion that lost favor years ago even among American Jews.  The day when we got out the flag and waved it no matter what Israel did (and especially when it did anything morally questionable) are long gone.  Israel no longer gets a blank moral check from most American Jews.  And that’s as it should be. We state what we think is in Israel’s long-term interests, but owe no special obligation to support Israel when it strays from our view of what those interests should be (as they have done in Operation Solid Lead).  I’m simply shocked to read that the leader of the most liberal American religious denomination is still spouting such virtual inanities.

Consider the moral calculus of this statement and ask yourself what is missing:

A second J Street statement was worse by far. It could find no moral difference between the actions of Hamas and other Palestinian militants, who have launched more than 5,000 rockets and mortar shells at Israeli civilians in the past three years, and the long-delayed response of Israel, which finally lost patience and responded to the pleas of its battered citizens in the south.

Notice that Israel has suffered 5,000 rockets fired at it while the Palestinians have suffered…hmmm, I seem to have missed that portion of Yoffie’s statement.  The Palestinians haven’t suffered anything, have they?  Well then, in that case you can see how easy it is for Yoffie to get into high moral dudgeon over J Street’s purported embrace of a “pro-Palestinian” position.

Here is more ignorance masquerading as sympathy for Israel:

These words [of J Street's criticizing both Israeli and Palestinian violence] are deeply distressing because they are morally deficient, profoundly out of touch with Jewish sentiment and also appallingly naïve. A cease-fire instituted by Hamas would be welcome, and Israel would be quick to respond. A cease-fire imposed on Israel would allow Hamas to escape the consequences of its actions yet again and would lead in short order to the renewal of its campaign of terror. Hamas, it should be noted, is not a government; it is a terrorist gang.

Most people in the world feel, at best, deeply divided over this conflict; and at worst they feel Israel is almost entirely in the wrong.  Yet somehow Yoffie transforms this reality into one in which J Street is “morally deficient” for seeing precisely what most other people are seeing: an aggressive Israel attacking disproportionately a virtually defenseless (except for crude handmade rockets which cause far more fear than actual mayhem) Gaza.

Not a whiff from the good rabbi in the above passage of Israel’s draconian siege on Gaza and the effects this is having on 1.5 million civilians who have done nothing to warrant such punishment.  And regarding the Hamas line he espouses, it is once again wrong.  Hamas IS a government whenever Israel isn’t intervening (like now) against its control of Gaza by preventing it from being one.  Hamas was elected by Palestinians democratically.  It was the U.S. and Israel which refused to accept the democratic results of this election and determined to topple Hamas by force.  Not a word about that, Rabbi Yoffie.  Why not?  Or is it possible that Middle Eastern democracy is only considered legitimate when it’s flying an Israeli flag?

In order to justify Yoffie’s rejection of Hamas as a legitimate representative of the Palestinians, he trots out this definitive “wisdom:”

To be a dove of influence, you must be a realist, firm in your principles but shorn of all illusions…

Being a “realist” as far as Yoffie is concerned means accepting that Hamas are nothing but a bunch of thugs incapable of being legitimate partners of Israel or of governing Palestine.  The only problem is that many Israelis, among them respected generals and intelligence analysts, don’t agree.  So Rabbi, are they unprincipled and illusion-filled or are you perhaps getting a bit ahead of yourself in making such definitive and ill-considered statements about the nature of Hamas?

As a reality check for my views, I did what I normally do in these circumstances: I checked with my closest Israeli friends, who are all left of center, haters of war and ferocious opponents of the West Bank settlement movement. In virtually every case, they saw the action in Gaza as tragic but necessary and were astounded by the opposition of American doves.

You’ll note that Yoffie’s “closest Israeli friends” are the moral arbiters of what a correct American Jewish position should be on this issue.  Could it be that his Israeli friends represent as narrow a spectrum of opinion as his own views expressed here?  Can Yoffie deny that the pages of the Israeli press are filled with reports that question Israeli motives for this attack, which denounce it as a failure practically before it began, which portray the immense suffering of Gazan civilians?  I guess the many critical journalists I’ve been reading in Haaretz and Ynet must not be among Yoffie’s circle of “closest friends.”  I’d like to introduce him to Akiva Eldar, Amira Hass, Gideon Levy, Yossi Sarid, B. Michael, David Grossman, Uri Avnery, and many others.  They might teach him a thing or two about what those Israelis believe who aren’t among his intimate circle.

…Why, we ask, should Israel’s center-left government, after long periods of restraint and desperate efforts to renew the cease-fire, be expected to refrain from fighting terrorists that are regularly attacking from right across the border?

Because the operation won’t work.  Because the only way to end the violence is to negotiate.  Because Hamas legitimately demands something in return for the end of its attacks–that is, an end to the horrifying siege that has starved its children and brought death to its critically ill who lack medicine or care.

American Jews see Israel’s Gaza offensive as a tragic necessity, unwelcome but inevitable, carried out by a reluctant Israeli government doing what it must to end rocket attacks against its citizenry. In short, American Jews are, as usual, sensible and centrist, and supporting Israel in her hour of need.

Again, not so fast.  While Rabbi Yoffie speaks for a large religious denomination, I don’t believe his views are those of the majority of American Jews.  And even if I concede that they are the views of the majority, there is by no means the consensus he posits.  American Jews, like the rest of Americans, are deeply divided about this.  To claim otherwise, is simply like whistling in a graveyard.  You’re hoping you’re right, but haven’t a clue or a means to prove it.

Rabbi Yoffie’s piece in the Forward proves to me that while he may have liberal instincts on many issues, when it comes to Israel he is little better than the mainline Israel lobby organizations.  We cannot expect wisdom from them or him on these issues.  It grieves me to say this because he has often been eloquent and profound about some subjects as I’ve noted above.  But not this one.  Not by a long shot.

J Street–you’ve done something honorable.  Don’t even think of backing down or being intimidated by this flackery.  You are in the right.  Time and history will confirm it.  It is Rabbi Yoffie who will be eating his words in six months time when he sees that this military project has failed just as all previous ones seeking to do the same thing have failed before it.  Unfortunately, Rabbi Yoffie would do well to consider these profound words from Zechariah: Ki lo b’choach, v’lo b’hayil, ki im b’ruchi, amar Adonai tzevaot.  “Not by strength and not by might, but rather by my spirit says the Lord of Hosts.”  “Spirit” is words, negotiations leading to peace.  Those are the only things that will work here.  Remember that little bit of Jewish wisdom, Rabbi.