Muslim and Jewish Women in Nazareth

'We can live in peace'...John Lennon (photo: Dafna Tal)

Mahzor

Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘gaza-invasion’

IDF Lt. Col. on Beit Hanun Massacre: ‘Artillery Least Effective Against Qassams, Most Likely to Harm Civilians’

Wednesday, November 8th, 2006


Thanks to Sol Salbe for informing me of this article. Lt. Col. (res.) Ron Ben Yishai, Defense columnist for Yediot Achronot (and serving in the paratroopers), provides a primer in Ynetnews on the IDF’s uses of artillery and why it is the least effective and most liable to error in situations like the one faced in Beit Hanun. If you read the following closely (paying special attention to the italicized passages) you will find that, whether he intended to or not, Yishai is laying out the strongest case that can possibly be made for the ultimate failure of the entire Gaza counter-insurgency operation.

And lest anyone doubt the utter horror of this heinous massacre, please view this short, but devastating Reuters video at Ynetnews (Firefox users will need install the Active-X plugin to view it; IE users should have no problem).

Please note that this is not the dovish raving of a peacenik (though many erroneously accuse me of being one here). This is the hard headed realism of an experienced military commander who understands the effectiveness of his weapons and chooses them carefully. This is someone who, while he may fight Palestinian militants to the death, understands that there are moral and tactical constraints that must be respected whether Israel wishes to or not. He is precisely in the Rabin mold. But he is precisely not in the mold of today’s IDF officer. Or at least not the ones I’m reading about in the Israeli press exemplified by Dan Halutz. It is both surprising and gratifying to read of such an IDF officer’s hard-headed pragmatism regarding this horrid incident. In short, he should be the next IDF chief of staff. And precisely for the reasons I outlined above he will never be.

Yishai begins by saying despite the fact that there may be alternate extenuating explanations for what happened:

These facts make almost no difference in the grave overall picture that is already…entrenched in Palestinian and world public opinion, which accuse the IDF of committing a massacre. This should not come as a surprise to anyone. In the dozens of years the IDF has been dealing with rocket fire from Lebanon and Gaza, one thing has been proven beyond any doubt: Artillery fire (using cannons) is the least effective means in preventing rocket and mortar fire. On the other hand, it is most susceptible to end up hurting innocent civilians. Moreover, preventive artillery bombardments that missed their targets entangled Israel in the international arena more than any other means employed by the IDF. On more than one occasion, they forced the State of Israel and the IDF – in the face of international pressure – to halt operations and actions that were essential in thwarting terrorism.

There’s no point in listing all those cases. The list is long and grim. It is enough to recall the bombing of Qfar Qana, during the Grapes of Wrath operation in 1995, which left more than 100 innocent Lebanese civilians dead. Following the incident, Israel was forced to halt its operations against Katyusha rocket launchers, accept Hizbullah’s ceasefire terms, and explain its actions to a United Nation commission of inquiry. Another case involved the Gaza family killed on a beach several months ago…

Amos Harel notes in Haaretz the disturbing fact that:

By sheer coincidence, the artillery battery that erroneously killed 19 civilians in Beit Hanun, belongs to the battalion that killed 100 Lebanese civilians in the first Kfar Kana massacre. That was the hitch that stopped Operation Grapes of Wrath in April 1996.

Uh, the IDF might want to consider disbanding this unit. Or do they want to wait for yet another massacre before they do something to curb its grievous mistakes?

The reason for the above is that artillery bombardment in proximity to residential areas, as accurate and careful as it may be and even employing large safety margins, will always be susceptible to errors. Some of those errors are a result of the lack of eye contact, at the time of the firing, between the cannons and the target. Many other errors result from the shells’ natural distribution.

Artillery is a weapon system designed to “cover” territory and not hit specific targets, particularly when it is used as “preventive fire” at territories rather than a specified target.

Another common reason for tragic incidents where innocents are hurt is errors in calculating the point of impact and technical failures in the armaments involved, which lead to the shells missing the target. Even shell duds that failed to explode threaten civilian populations no less than shells that were properly aimed and exploded.

Directly aimed tank fire is more accurate than artillery fire, but is also risky when employed in residential areas, because such fire is susceptible to missed shots and errors in identifying the target, particularly during nighttime. These facts are well known to IDF officials, particularly after the recent Lebanon war where about 130,000 artillery shells were fired. Now it is clear that the effectiveness of this weapon against Hizbullah fighters was marginal, while the economic cost was astronomical and reached millions of dollars.

Even before the Lebanon war, it was proven that artillery fire failed in preventing or even minimizing Qassam rocket fire from the Gaza Strip. This is the reason why the IDF Southern Command decided recently, on the recommendation of Gaza Division Commander Moshe Tamir, to stop or at least highly limit the use of preventive artillery fire. The trouble is that this recognition of the limits and risks associated with artillery fire were not implemented and so we got another horrifying testament to the dubious effectiveness and needless danger of hurting innocent civilians that is inherent in such fire near residential areas.

Read that carefully, a division commander ordered a policy of “highly limiting” artillery fire and the policy was “not implemented.” Amos Harel describes the situation a bit differently. He claims that Tamir himself approved the deviation from his own policies. This indicates an IDF commander so desperate for results that he rescinded his own policy, probably against his better judgment. This shows an army so lacking in discipline that it deviates from standing policy in the hopes of achieving a specified result. And of course it fails. If you can’t achieve a result following SOP then you’re highly unlikely to achieve it by violating them.

This is precisely the IDF that failed so miserably in Lebanon. Lucky for the IDF Palestinian militants cannot punish them as severely for their failures as Hezbollah did. But this is a gang that literally can’t shoot straight. Consider another grievous operational error noted by Amos Harel:

Veteran artillery men were terrified to discover that the battery had fired at Beit Hanun on the basis of range aiming from the previous night. The corps’ artillery procedure demanded that before firing at a designated target, the unit had to reset range and bearing that morning, because changes in the weather and humidity could affect the shell’s trajectory. Without such resetting, a 450-meter deviation from the target is not so radical.

They used coordinates for their firing based on test firing 12 hours earlier! This is like an airline pilot making an instrument landing and then 12 hours later, instead of doing it again, he decides that the coordinates he used for his last landing would work just as well this time. What he doesn’t take into account is that the wind’s direction and force could’ve changed dramatically thus causing him to crash.

And consider this statement from one of the IDF Gaza officers, which vainly attempts to portray artillery as an effective means of interdicting rocket fire:

IDF GOC Southern Command Yoav Gallant told Channel 2: “Israel’s citizens don’t know how many times artillery fire has prevented Qassam [rocket] launches. When you fire at the launching area area two or three hours in advance, there is a good chance of preventing the Qassam fire.”

Or not. Based on the results, I think I’d trust Yishai’s judgment before I’d trust Galant’s. Besides which, you’ll notice Galant doesn’t address the grievous error rate in such blanket artillery attacks. That’s because he doesn’t care about Palestinian casualties. He’s only interested in results. Or supposedly interested in results. If he were really interested in results he’d examine how successful such tactics are. Yishai doesn’t believe what he’s saying about artillery’s “effectiveness.” Why should we or any Israeli?

Israel will have to address the results of the disaster not only on the moral plain but also in terms of the damage to its position in the international arena. We must also recognize the fact that every such disaster boosts the motivation of Palestinian terror groups to continue the Qassam fire and terror attacks as well as the legitimization they receive on the Palestinian street.

If an IDF lieutenant colonel understand this why can’t Ehud Olmert and Amir Peretz? If you needed any proof that Yishai is right, read this Haaretz subheadline: “21 Qassams said fired at Israel in wake of IDF shelling on Gaza.” Or consider this wise, but sad testimony from a massacre survivor:

At the Kamal Adwan Hospital, Maali Athamnah, 27, the aunt of the newly orphaned Isra and two other siblings who survived, Islam, 14, and Muhammad, 3, who broke both his legs, broke into tears reading a list of the dead, nearly all of them relatives. Another 80 people were wounded.

Ms. Athamnah said she did not support the militants’ firing rockets into Israel. But she said: “Just think who is firing them: those who lost family members to Israel. And think about these kids now. They will be the rocket firers in the future. No mother, no father. No house. They will be the next ones to fire the rockets.

Yishai asks why the IDF would pursue such flawed tactics as artillery barrages in densely crowded urban areas knowing of the possible disastrous consequences:

So why does the IDF still continue using artillery fire? It appears the answer stems from the frustration of IDF commanders after military operations considered successful do not curb or significantly reduce Qassam fire.

Again, a return to the IDF’s lack of discipline borne of the utter failure of its military ’strategy’ (if one can call it that).

Such operations, like “Autumn Clouds” at Beit Hanoun and “Defensive Shield” in the West Bank in 2002 are supposed to create an intelligence infrastructure that would bring results in the long run. Yet meantime, the IDF and political echelons are slammed in the media and by residents of Sderot and Ashkelon. The pressure exerted on commanders in the field as a result of the ongoing Qassam fire, and the frustration that stems from it, lead them to ignore professional considerations .

Experience shows that even if it ultimately turns out that the civilians killed in Beit Hanoun Wednesday were hurt by a “work accident” in a Hamas weapons warehouse in town [ed., Haaretz and Ynetnews quote many IDF sources which concede that it was a result of an artillery assault, not a "work accident"], the Palestinians and international community will continue to blame Israel.

Therefore, the required conclusion is that the IDF must completely end preventive artillery fire. Foregoing this means would not fundamentally change the results of fighting Qassam fire, but at the same time will prevent severe physical and perceptual damage among innocent Palestinians and diplomatic damage to the State of Israel that will curb its ability to act against terrorist rocket fire.

IDF Artillery Barrage Kills 19 Gaza Civilians Sleeping in Homes

Wednesday, November 8th, 2006
beit hanun victim rushes child to hospitalShelling victim rushes wounded child to Gaza hospital (credit: Reuters)

Just as I was celebrating a remarkable Democratic victory in Congressional elections, this horrible incident occurred. An IDF artillery unit has murdered 19 Palestinians, all civilians, including 10 children and 7 women and destroyed the homes of four families in the process:

Israel Defense Forces artillery shells struck a residential area in the northern Gaza town of Beit Hanun early Wednesday, killing at least 19 Palestinians and wounding dozens of others. Ten children and seven women were among the dead, the Palestinian Health Ministry said, adding that 18 of the victims were members of the Athamna family. Khaled Radi, a Palestinian Health Ministry official, said all of those killed were civilians. According to witnesses, the victims were sleeping when the 15-minute barrage of shells first hit. Radi also said at least 40 people were wounded, all civilians. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni expressed regret for the deaths, saying that Israel did not set out to harm innocent civilians. The IDF confirmed that an artillery battery containing 12 shells had aimed at a site from where Qassam rockets were fired at the southern city Ashkelon on Tuesday. The artillery fire had been intended for a location about half a kilometer from the Beit Hanun houses. At this stage it is unclear whether the incident was caused by a technical or human error. The initial assumption is, however, that the wrong coordinates were fed to the artillery unit.

Pray, in this day and age of technological sophistication how does an artillery shell miss its target by one-quarter of a mile?? And why was Israel using artillery anyway to interdict Qassam rocket assaults:

The army has reduced the amount of artillery fire into Gaza in recent months, saying it was ineffective against the Qassam cells and inaccurate. Nevertheless, the army decided to continue firing artillery shells sporadically, in specific instances.

Yet, Tzipi Livni has the chutzpa to say Israel did not set out to harm civilians. When you use a weapon you know to be inaccurate and then kill innocent civilians you can no longer make such a claim credibly. You are guilty of woeful negligence at least. And did the shelling accomplish the desired effect of eliminating the Qassam fire? No, of course not:

Eight Qassams were fired at southern Israel from Gaza following the shelling.

I’m sure you’ll be reassured as I was to know who is investigating this outrage:

Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Dan Halutz appointed Major General Meir Kalifi to head an investigation into the shelling.

For those who don’t remember, he’s the same jackass general who “investigated” the Gaza beach massacre (that also involved artillery shelling) and gave the IDF a clean bill of health.

I’m sure he’ll conduct a thorough and impartial investigation letting the chips fall where they may. And this is the bitter fruit of such criminal military offenses:

Rahwi Hamad, 75, who lives across the street, said he woke to the sound of shells exploding and people screaming. “I opened my window and I looked out and I saw a shell hit a neighbor’s house … When I came out, another shell had hit the house,” he said. “There was a stench of blood and (burned) flesh.” Large holes had been punched in
the fronts of the houses and their balconies had collapsed. Surviving relatives sat weeping in front of the buildings. One man dipped his fingers in a puddle of blood and daubed it on his face. “God avenge us, God avenge us,” he cried.

Another survivor said this:

“It is the saddest scene and images I have ever seen. We saw legs, we saw heads, we saw hands scattered in the street,” 22-year-old eyewitness Attaf Hamad told Reuters news agency. “I saw people coming out of a house covered in blood. I started screaming to wake up the neighbours.”

Oh Condi and George…is it time for a ceasefire yet? Remember Lebanon where the same duo refused a ceasefire in order to allow Israel to “soften up” Hezbollah? Or should Israel continue killing scores or even hundreds more such civilians before you’ll get off your goddamn butts and do what you should do to knock heads and make things happen here. Oh the shame of it. Bush fiddles while Gaza burns. George, if you want to redeem your God forsaken presidency after today’s ignominious election defeat, you’ll gird yourself and do the right thing. Help bring peace between these two self-destructive peoples. Create a legacy. To paraphrase John Prine: just give us one thing that we can hold on to and be proud of in your presidency.

UPDATE: Haaretz initially reported that 19 had died. Most other media publication only noted 18 deaths at the time. But since then, 2 other vicitms have died bringing the total to 20 dead as of November 19th).

Palestinians Militants Watch Intently as Israel Fights Hezbollah to Stalemate

Friday, July 28th, 2006

Haaretz journalist Ami Issacharoff writes an opinion column today about how the Lebanon war is “playing” among Palestinians. He posits the odd theory that Israel must continue the fight against Hezbollah because to back down now would only strengthen Hamas’ hand against Fatah.

I don’t buy much of the argument. But it does raise an interesting point. Israel, in lashing out so disproportionately against Hezbollah and Lebanon; and in upping the ante by citing its goal of eradicating Hezbollah–has set itself up for failure if it achieves anything less than that. And it is virtually certain that it will not come anywhere close to eradicating or disarming Hezbollah, at least not for the foreseeable future.

So what consequence does that have for Israel’s relationship with the Palestinians? Some very important ones. In fact, one might argue that Israel’s attacks yesterday in northern Gaza in which 24 Palestinians were killed (the highest daily death toll since Israel withdrew last year) might be seen as a pre-emptive statement of deterrence. As if the IDF were saying: “So we lost a few in Bint Jbail. Just don’t get any big ideas, because we can still hand you a bloody nose at will.”

But of course, Israel’s bloody nose at Bint Jbail will have enormous consequences for Palestinians militants. They will see that Israel is vulnerable to a well-equipped, well-trained guerrilla force. This will only inspire Hamas and Islamic Jihad to redouble their efforts to damage Israeli interests.

Miraculously though, Mahmoud Abbas announced today that a Palestinian ceasefire and the return of kidnapped soldier, Gilad Shalit was imminent. To be candid, we have heard stories like this for some time. But this one appears to have a ring of authenticity to it:

Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, who is on a visit to Italy, announced on Thursday that he had enough reason to believe that kidnapped IDF soldier Cpl. Gilad Shalit would be released very soon.

Abbas was speaking to reporters in Rome after talks with Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi.

“I told the prime minister that as far as the question of the abducted Israeli soldier is concerned efforts are undergoing continuously that lead us to believe that the solution will be imminent,” he said.

The Jerusalem Post described the initiative being negotiated among Palestinian factions:

The initiative calls for an immediate halt to Israeli military operations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. In return, the Palestinians will announce a new hudna (truce) and release Shalit as part of a prisoner swap with Israel.

“This is a very serious Palestinian political initiative,” said Salah Bardaweel, a Hamas legislator from the Gaza Strip.

And apparently, if one believes the unnamed PA informant quoted below, some in Hamas don’t agree with Issacharoff’s analysis above about the prospect that it has much to gain from any Israeli withdrawal or defeat in Lebanon:

“The war in Lebanon has apparently led Hamas to reconsider its position,” a senior PA official in Ramallah told The Jerusalem Post. “They see that the international community, including some Arab countries, have come out in public against Hizbullah and they don’t want to find themselves in the same situation.”

Another official pointed out that Hamas is under growing pressure from the Palestinian public to resolve the case of Shalit because of Israel’s ongoing military attacks, which have claimed the lives of at least 130 Palestinians in the past five weeks.

As with all such claims, we’ll have to wait and see whether they’re borne out by actual events. But were Israel to agree to end its Gaza invasion and its targeted killing of Gaza militants and to return Palestinian prisoners in return for an end to Palestinian rocket attacks and the return of Shalit, it would be a days of miracles.

Another Failed Israeli Targeted Assassination

Wednesday, July 12th, 2006

Israel has continued its recent string of wash out targeted assassinations in Gaza with the attempted murder of Mohammed Deif and his fellow Hamas militant commanders yesterday. While meeting with the top leaders of Hamas’ military wing in a Gaza apartment house, the IDF launched missiles entirely destroying the building. Deif escaped wounded. The host of the meeting, a local Hamas leader, was killed along with his wife and five of his children. Fifteen others were injured as another Haaretz article notes:

The leadership of Izz A-Din Al-Kassam [Hamas' militant wing] were meeting in the home of Nabil Abu Salamia, an Islamic University lecturer and well-known Hamas political activist. In the early morning hours, a bomb dropped by IAF fell on the house and destroyed it, apparently hitting the bedrooms and not the rooms in which the meeting took place, allowing the military leaders to escape. They may have been in a cellar or bomb shelter in the home.

Deif, wanted since the early 90s, was apparently wounded in the back. He was operated on at Gaza’s Al-Shifa hospital and no details of his condition were released. Eyewitnesses reported Deif was unable to stand when he was taken out of the ruined structure. About six minutes after the explosion, a car full of Hamas operatives arrived on the scene to extract the injured, but the car was also hit by IAF missiles and some of its passengers injured.

The IAF strike killed seven people and wounded top Hamas commander Mohammed Deif, Palestinians said.

The seven dead were all members of the same family – two parents, including senior Gaza Hamas figure Dr. Nabil al-Salmiah, and their five children…

From the force of the blast, the three-story structure collapsed, burying people under the rubble. The family killed in the strike was on the house’s upper floor. Hamas activists said additional victims might be buried in the basement.

Could the IDF not have known there was a bomb shelter in the home in which the militants would’ve taken shelter? Can they not have known that by dropping a bomb on the building’s roof that they would incinerate the civilians sleeping in the bedroom immediately underneath the roof? This reminds me of the IDF’s successful assassination of an earlier Hamas figure, Saleh Shehadeh, in which they annihilated a multi-story apartment building in order to kill one man, while also killing 15 civilians in the process. Human rights attorneys are compiling a legal case against the IDF commander of that operation. Can such a case be far for Dan Halutz and whichever commander planned this botched operation?

In the Deif attempt, one potentially “guilty” party killed who wasn’t even a target of the raid to six civilians. A casualty ratio to be proud of! When will Israel realize that targeted assassination is a wantonly brutal operation which almost always kills or injures innocents? Probably never. They never seem to learn anything from their mistakes. At least not anything worthwhile.

So much for all the talk of a possible negotiated deal for the release of Gilad Shalit. If Israel tries to murder the commander of the group which holds him can anyone really believe that Israel plans to accede to such an agreement? Either Israel never intended to make a deal or it did but the deal went south. Either way we’re in for a terribly long, drawn out process involving Shalit and the Gaza invasion. This will end neither soon nor well.

Sarid on Gaza ‘War With No Clear Political Aim’

Saturday, July 8th, 2006

Yossi Sarid, despite his political longevity has lost none of his political acuity as demonstrated by this column in today’s Haaretz. He echoes a number of my own criticisms of the Gaza invasion in this caustic cry of outrage:

By the time operation Summer Rains ends, the reason for it will have been completely forgotten. The longer the operation goes on, the more removed it becomes from its original purpose – to rescue Corporal Gilad Shalit. Now they are already talking about “a new order” or about “changing the strategic situation” or about “rehabilitating our deterrent power,” and it is impossible not to recall with horror the “new order” in Lebanon 24 years ago: Ariel Sharon, may sleep be lifted from your eyelids – you have successors worthy of your name.

And as in the Lebanon War, so in the Gaza war, the aims change on a daily basis. That is what happens when the war has no clear political aim in the first place, and at the moment it is designed to save Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and Chief of Staff Dan Halutz. The “new order” in the territories will look like the new order in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia, and “rehabilitated deterrent power” will look like it does in North Korea and Iran.

Not only do the aims change constantly according to the mood at breakfast time, so do the “red lines”: another red line is erased and already the new line becomes apparent, and immediately the old one is replaced by the new. Perhaps the defense minister has not noticed that the line was recently crossed on the threshold of his home: Qassam rockets on Sderot and Ashkelon are terror; shells on Beit Hanun and Beit Lahiya are terror; leaflets from heaven, which are meant to scare entire families and make them flee, are also terror. The attack on an IDF outpost is not terror, it is war.

The U.S. government continues its powder-puff diplomacy regarding this crisis. Statements emanating from State Department spokespeople aren’t even full of sound and fury–they’re merely mealy-mouthed. But they do indeed signify almost nothing:

The State Department expressed concern Friday with the loss of life in the operation and urged the Israeli government to make sure innocent civilians were not hurt and the Palestinians’ day-to-day lives were not impaired.

At the same time, the department called for the immediate and unconditional release of Shalit, and said the hostage-taking by Hamas “continues to place innocent Palestinians in harm’s way.”

“There is no question that Israel has a right to defend itself and the lives of its citizens,” said spokeswoman Julie Reside. “But we also urge the Israeli government to ensure that innocent civilians are not harmed, to exercise restraint and to refrain from adversely affecting the Palestinian humanitarian situation.”

“We are concerned about the reports of violence and the loss of innocent life,” Reside said.

They’re asking Israel to “refrain from adversely affecting the Palestinian humanitarian situation???” Where have they been since the Hamas election victory last January, after which Israel initiated a full-on blockade of Gaza causing immense human suffering? And what do they think this invasion is doing to the “humanitarian situation” in Gaza? Does terrifying 20,000 northern Gazans into fleeing their homes through statements implying that their lives will be in danger if they remain constitute “refraining from adversely affecting the humanitarian situation?”

If this wasn’t so deadly serious our rhetoric would be comic. It’s just so vacuous, so banal, and so completely unconvincing. It’s like we’re just going through the paces. Compare this to Eisenhower’s ultimatum to Israel after the 1956 war; or Richard Nixon’s airlift to resupply Israel during the 1973 War; or Jimmy Carter’s efforts to negotiate peace between Egypt and Israel; or Clinton’s vigorous, but unsuccessful efforts to negotiate peace between Israel and the Palestinians. That was leadership. That was something to be proud of. What we are getting from this Administration is pathetic.

Beilin: Where is U.S. During Gaza Crisis?

Thursday, July 6th, 2006

Let’s queue up a round of applause for Yossi Beilin who’s said what I’ve been writing here for a few days about the tepid U.S. efforts to resolve the Gaza crisis. It’s a goddamn shame how pitiful our response has been. Rome is burning and all Rice can do is sit and fiddle like there’s no tomorrow. “We ask both sides to restrain themselves.” Blah, blah, blah. Lotta good that’ll do as F-16s scream over Gaza rooftops with their deafening sonic booms terrifying young children in their beds.

Here’s Beilin on America gone AWOL:

One of the most striking phenomena of recent weeks…is the absence of the American factor. True, there have been telephone conversations with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the U.S. ambassador in Israel receives updates, and the U.S. ambassador at the United Nations objects to resolutions calling on Israel to end its military operation in the Gaza Strip. But in terms of direct influence on the ground, there has been absolute American silence.

…I recall the Nixon administration’s involvement in the airlift that saved Israel during the Yom Kippur War; I remember the Carter administration that brought to a successful end the Camp David summit in 1978 and peace between Israel and Egypt; there is the Reagan administration that through its envoy, Philip Habib, contributed to a cease-fire between Israel and the PLO in July 1981 (one that was staunchly preserved by both sides until the Begin-Sharon government decided to embark on the Lebanon War); the government of Bush Sr., which led the way to the Madrid conference in 1991 and opened a new chapter for the Middle East; and there is the intensive involvement of Clinton in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict during the 1990s, which began with the Oslo Accords, continued with an address before the PLO institutions in Gaza to convince them to change the Palestinian constitution, and ended with his participation in the Sharm el-Sheikh Conference, aiming to bring about calm in the region following the horrific terrorist attacks in early 1996.

September 11 and its aftermath…have resulted in a United States that is nearly entirely absent from any involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. President Bush has not visited Israel since he was governor of Texas. The various envoys he dispatched to the area have failed to make the slightest impact. The administration will grant its blessing to any Israeli withdrawal on the condition that it will not commit it to anything, including any sort of financial expense…

Beilin notes that when Gilad Shalit was kidnapped Israel didn’t turn to its longstanding ally, the U.S. Instead it turned to Hosni Mubarak and Egypt (and later Turkey). We just no longer have any juice when it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict:

When the latest crisis broke out, as the firing of Qassam rockets increased and the violence intensified, Israel, naturally, turned to the same agent that enabled it to withdraw from the Gaza Strip – Egypt. It was President Hosni Mubarak that went into the heart of the matter and dispatched his intelligence chief, who demanded that a doctor be allowed to see Gilad Shalit, and is now busy trying to mediate between the factions.

The United States was not even mentioned as an option. The White House spokesman on duty did take the time to inform the world that it was Israel’s right to defend itself, but said it should do so carefully. Thanks a lot. Really. A different administration, in a different situation, would have sent a special envoy to the region who would shuttle between Syria, Gaza and Jerusalem, trying to calm things down, threatening, promising, fuming – all in order to end the crisis.

The worsening violent conflict in the Middle East is a blatant reflection of the weakness of the American partner. At the moment of truth, when Israel needs a powerful third party capable of moving things in the area, it turns out that little beyond the repetitive recitation of Bush’s vision and of the dust-covered road map can be expected…

Gaza and the Twilight War

Thursday, June 29th, 2006

We are in an eerie phase of Israel’s Gaza invasion. Operations have begun and Israeli forces have entered the territory. Some offensive operations have begun but mostly from the air or artillery. The major expected ground assault has not materialized. Palestinians are poised for the worst, but they know they’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg.

Reading today’s Haaretz, it seems there may be disagreement among Olmert, Peretz, chief of staff Halutz and his own senior commanders on what the proper order of battle should be:

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Thursday rejected a proposal by Defense Minister Amir Peretz and the Israel Defense Forces for a ground operation in the northern Gaza Strip against the ongoing Qassam rocket fire.

According to government sources, the operation, which will target Beit Hanun, will take place, but Olmert wants the operation to be “prolonged and exhausting,” and did not believe that the plan he was shown fit the bill…

The sources added that while IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz approved the plan, other IDF officers opposed it, and Olmert was informed of their objections.

The operation was aimed at halting Qassam rockets from being fired at southern Israel. Meanwhile, six of the homemade rockets struck the western Negev and Sderot on Thursday evening.

As best I can tell, Peretz (possibly along with Halutz) seems to have prepared a short range plan that would attempt to knock out Qassam sites, but would not involve a thorough “cleansing” or wholesale or long-term eradication of such capability. Olmert, after hearing of displeasure expressed by Halutz’s commanders has ordered Peretz’s plan thoroughly revised so that it will be a longer and more comprehensive operation.

One can only wonder what more Israel can do than it already has done to stop the rocket launches. And certainly no plan, whether it be Peretz’s or Olmert’s will stop a determined enemy from attacking Israel in whatever way and by whatever means are available to it.

Another consideration may be causing a delay in the full-scale assault: an Egyptian request to give its mediators several more days to broker an agreement. Notably, Khaled Meshal was due in Egypt today to speak with Egypt’s intelligence chief presumably to find a way to reach a compromise that might satisfy both Israel and the militants. Peretz appears in favor of the delay while his presumably more hot-headed field commanders may be tearing at the bit to attack. At any rate, there seems little love lost between the Defense Minister and whoever the unnamed “defense officials” may be who are referred to here:

Defense officials were furious at Peretz Thursday night, accusing him both of revealing that the planned military offensive in northern Gaza had been postponed and of denying initial reports that the postponement had been at Egypt’s request.

Part of the IDF’s plan in supposedly rooting out the Qassam menace appears to involve a forced exodus of the Palestinian civilian population from northern Gaza:

Meanwhile, in Gaza…leaflets were flung from helicopters last night over Beit Lahiye and Beit Hanoun, the two northeast corner towns of Gaza used by Qassam rocket launching crews to set up their attacks on the Israeli hamlets and towns around Gaza. The leaflets warned residents ‘to stay away’ as the IDF prepared to shell the residential areas and move in. Not since Operation Grapes of Wrath in southern Lebanon, when Israel warned civilians to leave south Lebanon and then proceeded to shell the region to drive out Hizbollah forces, has Israel taken a step so clearly aimed at forcing people out of their homes…Operation Grapes of Wrath ended with an accidental Israeli shelling of a UN encampment set up to provide refuge for fleeing Lebanese, killing some 120 people. As of noon…there were reports of hundreds of Beit Lahiye and Beit Hanoun families moving out of the area.

Robert adds the reference to the grave shelling error during Operation Grapes of Wrath which forced its demise. This of course reminds us of just how capable the IDF is of royally messing up its operations through the wholesale killings of Palestinian civilians. Would anyone care to doubt that this outcome is certain if all-out hostilities commence in Gaza?

Presumably, elimination of northern Gaza’s civilian population would give Israel freer reign to extirpate both the Qassams and the militants who fire them. But to me this strategy is little better than the U.S. strategy in retaking Fallujah last year. You have a “cesspool of violence” (their view not mine) and so decide to root out the evildoers. First you uproot civilians, then you go in and get the bad guys. Problem is, the bad guys have long gone by the time you get even remotely close to where you could catch them. Eventually, you have to leave as you cannot occupy the town forever. So what happens? The bad guys reinfiltrate Fallujah and you’re back where you started. Except for the casualties and dead on our side and theirs.

And even should you “cleanse” Fallujah (or northern Gaza) of bad guys, they just move elsewhere finding a weak point in our defenses to exploit. In the case of Fallujah, the insurgents moved to other towns in Anbar province.

One only wonders how this would work out in Gaza. But it’s entirely possible that once the IDF leaves the bad guys will simply move back into northern Gaza and take up where they left off. Unless, that is, the IDF plans on entirely and permanently uprooting Beit Lahiya and Beit Hanun, the two towns nearest to the launching sites. This of course would be a violation of the Geneva Conventions as would be a semi-forced expulsion/exodus of civilians from the area in order to promote the IDF’s ease in uprooting the militants.

In this hour of darkness, it is some small comfort to find brothers and sisters in arms who share my mistrust of the IDF’s plan and motives; and who hold out some hope that somehow common sense, cooler heads, call it what you will, can prevail and avoid the utter horror and bloodshed that appear to be in store should the IDF let loose with a full scale assault. Robert Rosenberg has been that “brother” over the past few days. His Ariga report today echoes many of the thoughts I wrote in yesterday’s report on the Gaza horror (given the time difference between the west coast and Israel, we may’ve even been writing at almost the same time).

Israel Using Hamas Political Echelon As Bargaining Chips?

Rosenberg expands upon the Shin Bet’s strange plan to arrest virtually the entire Hamas political echelon (at least those who weren’t smart enough to go underground to evade capture) and investigate them for their supposed complicity in terrorist crimes:

…Israel…put into motion a secret plan approved weeks ago by Attorney General Menachem Mazuz — the arrest of dozens of Hamas officials, including ministers and parliamentarians in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The 87 Hamas officials, including 64 elected officials, from Palestinian parliamentarians to at least two major city mayors (Jenin and Qalqiliya), are not being held as counter-hostages, as part of Israel’s efforts to win the release of captured soldier Gilad Shalit, Israeli officials insisted. They are all going to be questioned as suspects in specific terror cases and charged if evidence is found against them. Among those arrested are at least two Palestinians suspected of direct involvement in the murder of Asheri.

A separate Haaretz article quotes the IDF’s denial that the detainees (or should we call them ‘kidnap victims??’) are ‘bargaining chips’:

An IDF spokeswoman said the arrests were part of an operation against suspected terrorists, and were not “bargaining chips” for the release of abducted IDF soldier Corporal Gilad Shalit.

“They are not bargaining chips for the return of the soldier. It was simply an operation against a terrorist organization,” she said. “They will be investigated, brought before a judge to extend their detention and charge sheets will be prepared.”

You can see how much credence Haaretz gives to the army’s denial in the following sentence which directly contradicts the IDF:

The arrests are part of several moves designed to increase pressure on the militant group to free a captive soldier. Israel blames Hamas for the abduction of Shalit, kidnapped Sunday by militants who attacked an IDF post near the border with Gaza.

Army Radio speculated that the lawmakers might be used to trade for the captured soldier, but the IDF refused to comment on the matter.

Those who follow official Israeli government pronouncements as I do will know how to read these tea leaves: whenever an official denies that Israel’s tactics are intended to achieve thus-and-such a goal, you pretty much know that the denied motivation is precisely the actual one that motivates the Israelis. So of course the Hamas operatives ARE being held as counter-hostages despite what Israel’s Kabuki spokespeople say. But the very idea that such a stupid plan can have its desired impact of threatening or cowing or even dismantling Hamas and the PA is ludicrous as Robert notes:

The more pressure on the population, the more the Hamas government wins popular support;

Arresting Hamas Legislators As Attempt to Derail National Unity Government

Today’s NY Times adds another interesting and convincing dimension to the Israeli sweep against Hamas’ elected officials:

Ali Jarbawi, a professor and dean at Birzeit University here, said he thought the real goal was to remove the Hamas government from power.

Israel wants to continue with its unilateral policies based on the idea that there is no “Palestinian partner,” said Mr. Jarbawi, who turned down an offer from Hamas to join the government as an independent. “If you build up your strategy on having no partner, then you have to ensure you don’t have one. So when Palestinians tell you that there is about to be a political agreement among the factions, putting their house in order at last, you intervene.

So, according to this thinking the coming together of Hamas and Fatah in a national unity government severely threatened Olmert who would rather have a divided and severely weakened PA.

Rosenberg views dubiously Israel’s entire rationale for the Gaza operation:

Operation Summer Rains is thus gradually transforming from an operation…meant to put pressure on the Palestinian population to put pressure on the Hamas government to put pressure on the Hamas militants who are holding Shalit, into an operation with three goals: freeing the soldier, ending the Qassam fire, and bringing down the Hamas government.

But it is not at all clear if it can accomplish any of those three goals. The more pressure on the population, the more the Hamas government wins popular support; even as Israel was issuing dire warnings about the Qassam fire coming from the northern Gaza area, Qassams were being fired into the Western Negev; and even if Israel were to arrest all the Hamas parliamentarians and all its ministers, the Fateh leadership would not be able to step in lest it appeared as if they were merely Israeli collaborators.

Finally, he raises this chilling possibility should Israel actually fully eradicate Hamas and the PA:

Indeed, if Israel is not careful…it could bring down the PA itself. And that would mean Israel is once again responsible not only for security, but for the health, education and welfare of the Palestinians, to the tune of billions of shekels. Furthermore, it would likely mean a new eruption of intifada-style warfare in the territories, which would once again damper the Israeli economy, driving away tourists, harming international investment, and curtailing the impressive 5-6 percent economic growth rate Israel has enjoyed for the last year.

But of course it is not in Israel’s interests to entirely eradicate the PA. Just to cause enough disintegration to prevent anyone from being able to govern effectively. Israel for many reasons vastly prefers a fragmented, ungovernable Palestinian entity to one that is stable and coherent. For while a stable, coherent Palestinian government might rein in militants and end terror; it would also command the respect of the international community and possibly force Israel to negotiate with it in good faith. While some may see this view as cynical, I ask how in heaven’s name can Israel believe what it is doing now can ever lead to any coherent Palestinian governing authority? Sure they can try to destroy Hamas (and fail), but what is their alternative? Fatah? They think Fatah is going to be more moderate or amenable after this mass-hooliganism on Israel’s part? All I can say is “Hah.”

Mubarak Announces Hamas Agrees to Terms for Kidnapped IDF Soldier’s Release

I can’t believe I read the entire Haaretz article referenced above and almost missed the most hopeful part of it (at least potentially hopeful). Hosni Mubarak says that Hamas has agreed to terms for Corp. Shalit’s release:

Palestinian militants have agreed to a conditional release of Shalit, but Israel has not yet accepted their terms, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said in remarks published Friday.

In an interview with Egypt’s leading pro-government newspaper, Al-Ahram, Mubarak said “Egyptian contacts with several Hamas leaders resulted in preliminary, positive results in the shape of a conditional agreement to hand over the soldier as soon as possible to avoid an escalation.

“But agreement on this has not yet been reached with the Israeli side,” Mubarak said.

The president said he had asked Olmert “not to hurry” the military offensive in Gaza, but to “give additional time to find a peaceful solution to the problem of the kidnapped soldier.”

A Foreign Ministry official said Israel did not know of such an offer.

“In general Israel’s stance is, as the prime minister said earlier, that the soldier will only be released unconditionally and there will be no negotiations with a gang of terrorists and criminals who abducted a soldier from Israeli territory,” the official said.

Mubarak’s remark implied he was claiming a role in Israel’s decision.

“Israeli leaders promised, and I hope they will stick to it, not to shed the blood of innocent Palestinian civilians in any hurried military operation,” Mubarak said.

“At the same time, Egypt warned Hamas leaders of the dire consequences of adopting of tough positions and urged them to shoulder their responsibilities in view of the dangers and difficulties faced by the Palestinian people at the present time,” Mubarak said.

It is hard to know what all this means. Is Mubarak exagerrating the possibility of a solid agreement in order to burnish his own credentials as Mideast peace negotiator? In the event that Hamas is willing to engage in a prisoner swap for Shalit will Israel go along or will it truculently try to force the issue and go it alone in attempting to secure the soldier’s release? I have said many times here that both sides in this conflict “never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Cleary, Mubarak is warning both sides in this particular contretemps not to make the same mistake they’ve made in the past and botch an opportunity to potentially resolve the crisis short of a bloodbath.

And I’d like to know where the Hell is the Bush Administration on this? Why aren’t they restraining both sides with forceful statements instead of milquetoast pronouncements forgotten as soon as they’re uttered? We’re AWOL as usual when push comes to shove in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel’s conduct is becoming so outrageous, so beyond the pale of accpeted international norms, that some cooler heads outside the immediate zone of conflict must prevail.