During the entire Operation Cast Lead, somewhere around three Israeli soldiers were killed by enemy fire. And in a single day yesterday, the IDF lost a major and sergeant who were killed by Palestinian militants during an infiltration incident. It is a serious blow to the IDF to lose any soldiers, but to lose two officers of such high rank in a single incident is almost unprecedented.
According to Ynetnews, a patrol detected several militants planting an explosive device along the border fence. The BBC report speculated that there may’ve been an attempt to kidnap an IDF soldier along the lines of what happened to Gilad Shalit. The commander of the Israeli force protecting the area decided to give chase into Gaza. During an ensuing firefight a bullet struck a hand grenade carried by the sergeant. It exploded killing him. The story doesn’t make clear whether the grenade also killed the major. Two Palestinians were also killed in the incident.
An alternative version is that an explosive device planted by the Palestinians detonated and that this caused some of the IDF casualties.
Hamas’ military wing took credit for the original incident though two other Palestinian groups claimed to have joined in once the IDF entered Gaza. Hamas also claimed the attack was actually an ambush, which might support the report by the BBC. The incursion takes place amid an atmosphere of increasing tension along the border with almost daily Qassam attacks into Israel. Clearly, Hamas, after honoring the Post-Cast Lead ceasefire for over a year, seems willing to let loose the dogs of war at least on a small scale, though one isn’t sure what the political calculation behind the attack is, if any. On the political front, with peace talks, even the proximity talks proposed between Israel and the Palestinians, at a standstill, this is the time of uncertainty and instability when militants attempt to seize the initiative. Israel’s complete stolidity in the face of Palestinian and U.S. demands for flexibility only enhance the power of the militants to wreck any forward momentum.
I don’t want to appear to be blaming Palestinian militants for the current impasse. They’re clearly at best opportunists taking advantage of prevailing conditions. The blame is entirely Israel’s and belongs to the Netanyahu government. Nor do I claim that the proximity talks were likely to lead to any positive developments.
When incidents like this occur involving major losses, the IDF and Israeli government react sharply and severely. I’d guess you can expect airstrikes against Gaza over the coming days. Actually, Ynetnews already reports increased Israeli aerial activity over Gaza’s skies. While Hamas leaders have gone into hiding.
All this is complicated by the tense environment in Jerusalem, in which Palestinians have been violently demonstrating against various provocative Israeli acts like the announcement of new housing construction in East Jerusalem, and the designation of Hebron shrines as national historic sites. Not to mention the terribly strained relations between Israel and the U.S. in the aftermath of Bibi Netanyahu’s failed visit to the U.S.
The Gaza incident could be merely a footnote or it could have a larger impact on an already incendiary political/military environment.
Related articles by Zemanta
- Israeli tanks ‘advance into Gaza’ (news.bbc.co.uk)
- Gaza border firefight leaves four dead (guardian.co.uk)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](https://i0.wp.com/img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?w=640)
Richard, you rather understate the situation by stating there has been “already reports of light air activity over Gaza.” Actually, I have read reports that Israel has entered Gaza with four tanks, two bulldozers, and helicopters and DRONES, even before the incident to which you refer happened. I blame this flare-up entirely on Israel. It is their was way of scuttling the “proximity talks.” As though such talks would have any more effect on the situation than the Annapolis talks at the end of the Bush administration. And for all its smiley criticism of Netanyahu, the Obama administration has no intention of derailing the Zionist agenda to rid Israel – Eretz Israel – of its Arab population. That is also a part of the US agenda, General Petraeus’ complaints notwithstanding.
The longstanding problem with the rhetoric of Obama and other supposedly pro-peace American politicians is that they phrase the problem this way–
Israel needs to stop settlements and Palestinians need to stop violence.
So when violence does erupt, it is invariably blamed on Palestinians. And for that matter, “violence” is only considered to erupt when there are Israeli casualties.
Haaretz reported it this way:
“The exchange of fire began on Friday morning when IDF troops crossed into Gaza after they spotted militants planting explosives along the security fence on the border.
Palestinian sources said five Israeli tanks and two armored bulldozers advanced from the east into Gaza following the clashes, firing shells at targets near the town of Khan Younis in the center of the narrow coastal enclave.”
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1159409.html
HPost had an article with this headline:
“Gaza” Violence Leaves 2 “Israeli” Soldiers Dead.
The quotation marks are mine to point out the obvious. The rest of the article showed bias. Obviously that author is implying all the violence was on the Gaza side and 2 Israelis died with no mention of the 4 Palestinians who died plus one civilian that Ha’aretz mentions. Title should have read: Fighting on Gaza border leaves 2 Israeli IDF, 5 Palestinians dead. And then specify in the text that one was a civilian.
In your article you wrote:
“The BBC report speculated that there may’ve been an attempt to kidnap an IDF soldier along the lines of what happened to Gilad Shalit.” (Repeating rumour and speculation, creates bias.)
“An alternative version is that an explosive device planted by the Palestinians detonated and that this caused some of the IDF casualties.” (Repeating rumor and speculation, creates bias. Plus this statement is totally false.) Also, do Palestinians not have a right to defend themselves from a foreign army on THEIR OWN LAND?
…end of Part 1
Part 2.
“The incursion takes place amid an atmosphere of increasing tension along the border with almost daily Qassam attacks into Israel. Clearly, Hamas, after honoring the Post-Cast Lead ceasefire for over a year, seems willing to let loose the dogs of war at least on a small scale, though one isn’t sure what the political calculation behind the attack is, if any. On the political front, with peace talks, even the proximity talks proposed between Israel and the Palestinians, at a standstill, this is the time of uncertainty and instability when militants attempt to seize the initiative. Israel’s complete stolidity in the face of Palestinian and U.S. demands for flexibility only enhance the power of the militants to wreck any forward momentum.”
(First…wow! I’ve seen it stated repeatedly in various articles that Hamas did not fire the rocket that killed the Thai laborer and were honoring the ceasefire and it was another group firing the rockets. And yet just last week Israeli strikes injured 12 Palestinians. But, why this continuous disproportionate response?? – Even Israel confirmed it was NOT Hamas!
My question to you is: Why are you enabling biased rhetoric that in turn justifies the ongoing injustice and siege on Gaza by portraying the incident this way?)
“I don’t want to appear to be blaming Palestinian militants for the current impasse. (But you are!)
“They’re clearly at best “opportunists taking advantage of prevailing conditions”. (Again, how do you know they are “TAKING ADVANTAGE”? Have you forgotten what is happening in Gaza for the past 3 years? Have you forgotten that Israel is restricting access to Palestinian religious sites? I’m stunned by your bias here. This kind of rhetoric is NOT helpful to the Palestinians.
“Two Palestinians were also killed in the incident.” (Actually 4 PALESTINIANS were killed in the incident and Ha’aretz reports a civilian was killed as well.)
First of all, if someone indeed planted explosives inside the Gaza border, (it’s INSIDE the border, not outside, INSIDE). Last I checked, people have a right to defend themselves against a foreign army.
Secondly, Israel entered Gaza to kill and bulldoze structures there (read Ha’aretz article). They therefore initiated the ensuing violence, and lest we forget, last week, the IDF injured 12 Palestinians in Gaza with various bombings.
I am thoroughly disappointed with your article. We don’t need to spread bias which will not help the Palestinian situation at all, if our goal is to see peace, a Palestinian state and above all JUSTICE for these people who are suffering and have every right to defend themselves on their land.
Also, can you imagine a negotiated deal that doesn’t include Hamas in the equation? In my opinion and that of many, it’s ludicrous. Why you wrote your article this way is beyond me, in full knowledge of Israel’s irrational oppression, if your intention is to have truth and justice prevail?
The “militants” were planting explosives? Baloney. There is always a cock and bull story whenever the IOF invades Gaza and kills people. Kidnapping? Equally nonsensical. Once again, Gilad Shalit was not kidnapped; he is a bona fide prisoner of war.
Friends in Gaza tell me there have been retaliatory airstrikes. It’s ironic that the Israelis “retaliate” against actions that were of their own making. And of course, two dead Israelis must be avenged by as many dead Palestinians as can be killed by dropping one ton bombs.
Israel is trying its best to set off the Third Intifada.
Yes, that’s true Israel is trying to provoke a Third Intifada. Notice what’s going on in the West Bank as well, it’s ridiculous with the arrests, injuries and killing of protesters and the restricted access to Muslim shrines. This is all highly provocative and I suspect it may be deliberate.
I honestly hope Palestinians can resist the temptation because the Israel government would love nothing better than to turn public opinion around and stop the momentum of mounting criticism.
I am absolutely certain all the actions are deliberate because once a Third Intifada starts, all bets are off – no negotiations, and settlement building will take a back burner. This is the whole idea. The Israelis don’t care how many Palestinians they kill; as I’ve said here before, they see them as “superfluous young men” who should be gotten rid of anyway. And bear in mind that “Palestinian violence” can help Israel rejuvenate its favorite self-image, that of the perpetual victim.
“there may’ve been an attempt to kidnap an IDF soldier along the lines of what happened to Gilad Shalit. ”
What is different about Israeli soldiers that they are kidnapped even when they are on duty and engaged in combat whereas soldiers from every other country in the world are captured when they are taken by the enemy during combat operations?
Damn, you’re right. I can’t believe that that locution sneaks up on me every time I write about this type of incident. It’s embedded in my subconscious somehow. I’ll change it tomorrow.
This type of propaganda is the most insidious because it subliminally sneaks ideas and concepts into our brains and induces us to help turn them into received truth by repeating them without our even realizing it. We need to be vigilant in noticing and pointing out abuses of language such as this.
“Over the last 14 months, since the end of the Operation Cast Lead, small Islamist divisions have claimed responsibility for the small number of terror attacks emanating from Gaza. Hamas has even acted to restrain their activity; earlier this very week, the IDF exclaimed that it was impressed with the pressure Hamas has exerted to thwart the attacks.”
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1159415.html
So, again, after reading this I must question this statement you made regarding this fire-fight incident in Gaza: ““They’re [Hamas are] clearly at best “opportunists taking advantage of prevailing conditions”.
Or is the Israeli government really trying to find an excuse to invade Gaza again by provoking a reaction from Hamas, when they have clearly stayed away from firing rockets and have tried to rein in rocket fire from other groups?
And is the Israel government trying to start a Third Intifada by killing teenage protesters on the West Bank, wounding others, restricting access to Muslim shrines, imprisoning protesters, and prohibiting Friday demonstrations in Bilin and Nilin?
Palestinians are resorting to more peaceful means of resistance, and Hamas has attempted to thwart rocket attacks, so why is Israel trying so hard to provoke them to retaliate violently?
During the ceasefire prior to the Gaza massacre of 2008-9 the Israeli government stated very clearly that Hamas was “determined to keep the ceasefire”, had not fired any rockets, and had done an admirable job of restraining other groups that were not parties to the ceasefire and were not under Hamas control.
There is nothing the Israeli government fears more than moderation and peaceful resistance from the Palestinians.
Here’s a comment that reinforces my suspicions:
“Israel might re-occupy Gaza Strip again, and terminate the Hamas movement, in case it has no other choice, Radio Israel reported on Sunday, quoting Israeli Minister of Finance Yuval Steinitz.”
http://www.khabrein.info/news/Israel_will_seize_Gaza_again___Israeli_official_1269770143/
And yet, the “IDF exclaimed that it was impressed with the pressure Hamas has exerted to thwart the attacks.”
God, I hope I’m wrong. How much more punishment can those people in Gaza stand?
I just fear Israel will do something very provocative to find another excuse to get in there and cause more bloodshed and suffering.
The global community needs to monitor this situation and step in before another disaster occurs.
I am afraid the Israeli intentions are to create a massively violent event whether one calls it an intifada or a massacre. The re-occupation of Gaza would certainly be a bloodbath, and the purpose would not be to eradicate Hamas, which they cannot do (and there is no logical reason to do, seeing that Hamas has not been unduly aggressive towards Israel in a very long time). The purpose is to accelerate the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people from the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and to continue the imprisonment/siege upon the people of Gaza, at the same time crying to the world that they must “defend themselves.”
I think my article distinguished between the Hamas political wing and Hamas military wing. The political wing is strongly committed to the ceasefire. But the military wing clearly has those who are not. I was talking about the military wing.
But has the military wing fired any rockets? Even the IDF seems to say it has not done so, and has worked to restrain other groups, just as was the case during the 2008 ceasefire.
The military wing works in concert with the political wing; Zionists have a habit of scapegoating Hamas even when it is clear that Hamas has not engaged in any provocative acts.
Even if they are responsible for the deaths of the two IOF soldiers, this was not an act of terrorism on the part of Hamas. It was an act of resistance against the occupier.
Apparently, the IDF acknowledges that Peretz made a mistake (i.e., he violated the rules of engagement) by entering deeply into Gaza. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3868690,00.html
One wonders what the effect on his judgment was the fact that he and his wife and four kids lived in an illegal West Bank outpost which was under an Israeli demolition order?
Discipline in the IDF appears to be a problem to all reasoned military observers.
What would Peretz’ illegal home in the West Bank have to do with his decision to illegally enter Gaza?
Do you think his political and religious views as a settler have anything to do with it?
His mother made a strange comment about his death and that of his brother, who died fighting in Lebanon in 1998. She mentioned something about the “agony of peace” and the withdrawal from Sharam al Sheikh. I couldn’t tell whether she was implying that withdrawal from conquered territory (i.e. concessions) is what caused wars like the ones her sons died in, which is a common theme on the far-right.
So then it was a symbolic ideologically-motivated provocative move on the part of this major to order tanks and bulldozers into Gaza. Someone with radical views shouldn’t be put in charge of a politically-charged, sensitive operation like the Gaza border.
The IDF mentioned that “mistakes” were made, but did not specify, and although they stated entering Gaza wasn’t a mistake; it’s obvious it was; and putting him in charge was also a mistake.:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3868690,00.html
I happen to agree with those in the comments section below who condemn the IDF for entering Gaza. The explosives were being placed INSIDE Palestinian territory.:
http://www.ynet.co.il/english/Ext/App/TalkBack/CdaViewOpenTalkBack/0,11382,L-3868690,00.html
If the “militants” were planting explosives on their own side, why should it concern the IDF UNLESS they were planning to breach Gaza’s border and invade again in which case the militants have every right to defend their territory?
I don’t like this one bit. Netanyahu’s planning something for Gaza. Enough with the crimes being committed against these people! Haven’t they suffered enough?
The IDF is increasingly composed of soldiers who hail from settlements just like the ones Peretz came from. Especially those forces which serve in the Territories. They’re largely Orthodox & from settlements themselves.