Tag Archives: Hamas Israel War

Thought Experiment 1.

Posted on by
Reply

Much of world opinion appears to believe that Hamas has a “right” to win.  Israel is pressed to limit or pause or end its attack on Hamas, but Hamas is not pressured to end its resistance to Israel or to surrender. 

Does Hamas have a “right” to win?  If so, on what grounds? 

First, Israel is powerful and Hamas is weak.  Many “right-thinking people” reject the judgement of Thucydides on this matter as immoral.  Whoever is “stronger” is reflexively assumed to have the worse cause.[1] 

Second, at its founding, Israel committed a great crime against the Palestinians.  The Arabs in general were resolutely anti-Zionist; the Palestinians mostly emphatically so.  Israel fought for its survival.  In the process, many Palestinians fled the fighting or were driven out.  Israel conquered territory not assigned to it in the League of Nations partition plan.[2]  The refugees were not allowed to return.  Israel has continued to commit the same crime against Palestinians on the West Bank.  The settlements on the West Bank are progressively expanding.  They seem to be intended to make it impossible for the Palestinians to remain.  As one Israeli politician said years ago: “The Palestinians already have a country; it’s called Jordan.” 

Third, it doesn’t matter to many Palestinians (or foreigners) that the West Bank is under a totally different government than is Gaza.  Hamas is a Palestinian nationalist organization, not just the “de facto” governing power in Gaza. 

To understand all is NOT to forgive all.  Still, understanding is widely accepted as a good thing.  In the wake of the Holocaust, many Jewish survivors did not want to remain in Europe, especially in Eastern Europe.  In Eastern Europe, various national governments combined anti-Semitism with Stalinism.  The gates of Western countries were partially closed to Jewish immigrants.  Jews huddled in camps for Displaced Persons or wandered around in search of surviving family members.  Going to Palestine and helping to found a Jewish state offered an alternative.  A Jewish state would never turn away Jews in any future surge of anti-Semitism. 

The ending of the Second World War unleashed massive forced-movements of populations across Europe.  Poles were kicked westward to fit within the boundaries of a redefined Poland.  People of German ancestry fled the revenge of the people Germany had abused during the war.  Slave laborers and Prisoners of War held in Germany headed either homeward or westward.  Over time, all were absorbed or re-absorbed into countries struggling to recover from war.  From a callous Zionist point of view, displaced Palestinians would naturally be absorbed by neighboring Arab countries.  Too often ignored is the corresponding expulsion (and depredation) of perhaps as many as a million Jews living in Arab countries after the foundation of Israel. 

            Finally, a two-state solution was possible from 1948 to 1967, but Egypt and Jordan wanted the West Bank and Gaza—and all Palestine–for themselves. 

[1] Perhaps this feeling is a projection onto international relations of popular judgements about domestic politics.  Perhaps it is the Marxist influence.  However, it is very unhistorical.  It conveniently leaves aside the examples of the American Civil War, the Second World War, and the Cold War.  In all those cases, Right and Might were one. 

[2] Yes, I know: “it’s called the United Nations.”  You really think that there is any significant difference, aside from the huge number of nations created after 1945 who batten on the organization like flies? 

Hot Take on the Middle East.

Posted on by
Reply

            It appears from the news on the Devil Box that the American-Israeli captives taken by Hamas are not getting released in a speedy fashion.  This is so in spite of the eager role played by American officials in brokering the cease-fire in Gaza and the exchange of the detained.  Thing is it reminds me of the American embassy people held prisoner by the Iranians during the benighted Carter administration.  They didn’t get released until Reagan had been inaugurated.  Out of spite.  So maybe William Burns and Antony Blinken are embarrassed and scratching their heads that Hamas is holding onto the Americans.  “Don’t they understand that they are embarrassing the most powerful nation in the world?”  Sure they do.  It’s just that the Iranians are running Hamas.  Another chance at spite.  Probably need an expert on Persian culture (and not just a historian who will talk about the coup in 1953) to explain the role of spite in Iran. 

            Countries have foreign policies for their own advantage, not for the advantage of other people.  Israel always understood this truth.  Americans seem to have lost sight of the “self-interest” part of the “enlightened self-interest” formula that inspired the Marshall Plan.  Or perhaps it’s just the pull of Empire. 

            Now Biden has turned on Israel.  His motive appears to be advancing his own self-interest in November 2024.  He’s always been a time-server, a person who follows the course of thought at any given period, rather than a person with fixed convictions.  Now the Democratic Party is splintering over support for Israel’s brutal self-defense.  This change will not threaten Israel’s survival over the short run.  It will threaten Israel’s survival over the long run.  So, Israel is going to go in search of one or more new great power patrons.  (I’m looking at the Henry Kissinger obit on the front page of the Times as I write this.)  Will Israel pull along any of the Arab states in the process?  Who would you prefer to have as an ally, Israel or Iran? 

            How did Hamas get all the missiles it fired at Israel into Gaza in the first place?  Probably they smuggled them in through Egypt onboard the big semis hauling in food, medical supplies, building materials, and gasoline.  So, now that “humanitarian” relief is running in again, is Hamas bringing in more missiles, more ammunition, more explosives?  If so, I suppose you could call it “inhumanitarian” relief.  And is the UNRWA an objective ally of Hamas? 

            The Palestinian Authority (PA) seems to me to be a kleptocracy.  It won’t do anything to seriously rock the boat because that would interfere with the money-making.  This passivity has extended—so far, but who knows for how long—to dealing with the aggression of Israeli “settlers” on the West Bank.  That aggression isn’t new.  It’s been going on for years.[1]  Hamas’s attack on Israel and the subsequent trading of it’s prisoners for Palestinians in Israel’s jail has made Hamas increasingly popular on the West Bank.[2]  So, put the PA in charge of post-war Gaza, rather than let the League of Nations or Israel take over?  “Eeez joke, yes?” 

[1] On the origins of settlements, see: Revisionist Zionism – Wikipedia  In terms of political parties, Revisionists founded Herut, then changed the name to Gahal, then joined with some other small groups to create Likud.  Benjamin Netanyahu is the current leader of Likud.  Menachem Begin and Itzhak Shamir were previous leaders.

[2] Christina Goldbaum and Hiba Yazbek, “In West Bank, Trust in Hamas Only Deepens,” NYT, 30 Nov. 2023. 

Of Two Minds on the Hamas Israel War.

Posted on by
1

On the One Hand: Bunch of stuff in the papers and–for all I know–on television news as well about the “rising tide of anti-Semitism” in Europe, America, Russia, and even China.  Some Jews in the US buying guns, just in case.  No more Tree of Life stuff: “I see an anti-Semite with a gun, I shoot the bastard; that’s my policy.”[1]

This is an age-old story.  Kishinev[2]; the Dreyfus Case[3]; the “Jewish census” by the German Army in WWI[4]; various “numerical limits” on everything from the number of Jewish dentists in Hungary to Jewish blacksmiths in Rumania to Jewish undergraduates in the Ivy League[5]; various kinds of “genteel” anti-Semitism[6]; Kielce[7]; the rue Copernic[8]; the Buenos Aires community center.[9] 

It’s too bad that the Jews don’t have a country of their own.  One that has the will and the means to defend itself against attack by enemies either close at hand or operating at arms-length.  Like the US after 9/11: invade Afghanistan, invade Iraq, send the Special Forces scalp-hunting in Somalia, and no American cares if the League of Nations tries dragging on our coat-tails.  

Maybe the US can operate as a normal nation-state because memory in international opinion has a short half-life.  I see that another Iranian girl has died under murky circumstances after contact with the morals police.  I see that Saudi Arabia gets the World Cup for 2034 or so.  I don’t see much on Uighurs, so maybe that one got sorted out to everyone’s satisfaction.

So perhaps if the Jews had a country of their own, the anti-Semitism would stop? 

On the Other Hand: We all want the bombing of Gaza to stop.  It isn’t just Israel that is involved in this war.  Hamas has responsibilities and choices too.   Like Japan in 1941, it started a war that it cannot win. 

Here’s a simple solution.  Hamas surrenders.  Lays down all its arms.  Turns over all its war criminals—all of them–to the International Criminal Court,[10] rather than to Israel.  They get taken to the Netherlands and are held while their cases are investigated[11] and tried.  

The League of Nations could propose this and Hamas could accept out of their deep humanitarian concern for the people of Gaza.   Israel would stop bombing.  What the UN and the European Union and US media all refer to as “innocent civilians” would no longer suffer loss of life and limb, house and home, livelihood and sanity.  These people are, after all, the families, friends, and neighbors of the Hamas soldiers.  Hamas isn’t like ISIS.  It didn’t recruit from all over the Muslim world.  So it could demonstrate the depths of its humanity by ending the war. 

[1] Stole that one, obviously.  Intent to Commit Rape — My Policy — Shoot the Bastard – Clint Eastwood – YouTube 

[2] Kishinev pogrom – Wikipedia 

[3] I gotta give you a reference to the Dreyfus case?  Shame on you. 

[4] Judenzählung – Wikipedia 

[5] Jewish quota – Wikipedia 

[6] See: An Education #8 Movie CLIP – Hard and Boring (2009) HD – YouTube and Gentleman’s Agreement (1947) – Hotel registration [HD] – YouTube

[7] Kielce pogrom – Wikipedia  Like Kishinev, not so genteel. 

[8] 1980 Paris synagogue bombing – Wikipedia 

[9] AMIA bombing – Wikipedia 

[10] ICC doesn’t assign the death penalty, just some term of imprisonment in a reasonably comfy European prison. 

[11] Lots of video evidence of who did what. 

Palestine Drumbeats.

Posted on by
Reply

Conservatives have their knives are out for President Biden, no matter how unseemly this may be at a time of international crisis.  In Israel, the parties have closed ranks during this moment of national emergency.  Not so in the United States. 

One line of conservative criticism runs as follows.  President Biden came to office intending, in part, to replace great-power politics with a heavy emphasis on alternative priorities.  First and foremost, this meant climate change, but also included a renewed emphasis on human rights as these are understood in the Democratic party.  Before Russia’s attack on Ukraine, the President hoped to “park” Russia as an issue. 

He also harbored a grand vision for the Middle East, one which would allow the United States to reduce its involvement there in favor of the Far East.  On the one hand, he hoped to revive a working relationship with Iran, wrecked by the Trump administration’s withdrawal from the multi-national nuclear agreement.  On the other hand, he hoped to accelerate the “normalization of Saudi-Israeli relations.”  This new regional axis of….[1] would encourage other Arab states to do the same.  Implicitly, the alignment could shoulder more of the burden of against Iran. 

In the conservative view, which is also that of Israel, Iran has disdained President Biden’s offer of a renewed relationship.  It refused to rejoin the nuclear agreement.  It wrung $6 billion out of American control as the price for releasing a handful of hostages.  Now, the conservative argument goes, “there is no doubt that Iran trained, supported, advised and equipped the [Hamas] killers.”[2]  Iran’s goals, it is said, are regional rather than centered on Gaza or even Palestine.  The war between Israel and Hamas, once begun, may be stoked up into a much wider conflict.  Israel, the United States, and America’s friends in the Middle East will find themselves assailed from all sides. 

All or most of this could be true.  The vast quantity and improved quality of the missiles fired at Israel by Hamas seems to indicate a big up-grade in Iran’s support for aggressive action by Hamas.  Still, critics stop short of saying that Iran planned or incited the attacks.  Hamas seems to be dominated by brutal fanatics.  Brutal fanatics aren’t necessarily stupid.[3]  It isn’t impossible to imagine that a more competent class of fanatics has emerged in the leadership Hamas.  Maybe they figured out that it would be necessary to blind Israeli intelligence by stopping telecommunications and “playing back” Palestinian informants of Israel’s intelligence services.  Maybe they figured out on their own the many vulnerabilities in the border defenses of an evidently complacent Israel.  Israel’s leaders (and perhaps many ordinary Israeli) are not going to be comfortable admitting that “we got played by a bunch of Arabs.” 

We’ve been here before.  It was 2003 and the “undoubted” enemy was Iraq.  The “intelligence” said Iraq posed a real danger from its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction, and even of nuclear weapons.  Conservatives clamored for action.  Respected foreign policy Gumbys among the Democrat leadership[4] supported action.  It didn’t end well. 

So, some kind of action against Iran may well be necessary.  But slow any rush to war. 

[1] Axis of what?  The Serpent Prince and Benjamin Netanyahu?  Hard to label that when children might be reading. 

[2] Walter Russell Mead, “Hamas’s Global Test for Biden,” WSJ, 10 October 2023. 

[3] See: The Second World War. 

[4] Notably Joe Biden, John Kerry, Hilary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, and Diane Feinstein.