Showing posts with label Iron Dome. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Iron Dome. Show all posts

Saturday, 9 August 2014

Open Letter to Josh Broomberg

The attached picture of Jewish South African high school students has outraged me and many others.   One student, Josh Broomberg, has issued a statement in defense of his actions.  Below is his statement, which is followed by my open letter to him in response to these events:

For those of you reading this, my name is Josh Broomberg. I am the currently the Deputy Head Boy of King David Victory Park and the Captain of the SA National Debating Team.

What follows is my statement regarding the recent controversy over my stand against the human rights abuses currently being perpetrated against the citizens of Gaza.

Firstly, I would like to apologise. It was not intended to create the uproar it has, it was not designed to offend or upset. Because this has occurred, I apologise. But what I will say is this:

I am proud to be a South African Jew, and I am proud to attend a Jewish Day School. I am also a Zionist. I believe in Israel’s right to exist, and her right to defend herself from the threat presented by those seeking to hurt her citizens. All citizens of Israel, the West Bank and Gaza have the absolute right to live in peace and security.

It was with this in mind that I, and my team, chose to take the stand we did. It was not about politics, or about states. It was about humanity. We stand with the thousands of civilians who have lost their lives in the conflict. We stand with a people who do not yet have a state to protect themselves. We stand with the innocents. We stand for two states. We do not stand against Israel. All of this applies to me personally as well.

While I apologise for the hurt we seem to have caused, I do not apologise for standing with Palestine on this issue. This is not because I do not believe in Israel or its people. I do believe in Israel, and I take this stand because I can love and suppoprt the state of Israel but still reject and criticize some of its actions. In fact, I consider it my duty to contribute to the growing worldwide discussion surrounding the desperate need for a quick end and lasting solution to this pernicious conflict.

In my eyes, this criticism is not a betrayal, but actually the only honest and true way to show my patriotism and commitment to Israel, as well as my belief in human rights and the entitlement of all citizens of all countries to those right. To improve, we must criticise.

I will note, explicitly, that our support and sympathy also lies with the innocent Israelis exposed to threat at the hands of terrorists. The conflict is a tragedy for all, and once again, all innocent life is equally valuable.

We took a stand for the thousands and for those without a voice but we do not for a second condone any violence what so ever. We stand for peace.

Most importantly, the issues are complex but we can never let go of the ability to talk and engage with the other side. if we lose this ability we lose our claim to be an enlightened community. We lose what it means to be human.

I am proud to bear the responsibility of continuing the discussion.

Josh Broomberg



Open letter to Josh Broomberg from Anthony Reich

Dear Josh,

I have been following the unfortunate events surrounding your appearance in public with a Palestinian scarf around your neck.  I have also read your statement following these events.  In my view, your statement serves to confuse your position rather than clarify it.  You have managed to get yourself into a very unfortunate set of circumstances.

How can you honestly state that you did not intend to create an uproar or to offend or upset?  How can you say that “it was not about politics, or about states”?  Your apology, based as it is on this absurd statement, is extremely difficult to accept.  What did you think could be interpreted from a boy posing as a representative of KDVP, with a Palestinian scarf draped around his neck?  If you are sincere about standing with humanity, you have numerous other ways to do so.  By choosing this particular “humanitarian” gesture, you are clearly making a statement which is highly charged and highly political.  Perhaps it would be more honest for you to acknowledge that taking a political stand of this nature was a big mistake on your part.

As a former South African living in Israel for the past 16 years, I believe that there are a few important points that you may wish to consider about the conflict between Israel and the Arabs who now call themselves Palestinians.   It may surprise you to learn that most Israelis have a great deal of sympathy for the innocent Palestinian civilians, who are probably the greatest victims of this conflict.  Despite this fact, you will not find them parading with Palestinian scarves around their necks.  Doing so demonstrates support for the political cause and for the Palestinian leadership, rather than for the humanitarian difficulties experienced by innocent civilians.  Support for the politicians and their cause is the position that you are clearly taking by your actions.  We pity the Palestinians because of the way in which their own leadership treats them.  Whereas the Israeli civilians under fire have a government and an army that make every effort to protect them wherever possible, the Palestinians do not.  Not only does their leadership not take any action to protect them at all,  their leadership actually uses them against Israel.  This is because they know that Israelis care more about the Palestinian children than they do.  They know that Israeli pilots will rather not release a bomb from their plane if they know that it risks injuring innocent people.  The fact that this decision could cost Israeli lives in the future due to the rocket launch site being used again to launch further missiles, does not enter into their immediate consideration.  Where is your protest against the lack of humanity shown by the Palestinian leaders against their own people?  Where is your acknowledgement of the IDF field hospital that has been set up on the Gaza border to treat Palestinians injured in the conflict?  Where is your protest against the fact that their leaders are preventing them from taking advantage of this treatment, but also not offering alternative methods of treatment?

Although we have infinite sympathy for the innocent civilians, we do not feel the same for their leadership.  These are individuals who feel no qualms about allowing their own children to be strapped with explosives in the name of being martyred.  If this is how they treat their own children, how can we expect them to respond to ours?  Whereas they rejoice in the fact that their children have been martyred for the cause, we grieve for each and every Jewish life lost.  Whereas they spend all their foreign aid on building an infrastructure to attack and destroy Israel, even if this means that their children go hungry, we spend our money on building bomb shelters and developing the Iron Dome so that our children will be safe and sound.  Whereas we think twice and three times before taking action that could hurt their innocent civilians, they throw their children in the path of our bombs to gain world sympathy and PR advantage.  And they fire their missiles aimlessly into the centres of Israel’s most densely populated civilian areas.  These are facts that have been proven on more than one occasion.  Whereas we are prepared to take a risk in order to allow them the opportunity to prove that they are sincere about the “two states for two peoples” concept, they use every opportunity to destroy us so that they can have all the land, Jew-free, for themselves.

Please do not be fooled into believing that this is about the “occupation”.  This is about the future existence of a Jewish homeland.  The words in the charter of the PLO and in the Hamas charter, stating that their objective is to completely destroy the State of Israel seem blatant enough.  If they are not, the events in Gaza over the past 9 years should be clear enough for those who are interested to listen.  We all know that the Palestinians only arose and claimed the West Bank and Gaza as a Palestinian homeland after Israel captured these territories in the Six Day War of 1967.  Until Israel had possession of this land, there was never a reason for them to lay claim to it.  When the Israeli government turned Gaza over to them on a silver platter in 2005, we all hoped that times had changed and that they would use the opportunity to build on the two states for two peoples.  Instead of grabbing the chance to really build a state and a future for their people, they have spent millions of dollars and 9 years to build an infrastructure that is designed to attack and destroy Israel.

In wars and conflicts, you cannot support both sides.  You cannot bat for both teams.  At best, you can be a disinterested, objective bystander that takes neither one side nor the other.  More likely, you will take the side of one of the parties in the conflict.  When taking a stand, you are by definition in opposition to the second party to the conflict.  Despite your nice words about believing in Israel’s right to exist and her right to defend herself, you chose to don a Palestinian scarf at a time of war in Gaza.  You cannot sympathise with Israel, and appear with a Palestinian scarf around your neck at the same time.  Your actions speak much louder than your words.  When it came to making a public statement, you chose the Palestinians at the expense of Israel.  Why do you feel that it is acceptable to say that your “sympathy also lies with innocent Israelis exposed to threat at the hands of terrorists”?  Why does your sympathy not lie primarily with innocent Israelis, who have taken the risk time after time to search for the elusive path to peace in our land?  After all, these are your people.  These are the people who will look after you in the event that you may, G-d forbid, find yourself in serious trouble.  When you turn up at Ben-Gurion airport with your parents’ ketuba in your hand asking for citizenship of the Jewish homeland, they will not remember that you appeared in public with a Palestinian scarf.  You will be welcomed home to your ancestral homeland like all other Jews.  The Palestinians, for whom you stood up so brazenly in public, will also conveniently forget your scarf when they are searching for Jews to annihilate in the search for their version of the “final solution”.  Remember that, like you, the vast majority of Israelis seek peace and not war.  Unfortunately, this is a war that we are forced to fight, rather than doing so by choice.  Even when forced into something against our will, our new type of Jew does not shy away from this challenge.  We are brave and willing to do all that is needed to protect ourselves.  We are determined to succeed.  Your actions insult thousands of young men and women of the IDF (including my own sons) who go out of their way to fight a war in the most humane and humanitarian way possible, and whose actions give you the freedom to be a Jew representing your country in debating competitions in safety around the world.

You are most fortunate to have been born into a world that has a Jewish homeland.  I feel sure that your grandparents and great-grandparents would have wished to do all that they can to make you understand what it was like to live in world without one.  This privilege that you have, is also the one that allows you to live in relative safety and security as a Jew in your bubble in Victory Park.  It allows you to have a comfortable life in the knowledge that you have somewhere to fall back to in the event of any emergency.  Beware of taking this for granted.  Anti-Semitism is ever prevalent around the world.  The only force that prevents anti-Semites from destroying the Jews as they tried to do during the Shoah, is the State of Israel.  My recommendation to you is to appreciate, value and protect this huge asset.  Be grateful to those who are prepared to risk and to give their lives in the interests of ensuring that our Jewish homeland continues to exist, and continues to strengthen.  Do not be misled and misguided by those in the international press who confuse you into protecting our enemies at the expense of our Jewish state.  Her actions are not always perfect, and there is a great deal that you can criticise.  But nobody is perfect and no country is perfect.  If you search for faults, you will surely find them.  But be grateful and proud for the wonderful things that have been achieved, and for the way in which Israel gives all Jews around the world the backing to live as proud Jews wherever they are.  Israel will always protect you, and will give you much to be proud about.

Try to envisage for a moment what would happen if Israel unilaterally laid down its arms today, and refused to fire another bullet or missile.  Now try to envisage what would happen if the Palestinians did the same thing.  Which situation do you think is most likely to lead to peaceful coexistence between the parties?

I cannot hide the shame and anger that I felt in seeing you grab your five minutes of fame with that scarf around your neck.  You have shamed yourself, your family, your school and your community in my eyes, and in the eyes of many others.  You have misused your position in an unforgivable way.  I hope that, one day, you will have the huge honour to experience life as Jew in Israel, and will be able to understand the error of your ways.  Only when living here can you really understand the significance of what you have done.  I never wish you to lose your sympathy and support for the weak.  This is a characteristic that Jews have, and should be proud of.  But this should not be confused with the insult that you have dished out to Israel and her people by your actions at this time.  Shame on you.

Regards
Anthony Reich

Sunday, 3 August 2014

Tunnels of Terror

Operation Protective Edge is already into its 27th day of operations, and the ground operation has continued for more than two weeks.  Israel has lost more than 60 if its soldiers in battles with Hamas, and three civilians as a result of rocket fire into towns and cities.  The Palestinians are reporting that more than 1,500 of their citizens have been killed, including many Hamas operatives and terrorists.

In an operation that has held its fair share of surprises and some really positive reactions from Israeli society, there have been two stand-out features for which the operation is likely to be remembered.  The first feature is the unbelievable protection that has been offered to the Israeli home front by the Iron Dome anti-missile system.  Not only have hundreds, perhaps thousands, of lives been saved by this miraculous Israeli invention, it has offered the Israeli military commanders and political leaders the luxury of time to make rational and clear-headed decisions in the knowledge that much of Israel continues to go about its daily life in the meantime.  Let us not be lulled into a false understanding that Israeli life has continued without any interruption over the course of this operation.  Despite this fact, Iron Dome has allowed much of the economy to continue to function, and has allowed people to live their daily lives in relative safety.  This has been a true blessing, and the public recognition that has been in evidence for the Iron Dome units and the work that they are doing, is fully justified.

The second stand-out feature of this operation is the tunnels that have been discovered running beneath the Gazan towns, cities and fields, stretching into Israeli territory beneath the border fence.  While we have heard about Gazan tunnels extensively before today, the references to the tunnels have mostly been in connection with smuggling tunnels under the Egyptian border.  These tunnels, we are told, are the lifeline to the Gaza terror organisation and have allowed Hamas to be armed to the teeth in anticipation of an operation like this one.  We also understand that these tunnels have been the source for the incessant rocket fire that Israeli civilians have had to tolerate over many years.  The tunnels from Egypty have provided large quantities of arms and ammunition to Gaza.  Operation Protective Edge has revealed a new type of tunnel.  This is a tunnel that reaches from Gaza into the back gardens of kindergartens, and this is a tunnel that allows those who are intent on attacking civilians to reach their target undetected and in the most frightening and direct way.  Citizens of the south of Israel, hardened after many years of constant rocket fire from Gaza, now have a new fear to confront in the form of tunnel shafts that have been discovered a few hundred metres from the kibbutz where they live.  The reason for this fear is obvious.  These are tunnels that have no possible positive angle to them, and they are designed solely for the purpose attacking innocent men, women and children who simply wish to go about their daily lives.  These are tunnels of terror.

When Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza in 2006, there was some hope that this would signal the moment that the Palestinians living there could take control of their lives in the way that they had been claiming to desire for so long.  The terror campaign that had been waged until that moment was justified by the desire for Gaza to be independent of Israeli control and influence, to allow the Gazan population to be masters of their own destiny.  The decision made by then-prime minister Arik Sharon to give the residents of Gaza the opportunity to fulfil this desire, came at a very high price to citizens of Israel, and came against warnings by many of those who believed that Israel was taking the wrong action.  Although I personally still believe that the action of withdrawing from Gaza was the correct one, it is clear that those who warned that this would simply begin a new war in which the citizens of Gaza would advance to lay claim to the rest of the State of Israel, were correct.  The claims that Palestinians wished only for an independent Gaza were proven to be wholly incorrect.  The moment that they had full control over Gaza, they turned their attention to their next target to try to gain control of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and the rest of Israel.

The terror tunnels represent a microcosm of the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.  While Israel is spending huge resources on developing systems that will defend its citizens,  that will allow them to go about their daily chores even when missiles are raining down, Hamas is spending its resources on building infrastructure for the purpose of attacking and terrorising Israeli civilians.  While Israelis are spending their time, effort and money building a country and an economy that will give a good future for their children and grandchildren, Hamas is forcing its children to protect missiles that are to be used for attacking Israel and Israelis.  It seems inconceivable that a national government is abusing its population in order to pursue a policy of hatred and negativity.  The attacks that it carries out on Israelis will not advance its people in any way.  Gaza may well be a small and densely populated area, but it still represents a piece of land which the Palestinians can use to prove to the world that they have the intention and the ability to build a positive future for its people.  Israel had a similar challenge in 1948 when the UN agreed the partition plan for Palestine.  The land granted to the Jews was small and almost indefensible.  Despite this fact, the Jews have turned Israel into one of the most dynamic countries in the world, and have succeeded in developing an economy and an army that is admired by many around the world.  It provides a vision and a future for the next generation of Israelis, a vision and future that Palestinians do not have.

Hamas claims that the reason for carrying out terror attacks, is because of the "occupation".  They claim that Israel's actions are the reason for their aggression against Israel, and for the lack of hope and future for its younger generation.  Israelis will disagree with this.  There is nothing that Israelis want more, than to live in peace and security with its neighbours.  They would like to give respect to those who live around us, in return for respect being given in return.  Israel took the first step in granting the Palestinians their desire to rule over Gaza.  In return, they have fired thousands of missiles onto Israeli populated areas, and have dug tunnels to be used for the purpose of attacking innocent civilians.  Despite this situation, Israel continues to invest in building a future for its next generation.  Hamas uses its future generations to promote its murderous attacks, and to defend its terror infrastructure.  Turning children into a "shahid' (hero) that is so revered by Hamas and its Muslim extremist colleagues, is contrary to any concept of building a future.

The tunnels are being destroyed, whereafter Israeli troops will probably depart the scene to give Hamas another chance to show its humanity, and build a future for its children.  We live under no illusions that they will seize this opportunity, where they have failed to do so before.  Instead of building tunnels, it is our hope that Hamas will build homes, hospitals, schools and promote economic growth to create a vision and future for its children.  And we hope that this will promote a love and respect for their children, that will exceed the hate that they feel for Israel.

Saturday, 26 July 2014

Iron Dome - Blessing or Curse?

There is almost universal recognition of the value of the Iron Dome anti-missile system amongst Israeli citizens.  Watching missiles being shot down out of the sky, which have been fired indiscriminately into the most populated parts of Israel with the purpose of causing death and destruction, is an amazingly impressive and heart-warming sight.  It is difficult not to understand the enormity of the task that Iron Dome is doing, and the thousands of lives that are being saved in the process.   The stark contrast between Israel's investment in defensive systems and Hamas's investment in promoting terror, death and destruction, is difficult to ignore.  Unfortunately, not everybody sees it for the positive force that it is.

In an ironic twist of fate, Iron Dome is also proving to have some negative implications for Israel and her safety.  The fact that Israel has invested so heavily in defending the lives of her citizens, including a substantial investment in the Iron Dome, is causing the current round of operations to look one-sided and unbalanced.  Despite Hamas having fired more than two thousand rockets towards Israel's densely-populated towns and cities in the past two weeks,  "only" three Israeli civilians have been killed as a result of this rocket fire.  This is not due to lack of trying on the part of Hamas. This is all down to Israel taking care of its citizens.  By contrast, a few hundred Palestinian civilians have been killed in the conflict.  This is despite the fact that Israel has taken every precaution to avoid civilian deaths wherever possible.  Many Israeli bombing raids have been called off due to the fact that innocent civilians have been observed in the targeted areas.  This action, perceived as a weakness on the part of Hamas, has given the Hamas leadership the incentive to turn large swathes of the civilian population of Gaza into human shields.  Inevitably, when more civilians are sent into the war zone, more civilians are killed. This serves Hamas's interests.

International opinion seems to ignore defensive and precautionary efforts on the part of Israel, and equally ignores the despicable actions taken by Hamas.  Instead, international opinion counts up the dead bodies in order to decide in which direction it will be swayed.  This has resulted in the international community accusing Israel of a "disproportionate response".  The Hamas leadership has understood this very quickly, and seems to value international opinion and sympathy more than it values the lives of its innocent civilians.  It has decided that dead bodies are good for international public relations, and are more important than preserving the lives of innocent civilians.  They have cynically used this for public relations, to very good effect.  This is a battle that Israel cannot win.  Investing in safety for Israeli civilians means that Israel is losing the moral high ground in the eyes of international community.  The Iron Dome and other defensive measures implemented, are turning the tide of international public opinion against Israel.  Instead of valuing Israel's efforts in defending her citizens, the international community is being fooled by the cynical efforts by Hamas to gain their sympathy and support.

It is horrifying that Hamas seeks sympathy via the death of its innocent civilians, through the glorification of death and using it in the most cynical way possible.  It is even more horrifying that members of the international community cannot see through this for the disgusting behaviour that it is.  Even if these sympathy-seeking tactics are successful, they will never change Israel's approach to valuing life of its own citizens and even of the citizens of its enemies.  Citizens of the State of Israel are enormously proud of Iron Dome, and the wonderful work that it has done in protecting innocent lives.  No amount of sympathy lost as a result of employing life-saving tactics and technologies will change this.

In an ironic way, the Iron Dome has probably saved more Palestinian lives than Israeli ones.  Without the benefit of the Iron Dome protecting Israel, the government and the IDF would have been forced into making much quicker decisions, and ones that are much more far-reaching.  The response to so many rockets fired into Israeli towns and cities causing death and destruction, is likely to have been a much more powerful military and air force reaction to bring the bombimg campaign to an abrupt halt.  The "collateral damage" in terms of Palestinian civilians from such a campaign would have been far greater.  

The value and importance of recognition and support of the international community can never be underestimated.  The actions taken by Hamas to gain this support and recognition have crossed all red lines.  There can be nothing to justify sacrificing the lives of innocent civilians, your own innocent civilians, in return for international sympathy.  It is for this reason that Israel will continue to develop systems to defend its citizens, and Hamas is likely not to do so.  If this comes at the cost of public support and sympathy, so be it.  Israel will never compromise on defending the lives of her citizens.  And the citizens of Israel will never give up on Israel and her defense forces.

Sunday, 13 July 2014

Protective Edge or Strong Cliff

The name of the latest operation against Hamas rocket-fire from Gaza is an interesting and meaningful choice.  The Hebrew name for the operation, צוק איתן (tzuk eitan), literally means strong cliff.  One can understand the imagery associated with a cliff that is extremely strong.  One can easily imagine the Sate of Israel risking the threat of collapsing if the cliff does not continue to support it, and the Israel Defense Force (IDF) continuously reinforcing the strength of the cliff to support all that sits above it.  Despite having stood on the edge of the cliff for the past 66 years, the cliff stands as strong as ever.

The English name for the operation, probably chosen by spin doctors who will have given great consideration to how the world's media will interpret it, is "Protective Edge".  No matter which way one translates the "edge" in "protective edge", it seems to work out in a positive way in depicting the State of Israel in its current state of emergency. The "protective" seems to portray to the international community, that the operation is all about retaliation and protection, rather than being the aggressor.  While this is entirely accurate, it contrasts sharply against the impression of strength that is reflected in the Hebrew name.

How important is the name of  the operation?  Other than providing the press with a way of referring to the operation, does the name really serve any significant purpose?  Does it matter whether it is named something meaningful, or if we simply adopt a system of naming operations in alphabetical order in the same way as typhoons in the Atlantic are named?  The naming of an operation is a significant moment in the conflicts that Israel is constantly battling.  The moment an operation has a name, it is a clear indication to the general public and to the security services  that this operation is more than simply ongoing defensive actions that are part of our everyday lives.  The name becomes equally important.  We wish the name to reflect the tone and atmosphere that will be associated with the operation.   In the case of "protective edge", the names in Hebrew and in English are both significant to their respective audiences.  The message to the people of Israel is, that while we do have the risk of falling over the cliff, we also have the strength to avoid this.  A little stick, and a little carrot.  The message to the international community is that we will do all that we need to protect ourselves, and we will use our edge despite living on the edge.

All of these messages seem to have got through to those who are fighting this battle on behalf of Israel and the Jewish people.  Our soldiers and our politicians understand that we are on the edge of the cliff.  This is how we have survived for the past 66 years, and how we are likely to continue for the foreseeable future.  We live under an existential threat which sees our neighbours continuously and unashamedly trying to destroy us, and wipe us from the map.  Our so-called peace partners in the Palestinian community, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (which currently forms part of Fatah), still have as part of their constitution the objective of destroying the State of Israel.  It is clear that, if we were not to defend ourselves in the strong and determined way that we do, we would not have a state.  In the defense of our country, we are strong and will continue to be strong.  Our young men and women who are drafted to the military in the defense of this country, do an amazing job with a smile and with an understanding of the importance of their role that belies their age. 

We use our edge in every possible way.  In this operation, the Iron Dome has proved to be our edge.  The technology associated with this system is ahead of its time, and has shown itself to be highly effective in protecting the lives of innocent people.  As of the time of writing this article, more than 100 incoming missiles have been intercepted by Iron Dome.  Failure to intercept these rockets could have resulted in hundreds, or even thousands, of death and injuries.

Our edge has also been in the way that we approach the battle.  Hamas insists upon launching missiles, which have no accurate guidance method, right into the centre of the most populated areas of Israel.  By contrast, Israel has been sending pamphlets to the residents of Gaza warning of impending attacks.  Due to the fact that Hamas continues to insist upon conducting its warfare from residential areas, the Israeli army has no choice but to target these areas in an attempt to quell the rocket fire.  Telephone calls and SMS messages are sent to the residents of particular apartment buildings by the IDF to warn them to evacuate the area.  Hamas has advised these residents to remain in their buildings, and to even climb onto the roofs in the knowledge that Israeli pilots are likely to abort releasing missiles on buildings which are inhabited by innocent civilians.

Our edge is also represented in the way that we support our boys and girls in battle.  Our soldiers on operational duty have told of residents bringing food and other suppliers to their units in the field, in order to keep them well fed.  It is also a way for these residents to show appreciation and solidarity with those on operational duty.  No food is too much to make, and no distance is too far to travel to bring the smell and taste of home-made food to battle stations.  With many fathers having been called to reserve duty to serve in this operation, systems at home have moved into overdrive in order to assist wives and children left at home.  The country is doing all that it can to assist and support those who are on active duty at this critical time.

They say that the strength of character of people is brought out during extreme circumstances.  The strength and character of the Israelis who are under fire during this operation, has truly surpassed all expectations.  This is the real strength that is referred to in the Hebrew version of the name.  We are enormously proud of the way in which our army and our people have responded to this crisis.  It certainly bodes well for this operation, and for the future.  The names in Hebrew and Engish both fit well, and perhaps even drive us forward.

Image from http://carnegieendowment.org/images/article_images/bertijul2.jpg.

Friday, 17 May 2013

The Importance of Preemptive Strikes

Israel's recent double strike on Syrian weapons storage facilities has, once again, raised the issue of the validity of preemptive strikes.  Israel has used this tactic on more than a number of previous occasions, has already struck Syria already a few times this year.  There are those who go as far as attributing Israel's continued existence to the fact that she has been prepared to go out and defend herself even before the attack materialises.

The issue of preemptive strikes as a defense mechanism to counter a potential threat has a number of inherent problems attached to it, particularly when this encroaches on the sovereign territory of another country.  Firstly, there is always the question as to whether the perceived threat is real and credible.  We saw the consequences of a bad call on the perceived threat when it was revealed that intelligence information was incorrect prior to the Second Gulf War.  This dogged both Tony Blair and George W. Bush until the end of their respective tenures, and continues to dog them in their personal capacities to this day.  Secondly, there is the question as to whether one sovereign country has the right to attack another sovereign country in defense of itself even where the threat is sure.  It could easily be argued that there is an element of hypocrisy in this concept.  Does it make a difference if the perceived threat is not an immediate one, but rather a perceived future threat?  This is the case with Israel's strikes in Syria last week, where the rationale for the strike was that Hezbollah may use these arms against Israel at an undetermined time in the future.  There are no firm answers to these questions, and the international community has historically judged such deeds on the basis of the parties involved, rather than the act.  On this occasion, Israel succeeded in capitalising on the negative views currently held by the international community towards Syria and Hezbollah, and escaped with little or no censure by the international community - something quite rare for Israeli attacks.  But this has not always been the case in the past.

Israel, a small island located in a sea of aggressive and hateful enemies, has been forced to employ the tactic of preemptive strikes in order to survive.  Some of Israel's most famous and important victories - most notably that in the Six Day War - were achieved by surprising the enemy before they were able to inflict damage.  The Egyptian air force was destroyed while on the ground in 1967.  This surely paved the way for the famous Israeli victory.  Israel was roundly criticised for sending its air force aeroplanes to destroy the Osirak nuclear reactor site in Iraq in 1981.  It was only many years later in 2005 that President Clinton finally acknowledged for the first time that the strike on Osirak by Israel was a "really good thing".  Similarly, the strike on the Syrian nuclear facility that was carried out by Israel in 2007, attracted criticism from Mohamed ElBaradei, then head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.  Imagine if the civil war in Syria being waged at this time involved the added concern of nuclear weapons.  With the benefit of hindsight, the Israeli strike in 2007 has potentially saved massive consequences.

These historical experiences also put a context to the ongoing standoff with Iran concerning the development of its own nuclear facilities.  A preemptive strike against Iran's nuclear facilities would be much more difficult, and would have far greater consequences than the ones carried out against Iraq and Syria.  Both of the previous attacks solicited no military response at all.  This miraculous escape, after catching each of these countries off guard, is highly unlikely in the Iranian context.  It is almost assured that any attempt to carry out a military strike against the Iranian nuclear facilities would include a substantial response.  It is for this reason that Israel has tried using different tactics against Iran, including mounting a concerted campaign to assassinate key personnel employed in the Iranian nuclear industry and using cyber warfare to destroy software and hardware in use by the Iranian nuclear facilities.  Until now, these tactics have served to slow the processes down at best, and have not been effective in halting Iran's march towards becoming a nuclear power.  Israel is still considering a game-changing strike that will kill off Iran's nuclear push once and for all.  The threat posed by a retaliation to such a strike is surely much lower than the threat presented by a nuclear Iran.  Despite this fact, the threat presented by retaliation is substantial.

While not completely invincible, Israel's military and intelligence establishments have proven themselves over and over again.  Mistakes have certainly been made, but reports of potential threats which are reported by these organisations are always taken seriously by the Israeli government.  This is based on its amazing track record of getting things right more often than getting them wrong, and managing to sniff out information in a seemingly impossible way.  The way that the Israeli organisations work seems somehow to be different and more effective than similar intelligence agencies elsewhere in the world.  A potential threat to Israel which is reported by Israeli intelligence will almost certainly be taken seriously.  Equally, the Israeli intelligence community is well aware of the importance of the advice that they offer, and the consequences of giving bad advice or making mistakes.

It seems highly unlikely that Israel will reverse its tactic of preemptive strikes against enemies in the near future.  This tactic which has proved very effective in the past, and critical to Israel's survival. Despite the fact that a great deal of Israel's focus is on defense rather than attack, as evidenced by new developments such as the Iron Dome, the tactic of attack is often the best form of defense.  Despite this fact, we all wish to believe that this will always be used sparingly and very cautiously.  Ultimately, however, it is one of the ways that Israel will be able to maintain any superiority over its enemy neighbours around the Middle East.  If attacks and threats against Israel persist, Israel will be forced to employ measures to protect herself.  These measures include preemptive tactics to prevent the possibility of attacks taking place, and to prevent loss of innocent lives.  Extreme circumstances demand extreme measures.  It would be difficult to argue that Israel is not living under extreme circumstances.

Saturday, 30 March 2013

Obama's Israeli Triumph

US President Barack Obama has concluded his trip to Israel after an intensive few days in the Holy Land.  Prior to this visit, Obama was perceived by a majority of the Israeli public as being unsympathetic and unhelpful to Israel's cause in the international community.  Some believe that a US president with the Muslim heritage that Obama has, can never be good for Israel.  Expectations that Obama's visit to Israel would dramatically change his attitude towards Israel were extremely low.

Now that he has been and gone, and we have had the chance to view the course of the visit's events in hindsight (albeit a very close hindsight), I believe that Obama has almost managed to pull off the impossible.  It was a very different Obama who was in Israel from the one who has spent the past four years taking neutral positions on matters which affect Israel.  From the moment that he stepped onto the tarmac at Ben Gurion airport and said in Hebrew that he was happy to be back in Israel, Obama seemed not to put a foot wrong.  He managed to say all the right things to help reverse the negative sentiments towards him.  He paid tribute to Israeli technology and military strength when inspecting the Iron Dome battery at the airport.  He reiterated his intention to continue to fund this program, despite the budget cuts in the US.  He paid tribute to Israeli fallen heroes during his visit to the Mount Herzl cemetery, and paid his tribute to the six million at Yad Vashem.  He met with Israeli students to relate his view of the future to them, and to listen to the things that they had to say.

On the pressing issue of Iran, the US president was eager to reiterate the points of common understanding rather than the differences.  He said that there was little daylight between the Israeli and US positions.  In truth, I think that he refers more to the assessment of what is happening in Iran, rather than the view as to how to deal with it.  Even though nobody expected that there would be a great deal of public discourse on the Iran issue, it was easy to read between the lines that Obama and Netanyahu are not precisely on the same page where this is concerned.  The Israeli public would like to know if Obama will be prepared to sanction military action in sufficient time to prevent the final steps being taken for the construction of an Iranian nuclear bomb.  It is also important to know whether the US commander-in-chief is prepared to commit his forces to be in the front line, or if they will be watching from a distance while Israeli forces are required to do the hard work.  Answers to these questions were not forthcoming in public, and we have the impression that the US answers to these questions are probably not the ones that Israel would prefer to hear.

It was important to hear Obama say that Israel's continued strength will ensure that a Holocaust does not happen in the future.  As much as it is a stark admission to make that it is not the free world and the powers of the UN that will prevent such a genocide in future, it was equally important for him to publicly recognise the central role that Israel plays in the future of Jewish survival.  It was also important to hear him say that being on friendly terms with Israel is in the US national security interest.  Relationships between countries are built on necessity and mutual-dependence, and not on sentiments.  As much as there are some in the US who do feel some sentimental attachment towards Israel, the only thing that will ensure that the US will continue to support Israel in the future, is a national security interest that drives this friendship.
President Obama's trip to Israel was a public relations triumph that saw him win over many Israeli sceptics.  He managed to convince some that America is indeed there to support Israeli, despite the many instances over the past four years when Israel felt isolated by the contrary view adopted by the Obama administration.  Could it be that the next four years will be different, and that there will be more help forthcoming from Obama and his friends in support of Israel?  Only time will tell.  Many feel that the president's appointment of Chuck Hagel to the position of US Secretary of Defense is more reminiscent of the old Obama, rather than a new one.
Hagel is perceived to unsupportive and unsympathetic to Israel's cause.  I do believe that most Israelis are prepared to give Obama the opportunity to prove his credentials again.  His actions over the coming months, particularly with regard to Iran, will be highly influential in convincing people of his true allegiance.

As a parting gift, Obama brokered an apology to be delivered by Prime Minister Netanyahu to Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan over the deaths of Turkish activists in the Gaza Flotilla incident three years ago.  While it is clear to see why a united Israel and Turkey serves US national security interests as a buffer against Syria, it is still unclear whether this is good for Israel's interests or not.  This apology by Israel represents a major climb-down on a point of principle, while the benefits sufficient to outweigh this concession are not immediately obvious.

A good relationship with the USA is certainly in Israel's best interests.  But this is not at any price.  Israel wishes to see the US being prepared to speak out and take actions on matters which would benefit Israel in the international community.  With the constant threats that Israel is facing, this is of importance to Israel's future surivival and that of the Jewish people.  Over the course of the next year, this will manifest itself in the support that Israel receives to counter the Iranian threat.  The clock is ticking.......

Monday, 26 November 2012

Hatred and Ceasefires

In the hours following the terror attack on a bus in Tel Aviv on Wednesday, I had the same thoughts that I recall thinking during the course of the suicide bombing campaign in the Second Intifada.  I was desperately trying to envisage what sort of person it could be who would leave an explosive on a bus knowing that it would kill and maim innocent men, women and children.  I have also wondered in the past what sort of person would kill themselves in a restaurant or other public place, just because they have the opportunity to kill innocent men, women and children around them.  I cannot imagine the person who would undertake such a ghastly act, and why they would think that this is justified in any way.  I felt the same when I saw missiles being launched towards civilian areas, with the express hope and intention that they will hit apartment blocks or shopping centres full of innocent people trying to go about their daily lives.  And yet, there are such people in this world.  Many of them are neighbours of Israel who believe that they have full justification to massacre civilians.

When discussing this with one of my colleagues, the answer seemed quite obvious to him.  His take on the matter is quite straight-forward.  He simply said, "you have to understand how deep the hatred goes".  Perhaps he is right and we do need try to understand how deep the hatred goes, as difficult as this seems.  The problem is that I simply cannot understand hatred of this magnitude.  I have met people who do have a genuine and justifiable reason to hate deeply.  These are people who still have numbers that were branded onto their arms, and who were subject to the most depraved behaviour known to mankind.  They were herded and kept like cattle, and were forced to witness the deaths of close friends and family members at the hands of some of the most evil people ever known.  Deep hatred would be fully justified under these circumstances.  Strangely, many of these victims do not feel the hatred that may be expected of them.  Somehow, it is not in them to bear a grudge and feel hate in this way.  It seems to me that the type of hatred that we see coming from Gaza is hate that has been taught and cultivated over many years, and passed by one generation to another.  Even if we assume that this has arisen as a result of maltreatment, this has certainly not been at the hands of Israelis.  Even when Israel controlled Gaza, the treatment of the Palestinian population was in accordance with security requirements.  Israel certainly did not maltreat Palestinians in a way that cultivate the hate that is in evidence, and that could ever justify the deliberate murder of women and children.

So where does the hatred come from, and why is it so strong?  Although some say it goes back many centuries, there is a noticeable increase in the hatred since the State of Israel was declared in 1948.  Perhaps this was the moment that the anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist sentiments could be directed towards a physical entity, rather than a bunch of individuals.  It also represents the moment that the Arab leaders promised their people that Israel would be wiped off the map, and that the Jews would be driven into the sea.  To date, this promise has not been fulfilled despite their best efforts.  This also gives a basis for hatred, even though it is misdirected in many cases.  It may also be the case that Arab leaders ensure that the dissatisfaction of their citizens is channelled in the form of hate towards Israel, rather than directed towards the leaders who are the real cause of the suffering of their people.

The guns have now gone silent following another outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas.  It was noticeable how the war was fought between the different parties.  Israel did all that she could to avoid civilian casualties.  Some targets were not fired upon when there was a risk that civilians would become involved.  The strikes that were made, were undertaken with pinpoint accuracy to avoid civilian casualties.  Hamas took a completely different approach.  Their objective was to place at risk the lives of as many civilians as possible.  Their rocket fire was always aimed at areas of high civilian population.  Hamas was happy to risk the lives of its own population by creating human shields out of people.  Rockets were fired from apartments where women and children live.  The leadership hid itself and some of its ammunition stores under a hospital.  All of this would ensure that Israel, with its humane attitude, would not aim its fire at these areas.  In the event that fire was directed towards these targets, it would make a great news story for the waiting press pack.  Not only is it difficult to wage a war against such people, it is also virtually impossible to make peace with them.

Operation "Pillar of Defense" has ended, and the rocket fire has finally ceased.  If it was not for the wonderful and heroic "Iron Dome" system, Israeli civilians may have been subject to 400 more rockets landing in their towns and cities.  This is to add to the thousands of rockets that have been fired incessantly over the past ten years, and more.  What is perhaps most astonishing about this situation, is the reaction of the international community.  It is incredulous that Israel is continuously criticised for being the aggressor, and that foreign countries try to dictate to Israel that any response to attacks on its citizens should be "proportionate".  What could be regarded as disproportionate, when a missile is fired towards the centre of a town or city with the aim of killing and maiming civilians?

Perhaps the international community should also try to understand the form of hatred that is being bred towards Israel in places like Gaza, and elsewhere in the region.  There should be an attempt to appreciate that this is hatred that is being taught by parents and in schools, rather than hatred based on rationality.  As such, it appears difficult, and perhaps even impossible to counter.  It is against the background of this hatred that ceasefires are agreed, and peace treaties negotiated.  It seems fairly clear that, while this hatred continues to be bred amongst the younger population and passed from father to son, ceasefires and peace arrangements will only ever be temporary.  Unfortunately, under these circumstances, a permanent peace can never exist.