Fly Perspectives: Israel Strikes Back
Wow. Okay, well, I'm not exactly sure where to start on my analysis of what's going on with Israel and its neighbors right now. I had only intended to discuss the Israeli offensive in Gaza, which happened right before I left for home a couple of weeks ago. That plan flew right out the window when Lebanon decided to get involved. So, we'll start off with the situation in Gaza, and then transition into the situation in Lebanon. Fair warning, this is one of my longest posts ever.
Before I go into my own commentary, one might do well to review the History of "Palestine"; it's why I put "Palestine" and "Palestinians" in quotation marks. As far as I have been able to research over the last couple of years, the information, though presented in a biased and non-objective form, is wholly reliable and accurate regarding the history it presents.
For those of you who haven't paid close attention, the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip was caused by an incursion by "militants", which is to say, "terrorists", who dug yet another tunnel into Israeli territory, came up inside an Israeli outpost, engaged in a gunfight, and kidnapped a young Israeli corporal named Gilad Shalit. Later, "Palestinian" thugs kidnapped an Israeli youth from a border settlement; Corporal Shalit is reportedly still alive, but the Israeli settler was killed. The Israelis immediately marshalled their forces on the Gaza border and struck with unrequited fury. They continue to carry out air strikes on various government buildings and leading Hamas installations; they bombed Gaza's primary power station, essentially eliminating electricity (and by extension water service) to the entire Gaza Strip. Every major bridge linking the northern half of Gaza to the southern half has been destroyed. It's also worth noting that terrorist militants in the Gaza Strip have been launching rockets against Israel since the "Palestinians" took control of the Gaza Strip in 2005.
Israel has ignored warnings from the United Nations and the European Union, and continued their assault with a single demand: the unconditional release of Corporal Shalit. Hamas has offered to negotiate with Israel in an attempt to trade the kidnapped Corporal Shalit for "Palestinian" war criminals who are in Israeli custody. The Israelis have reiterated that no negotiations will take place until Corporal Shalit is safely and unconditionally released into Israeli custody. Corporal Shalit has not been released, and the offensive continues.
The Israeli government unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip last summer, allowing the Palestinian Authority and at least some of their constituency to create their own tiny country. In January, "Palestinian" voters ousted the Fatah party, led originally by Yasser Arafat and subsequently by Mahmoud Abbas (who, according to your humble blogger, was the "Palestinians'" best hope for achieving their goals); in its place, they elected the political wing of Hamas. This led to international freezing of aid into Gaza, as it made the "Palestinian" government a state sponsor of international terrorism. Israel gave Hamas numerous chances to enter into a non-aggression agreement, but Hamas continued to refuse to so much as acknowledge the state of Israel; instead, Hamas continued to use strong anti-Israeli language. Basically, the Israeli government gave the "Palestinians" every opportunity to make something of themselves, and they blew it. Now, Israel is answering an act of war and six months of aggressive posturing by Hamas with just what Hamas has acted like it wanted: a war. In a matter of hours, they could have turned Gaza into a smoking crater; instead, they showed restraint, merely demonstrating to the Gazans how impotent they are as a nation. With a mere iota of their military capacity, Israel eliminated electricity, water, and free movement throughout the entirety of Gaza; Hamas could still alleviate a massive humanitarian crisis that they essentially brought upon themselves by simply forcing the release of Corporal Gilad Shalit.
For Israel's part, their response to the kidnapping of one soldier, particularly given their previous history of prisoner exchanges with Hamas and Hezbollah, surprised even me. (For the record, when the 2004 prisoner exchange took place, Sheikh Ahmed "Saruman" Yassin was overjoyed, saying the trade should be answered with more kidnappings and killings of Israeli soldiers.) Now, the gloves are obviously off; Israel is showing Hamas that it must cooperate, and that it must achieve control over both Hamas and non-Hamas militants, or else it will suffer consequences such as those that Gazans have been suffering for two weeks now. Corporal Gilad Shalit's kidnapping has forced Israel to teach the "Palestinian" Authority and Hamas a lesson; and although I was surprised initially by the Israeli response, further consideration has led me to understand that, from the Israeli perspective, this is essentially their most logical option.
For a non-Fly perspective on this issue, check out Wikipedia's article or the BBC's "In-Depth" coverage; be advised that both sources are likely to be "neutral", which is to say, left-leaning.
Of course, it couldn't just stay that simple. On Tuesday, Hezbollah guerillas launched an attack into Israel, kidnapping two Israeli soldiers and killing eight others. Israel launched immediate attacks in southern Lebanon against Hezbollah positions, as well as further north against the country's only major airport in Beirut, and against Lebanese air bases further north. The Israelis have, for all intents and purposes, crippled Lebanese aviation capacity; in addition, Israel has imposed a naval blockade and launched additional air strikes against Lebanon's primary highway.
Like the Hamas government in Gaza, the Lebanese government has denied any involvement with the kidnappings and attacks; however, the historical and political situation in Lebanon is a bit more complicated than the one in Gaza.
Lebanon fought a long and complex civil war from 1975 to 1990 in which sixteen factions fought for control of the country, each of which allied with and then betrayed each other faction at one point or another. Lebanon is still culturally and politically fragmented as a result.
At one point, Israel invaded and occupied portions of southern Lebanon in order to establish a buffer zone to protect its citizens from Lebanese attacks. Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, and the Lebanese electorate credit Hezbollah for that apparent victory.
Hezbollah itself (Wiki, BBC) is a group sponsored and, for all intents and purposes, controlled from Iran.
Lebanon was essentially a Syrian puppet state until 2005; following an apparent Syrian assassination of Rafik Hariri, a anti-Syrian former Lebanese prime minister, massive Lebanese protests and intense international pressure forced Syrian intelligence agents to leave Lebanon.
Because Hezbollah is credited by the Lebanese electorate for ousting Israel, they enjoy a parliamentary majority, meaning that the ruling Lebanese political party is the political wing of a militia/terrorist group that, as I mentioned, is financed and controlled from Iran.
Hezbollah has continued rocket attacks into Israel, hitting the Israeli port city of Haifa with dozens of Katyusha artillery rockets; according to a commentator on the Hugh Hewitt show this afternoon, Hezbollah would have received such rockets from Iran. Basically, since Hezbollah is the Lebanese arm of the Iranian mullahs, and since the rockets being used against Israel are supplied by Iran, these acts of war by Hezbollah are de facto acts of war by Iran. A Syrian connection is also suspected, and both the Israelis and President Bush have condemned the Iranian and Syrian connections to the Lebanese attacks. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, well known for his diplomatic and even-handed approach to international politics, released a statement saying that an attack on Syria by Israel represented an attack on the entire Islamic world. (Clearly, Arabs and Persians are now bosom buddies.)
Now, for one reason or another, the Saudi government has condemned the attacks and kidnappings by Lebanon; one would expect them to merely remain silent on the issue, so siding against Hezbollah (which is as close to siding with Israel as we could hope from the Saudis) is uncharacteristic. It's likely that the Saudis, as usual, have their own interests in mind, but it's still important to note.
Again, Israel has little choice; the Hezbollah attack and kidnappings are at least a reaction, and at most connected to, the abduction of Corporal Shalit. Israel can not answer a "Palestinian" abduction of one of their soldiers and one of their settlers with a major offensive, and then treat a similar Lebanese action with restraint. The Israelis have a right to exist, their only option is decisive military action; diplomacy with Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and the current Iranian regime is absolutely worthless. Israel is surrounded on all sides by neighbors who either want nothing to do with her, or want to wipe her and her people off the face of the earth.
The political situation is a tough one. Terrorist organizations from the IRA to Hamas have a habit of employing two wings: a political wing, and a militant wing. The Irish Republican Army, in its various forms, was tied to the political party known as Sinn Fein; their objectives were the same, while their approaches were different, but both approaches were coordinated by the same leadership. Hamas and Hezbollah are different only in that their wings don't have different names. Through a combination of "liberating" southern Lebanon and continuing cross-border attacks against Israel, and providing basic welfare to various Lebanese constituents, Hezbollah has been able to take political control of the Lebanese government. In the same way, Hamas gained near-total control of the "Palestinian" Authority through attacks on Israel and provision of basic welfare services to select "Palestinians". As a result, the militant/terrorist arm of the organization is given free agency to attack Israel, while the political wing ostensibly receives the privilege of plausible deniability. This situation is not fundamentally different from the Ku Klux Klan winning the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress, its militant wing forming lynch mobs, and the so-called "political" wing disavowing all knowledge of said actions. As far as the international community is concerned, this should be completely unacceptable. Of course, political considerations would prevent groups like Hamas and Hezbollah from negotiating with or compromising with Israel; from the "Palestinian" point of view, this would be just about equivalent to President Bush having been elected on a platform of having continually pursued al Qaeda, and then turning around and signing a peace treaty with Usama bin Laden. Basically, the situation is very precarious.
And as cynical as this will sound, the bottom line for most Americans is that fuel prices are going to go up. Between this and the worsening nuclear crisis, Iran's the real loose cannon (as if that's a surprise), but there's not much that can be done.
For more information, check out the Wikipedia article on the subject.
Be informed, ladies and gentlemen. Be aware, and be informed.
Before I go into my own commentary, one might do well to review the History of "Palestine"; it's why I put "Palestine" and "Palestinians" in quotation marks. As far as I have been able to research over the last couple of years, the information, though presented in a biased and non-objective form, is wholly reliable and accurate regarding the history it presents.
For those of you who haven't paid close attention, the Israeli offensive in the Gaza Strip was caused by an incursion by "militants", which is to say, "terrorists", who dug yet another tunnel into Israeli territory, came up inside an Israeli outpost, engaged in a gunfight, and kidnapped a young Israeli corporal named Gilad Shalit. Later, "Palestinian" thugs kidnapped an Israeli youth from a border settlement; Corporal Shalit is reportedly still alive, but the Israeli settler was killed. The Israelis immediately marshalled their forces on the Gaza border and struck with unrequited fury. They continue to carry out air strikes on various government buildings and leading Hamas installations; they bombed Gaza's primary power station, essentially eliminating electricity (and by extension water service) to the entire Gaza Strip. Every major bridge linking the northern half of Gaza to the southern half has been destroyed. It's also worth noting that terrorist militants in the Gaza Strip have been launching rockets against Israel since the "Palestinians" took control of the Gaza Strip in 2005.
Israel has ignored warnings from the United Nations and the European Union, and continued their assault with a single demand: the unconditional release of Corporal Shalit. Hamas has offered to negotiate with Israel in an attempt to trade the kidnapped Corporal Shalit for "Palestinian" war criminals who are in Israeli custody. The Israelis have reiterated that no negotiations will take place until Corporal Shalit is safely and unconditionally released into Israeli custody. Corporal Shalit has not been released, and the offensive continues.
The Israeli government unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip last summer, allowing the Palestinian Authority and at least some of their constituency to create their own tiny country. In January, "Palestinian" voters ousted the Fatah party, led originally by Yasser Arafat and subsequently by Mahmoud Abbas (who, according to your humble blogger, was the "Palestinians'" best hope for achieving their goals); in its place, they elected the political wing of Hamas. This led to international freezing of aid into Gaza, as it made the "Palestinian" government a state sponsor of international terrorism. Israel gave Hamas numerous chances to enter into a non-aggression agreement, but Hamas continued to refuse to so much as acknowledge the state of Israel; instead, Hamas continued to use strong anti-Israeli language. Basically, the Israeli government gave the "Palestinians" every opportunity to make something of themselves, and they blew it. Now, Israel is answering an act of war and six months of aggressive posturing by Hamas with just what Hamas has acted like it wanted: a war. In a matter of hours, they could have turned Gaza into a smoking crater; instead, they showed restraint, merely demonstrating to the Gazans how impotent they are as a nation. With a mere iota of their military capacity, Israel eliminated electricity, water, and free movement throughout the entirety of Gaza; Hamas could still alleviate a massive humanitarian crisis that they essentially brought upon themselves by simply forcing the release of Corporal Gilad Shalit.
For Israel's part, their response to the kidnapping of one soldier, particularly given their previous history of prisoner exchanges with Hamas and Hezbollah, surprised even me. (For the record, when the 2004 prisoner exchange took place, Sheikh Ahmed "Saruman" Yassin was overjoyed, saying the trade should be answered with more kidnappings and killings of Israeli soldiers.) Now, the gloves are obviously off; Israel is showing Hamas that it must cooperate, and that it must achieve control over both Hamas and non-Hamas militants, or else it will suffer consequences such as those that Gazans have been suffering for two weeks now. Corporal Gilad Shalit's kidnapping has forced Israel to teach the "Palestinian" Authority and Hamas a lesson; and although I was surprised initially by the Israeli response, further consideration has led me to understand that, from the Israeli perspective, this is essentially their most logical option.
For a non-Fly perspective on this issue, check out Wikipedia's article or the BBC's "In-Depth" coverage; be advised that both sources are likely to be "neutral", which is to say, left-leaning.
Of course, it couldn't just stay that simple. On Tuesday, Hezbollah guerillas launched an attack into Israel, kidnapping two Israeli soldiers and killing eight others. Israel launched immediate attacks in southern Lebanon against Hezbollah positions, as well as further north against the country's only major airport in Beirut, and against Lebanese air bases further north. The Israelis have, for all intents and purposes, crippled Lebanese aviation capacity; in addition, Israel has imposed a naval blockade and launched additional air strikes against Lebanon's primary highway.
Like the Hamas government in Gaza, the Lebanese government has denied any involvement with the kidnappings and attacks; however, the historical and political situation in Lebanon is a bit more complicated than the one in Gaza.
Hezbollah has continued rocket attacks into Israel, hitting the Israeli port city of Haifa with dozens of Katyusha artillery rockets; according to a commentator on the Hugh Hewitt show this afternoon, Hezbollah would have received such rockets from Iran. Basically, since Hezbollah is the Lebanese arm of the Iranian mullahs, and since the rockets being used against Israel are supplied by Iran, these acts of war by Hezbollah are de facto acts of war by Iran. A Syrian connection is also suspected, and both the Israelis and President Bush have condemned the Iranian and Syrian connections to the Lebanese attacks. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, well known for his diplomatic and even-handed approach to international politics, released a statement saying that an attack on Syria by Israel represented an attack on the entire Islamic world. (Clearly, Arabs and Persians are now bosom buddies.)
Now, for one reason or another, the Saudi government has condemned the attacks and kidnappings by Lebanon; one would expect them to merely remain silent on the issue, so siding against Hezbollah (which is as close to siding with Israel as we could hope from the Saudis) is uncharacteristic. It's likely that the Saudis, as usual, have their own interests in mind, but it's still important to note.
Again, Israel has little choice; the Hezbollah attack and kidnappings are at least a reaction, and at most connected to, the abduction of Corporal Shalit. Israel can not answer a "Palestinian" abduction of one of their soldiers and one of their settlers with a major offensive, and then treat a similar Lebanese action with restraint. The Israelis have a right to exist, their only option is decisive military action; diplomacy with Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, and the current Iranian regime is absolutely worthless. Israel is surrounded on all sides by neighbors who either want nothing to do with her, or want to wipe her and her people off the face of the earth.
The political situation is a tough one. Terrorist organizations from the IRA to Hamas have a habit of employing two wings: a political wing, and a militant wing. The Irish Republican Army, in its various forms, was tied to the political party known as Sinn Fein; their objectives were the same, while their approaches were different, but both approaches were coordinated by the same leadership. Hamas and Hezbollah are different only in that their wings don't have different names. Through a combination of "liberating" southern Lebanon and continuing cross-border attacks against Israel, and providing basic welfare to various Lebanese constituents, Hezbollah has been able to take political control of the Lebanese government. In the same way, Hamas gained near-total control of the "Palestinian" Authority through attacks on Israel and provision of basic welfare services to select "Palestinians". As a result, the militant/terrorist arm of the organization is given free agency to attack Israel, while the political wing ostensibly receives the privilege of plausible deniability. This situation is not fundamentally different from the Ku Klux Klan winning the White House and majorities in both houses of Congress, its militant wing forming lynch mobs, and the so-called "political" wing disavowing all knowledge of said actions. As far as the international community is concerned, this should be completely unacceptable. Of course, political considerations would prevent groups like Hamas and Hezbollah from negotiating with or compromising with Israel; from the "Palestinian" point of view, this would be just about equivalent to President Bush having been elected on a platform of having continually pursued al Qaeda, and then turning around and signing a peace treaty with Usama bin Laden. Basically, the situation is very precarious.
And as cynical as this will sound, the bottom line for most Americans is that fuel prices are going to go up. Between this and the worsening nuclear crisis, Iran's the real loose cannon (as if that's a surprise), but there's not much that can be done.
For more information, check out the Wikipedia article on the subject.
Be informed, ladies and gentlemen. Be aware, and be informed.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home