How dare anyone in the world including the US, Germany and Great
Britain lecture to Israel on “disproportionate deterrence”? Did not the
US via Harry Truman release atomic bombs over the Japanese cities of
Nagasaki and Hiroshima killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in one
stroke with generations suffering the severe mental and physical
consequences ever since?
Did not Britain and the US level the German cities of
Cologne, Berlin, Dresden, Stuttgart, Hamburg killing tens of thousands
of people indiscriminately? Did not Germany attempt to level London
with blanketed bombing at the onset of WW II?
http://israel-commentary.org/?p=5141
How is that suddenly Israel, when the Jews finally have power of
their own and is uses that power with maddening discretion so as not to
kill innocent people, the hypocrites and Jew Haters of the world
suddenly get on their phony humanitarian soap box relative to
“disproportionate response.” Does it take any imagination to visualize
what would happen to Israel if the Arabs had anywhere near Israeli
military power?
jsk
Only disproportionate deterrence will offset Hamas Terror
by Isi Leibler
The Jewish state was created to overcome powerlessness and provide a haven for Jews – not to have them cringing in shelters.
There had previously been considerable criticism of the government for
its failure to adequately respond to the ongoing toll inflicted on over a
million Israeli citizens obliged to endure thousands of missiles
launched against them at the whim of a loathsome neighboring terrorist
state. We had tired of hearing successive Israeli leaders repeatedly
expressing empty threats and chanting the mantra “this is intolerable
and unacceptable and must stop”.
Hamas is no longer a terrorist faction. It is in every respect an
independent state the majority of whose citizens enthusiastically
support the terrorist initiatives and missile launches initiated by its
evil leaders committed to our annihilation.
The situation deteriorated with the advent to power in Egypt of the
Moslem Brotherhood, the creators of Hamas. Since then, the Egyptian
authorities stood by as Hamas accumulated vast quantities of
sophisticated missiles and other lethal weapons including guided
antitank missiles and shoulder mounted antiaircraft weapons from Iran,
Libya, Sudan and other states.
That explains why despite awareness that Operation Amud Annan –
“Pillar of Defense” may escalate into full-scale war, all sections of
Israeli society fervently support the IDF operation. It is also
gratifying that Jews throughout the world are actively demonstrating
solidarity with Israel.
Hamas was emboldened into testing our resolve, believing that Israel
would be fearful of confronting the new Egyptian regime and also
encouraged by the active support from the Turkish government and the
recent visit to Gaza of the emir of Qatar who contributed $400 million
to their coffers.
Israel was indeed sensitive to these issues as well as the effect of a
military conflict diverting attention from Iran – especially now as it
proceeds with its uranium enrichment. There was also concern at the
civil war in Syria and the dramatic rise of Islamic extremism throughout
the region. To top it off there were inhibitions because of the US
presidential elections.
Nevertheless, Hamas miscalculated. By intensifying the bombardment of
the South, it obliged the state of Israel to respond harshly or forfeit
any modicum of deterrence.
The initial outcome was good. The IDF had clearly learned from the
lessons of previous wars; intelligence was impeccable; action was
systematic and rational with to date, minimal civilian casualties.
It must be stressed that the targeted killings of terrorist leaders
are not acts of revenge or a display of showmanship. They are logical
military actions which can be rationally justified in moral terms. The
killing of Al Ja’abari, regarded as the Palestinian counterpart of Bin
Laden, is a prime example. Unlike US drone attacks on Al Qaeda and the
Taliban, the IDF succeeded in avoiding collateral casualties.
The global response from most Western countries which followed
President Obama’s lead condemning the rocket attacks and endorsing
Israel’s right to self-defense, was until now satisfactory, despite the
usual calls for restraint and for Israel to act in a “proportionate”
manner.
But these are early days. Initially, we are unlikely to face problems
at the UN Security Council. However, the General Assembly and UN Human
Rights Council, controlled by Islamic and other anti-Israeli coalitions,
have consistently viewed Israel as the aggressor and never the victim.
Neither of these bodies has even once condemned the Hamas missile
attacks and there is little doubt that they and NGO bodies such as
Amnesty International will blame Israel exclusively for reigniting the
armed conflict.
In addition, whilst the IDF is taking extraordinary precautions to
minimize civilian casualties, there will invariably, as in any military
conflict, be mishaps — especially in Gaza where Hamas ruthlessly employ
human shields by locating armaments and launching missiles in civilian
residential areas. In addition, our enemies have already circulated
bogus images of Palestinian civilian casualties, highlighting infants
allegedly killed by Israel. As in the past, these gruesome images will
be exploited to pressure Israel to back down.
And whilst the Iron Dome anti-rocket shield has been highly
successful in largely protecting the major Israeli cities, there have
already been tragic casualties and regrettably more are likely if
hostilities continue to escalate and impact on the home front.
Clearly, the IDF would prefer to limit the conflict to pinpointed
aerial strikes. However, if Hamas continue raining rockets against
Israeli civilians, Israel will be forced into a ground offensive in
which greater casualties are inevitable.
The main challenge for the government is to devise an end strategy to
achieve long term deterrence as well as a strategy to be implemented
instantly should Hamas become sufficiently re-emboldened to recommence
missile launches.
Israel has no desire to return to the era of the tit-for-tat war of
attrition whereby we respond to missile launches by bombing rocket
launching sites, and empty buildings.
Although some of our allies are already urging us not to respond
“disproportionately,” such a concept has absolutely no relevance to the
threat facing Israel. Whilst still seeking to minimize civilian
casualties, we must create genuine deterrence in order to avoid future
full-scale conflicts of ever increasing magnitude. In fact, a
disproportionate response to aggression is fully consistent with
international law in which the prime obligation of the state is to
protect its civilians. Those seeking to deny us this basic right are
maliciously hypocritical.
The issue of Israel continuing to provide Hamas-controlled Gaza with
services is another bizarre anomaly. It is one thing to be sensitive to
the humanitarian needs of civilian noncombatants, but to continue
providing electricity and other utilities to a neighboring state raining
missiles against us is utterly perverse. If the lights went out
automatically every time a rocket was dispatched, the inconvenienced
Gaza residents might even influence their leaders to hesitate before
launching missiles.
An intensive government campaign must be implemented to counter the
impact of successive years of the world having become conditioned to
regarding Israel under missile attacks as a normative way of life. We
must highlight the fact that such attacks against civilians are
unequivocally war crimes. Would the US respond “proportionately” if 50
million Americans were under missile attack from Mexico or Canada for a
decade? Or if France faced such bombardment from Belgium or Luxembourg?
No other state in the world would tolerate this and we must demonstrate
that a policy of “restraint,” far from reflecting strength, displays
weakness and emboldens our evil neighbors to intensify their attacks.
We must recognize that in future conflicts, the terrorists will
continue accumulating more effective and lethal weapons to employ
against us. We must therefore endeavor to resist calls for a cease-fire
until such time as Hamas, in conjunction with the Egyptians, undertake
to cease their aggression. There must be a clear understanding that any
breach would result in harsh “disproportionate” Israeli responses
including the targeted killings of those responsible for initiating
attacks. In the absence of such an agreement an enforced cease fire will
be perceived as a major victory for Hamas and our citizens will simply
return to the life of terror they endured since the first Kassams were
launched a decade ago.
No comments:
Post a Comment