Gaza

by publius

I hesitate wading into this, but recent events in Gaza – both outgoing and incoming attacks – are disturbing and raise important human rights concerns. To be clear, I reject (denounce, condemn, etc.) firing rockets into civilian areas – that’s got to stop. But that said, today’s Post editorial seems to be willfully ignoring Israel’s role in this:

[Leaders wrongly assumed that] Hamas could be bottled up and ignored in the Gaza Strip while a deal for a Palestinian state was worked out. In fact, since the Annapolis conference three months ago, Hamas has repeatedly proved that it can disrupt the process and command the world's attention by firing rockets at Israeli cities and drawing the inevitable military response. That the resulting Palestinian casualties are heavy, and usually include civilians, doesn't trouble the Islamists.

Well, “bottled up and ignored” is one way of putting it. Another is that Israel is essentially reoccupying Gaza – and in a particularly brutal way. Cutting off 1.5 million people from food, water, and medicine isn’t exactly “ignoring” Gaza. Plus, Israel (for understandable reasons) is not negotiating with Hamas. Maybe the “snub, starve, and bomb” strategy will work this time, but it hasn’t exactly had a good record.

Instead, Israel seems to be – once again – locking itself into a chain of events that will ultimately lead to a larger military invasion. That, in turn, will accomplish the goals of Hamas guerrillas and further undermine the long-term strategic stability of Israel. (See also Lebanon).

To be clear, I think everyone shares the same goal – the security of both Israel and the Palestinians (not just existence, but freedom from fear, want, etc.). The issue is one of means. I think Israel’s strategy is not only a humanitarian disaster, but undermines everyone’s shared goals. And, frankly, the Hamas “bomb the innocent” strategy also undermines their long-term goal.

It’s a mess, but one with no bloodless hands. Understanding the "dilemma" requires looking at culpability on all sides.

Comments

[jdog]

Everyone does not have the same goal. Hamas wants the land that Israel holds. The question has been whether enough Palestinians would forgo large parts of that land (assuming that it is impossible to get rid of Israel). Hamas represents a faction that does not.

[Daniel S. Goldberg]

Nice to see a little more balance in this post than some of your more strident (and, IMO, uninformed) efforts on LF.

(formerly TP)

[KCinDC]

everyone shares the same goal -- the security of both Israel and the Palestinians

Really? What happened to all the people that support only one or the other of those two goals?

[OCSteve]

One of my goals in blogistan is to recognize which threads to steer well clear of. This one has a flashing red light, a large skull and crossbones sign, and an audible alarm screaming “Danger, Will Robinson” at 150dB. So thanks for the warning anyway. ;)

[Stuart]

Publius, even if we grant your premises, you still have to come up with a suggested alternative. The problem is that Israel tried all the alternatives already. They negotiated with a known terrorist in Oslo. They pulled back unilaterally in South Lebanon and Gaza. They uprooted settlements in Gaza and the northern West Bank. None of those led to peace - quite the contrary, they aggravated the problem. Short of self-immolation, there is no approach that hasn't been tried yet. I see no evidence that any of those has worked, the main reason being that the Palestinians' leaders aren't interested in peace, they're interested in victory - and they're very patient.

Don't attribute to them your Western view of the dispute.

[Jay Jerome]

publius: "The issue is one of means. I think Israel’s strategy is not only a humanitarian disaster, but undermines everyone’s shared goals. And, frankly, the Hamas “bomb the innocent” strategy also undermines their long-term goal."

Here, for your edification, publius, are the Hamas stated 'long-term' goals for the Jews (in Israel and elsewhere):

From the Hamas Covenant 1988

They [the Jews]are smitten with vileness wheresoever they are found; unless they obtain security by entering into a treaty with Allah, and a treaty with men; and they draw on themselves indignation from Allah, and they are afflicted with poverty. This they suffer, because they disbelieved the signs of Allah, and slew the prophets unjustly; this, because they were rebellious, and transgressed." (Al-Imran - verses 109-111).

Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory).

That's their statement of purpose. And if you think they're ever going to negotiate in good faith with the Jews, you're living in a fantasy world. As long as Hamas exists, the Israelis will have to keep their backs to the wall and their fingers on the trigger.

[stickler]

"Hamas", even if you accept their awful rhetoric from twenty years ago at face value, is not the same thing as "the Palestinian people."

Israel's current policy toward the Palestinians in Gaza does precisely nothing to weaken Hamas. Collective punishment is not only a crime, it is a mistake.

[a-train]

I hesitate wading into this ...

I think that introduction says a lot about American discourse re: Israel and Palestine. If you are even going to consider mentioning something negative about Israel's conduct or policies, you'd better first "reject and denounce" Palestinians.

I wonder if people who complain about what is written from the Palestinian view ever complain (or even think about complaining) about one sided posts and articles when they are pro-Israel?

Settlements keep expanding and (surprise) rockets keep getting fired both ways. I wish there was a way to have no part in funding this slaughter.

BTW, Publius did you see this in Vanity Fair:

After failing to anticipate Hamas’s victory over Fatah in the 2006 Palestinian election, the White House cooked up yet another scandalously covert and self-defeating Middle East debacle: part Iran-contra, part Bay of Pigs. With confidential documents, corroborated by outraged former and current U.S. officials, David Rose reveals how President Bush, Condoleezza Rice, and Deputy National-Security Adviser Elliott Abrams backed an armed force under Fatah strongman Muhammad Dahlan, touching off a bloody civil war in Gaza and leaving Hamas stronger than ever.

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804

[anon]

The problem is that Israel tried all the alternatives already.

This is the opposite of truth.

[Sebastian]

"To be clear, I reject (denounce, condemn, etc.) firing rockets into civilian areas – that’s got to stop."

Why does that have to stop? Are you saying that purely as a theoretical moral proposition? What will be the consequences if it does not stop?

"To be clear, I think everyone shares the same goal – the security of both Israel and the Palestinians (not just existence, but freedom from fear, want, etc.). "

Why in the world would you think that everyone shares the same goal?

Seriously, what makes you think that the goal you outline for BOTH Israel and Palestinians is a shared goal? From where I stand the whole problem is that the goal you outline is not shared by at least one and perhaps two or more major parties to the problem. At a minimum, I'm almost certain that Hamas doesn't look like it shares that goal for Israel. I strongly suspect that the PLO doesn't share that goal for Israel. And depending on the year, I'm not even sure the Israeli government shares that goal for Palestinians. So who are you talking about?

[publius]

stuart - fair point, but I think things are more complicated. yes, i think arafat blew something very big in 2000 - no argument there. but the other instances are more ambiguous. yes, israel pulled out of lebanon (good), but not before committing the classic counter-insurency blunder of disproportionate attacks (bad). similarly, israel pulled out of gaza (good), but currently keep it under barricades (bad).

i guess my bigger concern is that there's almost an infinite regression of blame. one side can always point to something else in the past. yet, people (on both sides) tend to ignore the blame on their respective sides

and agian, i really don't want this to turn into a nasty thread. but it just bothers me to see that many people without basic supplies. particularly as a new father, i try to imagine what it would be like if my baby didn't have food, water, and medicine. it seems like these tactics could be replaced with better ones.

[publius]

seb - i meant commenting parties here (in america/this blog) do. i'm sure some hamas people want israel gone, just like some israelis want the palestinians gone.

[Brett Bellmore]

""Hamas", even if you accept their awful rhetoric from twenty years ago at face value, is not the same thing as "the Palestinian people.""

I'm not clear why the Israelis should care, so long as the Palestinian people are either unable, or unwilling, (Hamas does win elections, after all.) to stop Hamas from launching attacks on Israel from Palestinian territory.

[Donald Johnson]

"yes, i think arafat blew something very big in 2000 " Arafat arguably blew something in early 2001. Shlomo Ben Ami, who is not exactly an Arafat fan, blames Arafat at Taba. The Camp David offer he agrees was not a good one.

link

I've decided to ignore all plaintive complaints about how hard the Israelis have tried to obtain peace. Yeah, right. There's plenty of blame on both sides, and anyone who says otherwise--well, nevermind.

[Gary Farber]

"I've decided to ignore all plaintive complaints about how hard the Israelis have tried to obtain peace."

Responding only to the nasty or arrogant ones, instead, may not be the best choice. Is plaintiveness really worse? And will the pathetic complaints, or the tragically sad complaints, be more fun to respond to than the plaintive ones?

It's understandable that you'd prefer to respond to the hilarious, and insightful complaints, but with so many adjectives left to describe all the other complaints you won't be ignoring, I fear you'll be so busy that the deep and moving complaints may be lost in the shuffle with the merely whimsical, and the truly ridiculous, complaints.

Perhaps you might reconsider this stance, Donald, and also ignore other types of complaints, such as inane complaints, such as this one.

;-)

Besides, things won't really get moving until the accusations of intended genocide start gettting flung around. And the moral righteousness. We can't start until we have a sufficient amount of combined and antagonist moral righteousness on everyone's side, to denounce all the being wrong on the internet that might otherwise take place.

I'll help: the real problem with the Palestinian-Israeli situation is that there's too much gun control, and not enough late-term abortion taking place in the territories the parties control; this is clearly due to the prevalence of Windows OS, which should be immediately replaced with Macs and Linux. Also, Gaza should immediately begin manufacturing HD DVD players, in keeping with the tradition of always choosing an option too late. Blu-Ray shall never be accepted, and Jersualem is eternally ours, not the other side's! If there are not to be two types of high-density DVDs, then Jerusalem cannot be divided either!

What I want to know is how many superdelegates does Ismail Haniyeh hold pledges from?

Discuss.

[Donald Johnson]

I'm not sure that bringing the Windows/Mac conflict into this is going to improve the prospects of peace, not in the Middle East, but simply in this thread. All the more reason for me to limit myself to providing an occasional link and fuming for a sentence or two, and then hitting the post button.

[Bill]

If we believe in democracy, and the Palestinian electorate overwhelmingly chooses a leader who openly calls for the destruction of the Jews, who among them is innocent? Mr. Bush?

I think it’s time to allow Saudi Arabia, with all of our petro-dollars, to fund Gazan living expenses. Israel already donated the land.

[Jesurgislac]

Brett: I'm not clear why the Israelis should care, so long as the Palestinian people are either unable, or unwilling, (Hamas does win elections, after all.) to stop Hamas from launching attacks on Israel from Palestinian territory.

If you're of the opinion that Bush won the last two elections, and the American people are unable/unwilling to stop Bush from launching attacks on Iraq, does that mean you think Iraqis ought to blame all Americans, without any distinction, for the million-plus Iraqi deaths that resulted?

[russell]

this is clearly due to the prevalence of Windows OS

Vista delendo est!

That is all.

Thanks -

[Gary Farber]

"If we believe in democracy, and the Palestinian electorate overwhelmingly chooses a leader who openly calls for the destruction of the Jews, who among them is innocent?"

The ones who disagree, of course. "Collective guilt" is a concept disavowed and legally forbidden by the Fourth Geneva Convention:

[...] Article 33

No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Similarly, following WWII, we didn't put all the Germans and Japanese and others to death, but only those convicted in courts of law of specific war crimes.

Hope this helps!

[Brett Bellmore]

"If you're of the opinion that Bush won the last two elections, and the American people are unable/unwilling to stop Bush from launching attacks on Iraq, does that mean you think Iraqis ought to blame all Americans, without any distinction, for the million-plus Iraqi deaths that resulted?"

Aside from the moral idiocy of denying the insurgents' moral agency, (Surely they can be blamed for their own choices, they're not automatons.)and ignoring for the moment that I said "care", not "blame", yeah, sure, why not? In a nation at war there are only the complicit, and innocent shields. Is a country under attack supposed to allow itself to be targeted without consequence just because the former hide behind the latter?

If the Palestinians don't want to suffer for the sins of Hamas, they could start by not electing them, and then do something to stop them.

[Francis]

Just as a matter of curiosity, looking forward and not back.

Is Gaza a viable state or substate economically? Even assuming that the doves of peace were flying over both Gaza and Israel, is it technically feasible to establish a second-world infrastructure and economy?

Agriculture? Given the existing population density and water disputes, that doesn't seem a good choice.

Textiles? Lots of competition worldwide, unless other Arab states create trade barriers with, frex, Vietnam, and give trade advantages to Gaza.

My ignorance is vast and wide. But America helped rebuild Germany in 1945. What would a Marshall Plan for Gaza look like?

[Nell]

Does anyone have an estimate, with sources, of the number of Israeli deaths and injuries from Palestinian rocketing of Sderot and other Negev communities?

Last May, I tried to come up with one by searching the Israeli press online. My results are in my next comment below.

The occasion for my doing so was discussion in comments on a post on my blog about the Bush administration policy of backing Dahlan's faction of Fatah in a dirty war against Hamas (the subject of the recent David Rose article that a-train mentionedI encourage everyone interested in informed comment on the situation in Gaza to read).

At that time, the death toll since the beginning of 2004 appeared to be twelve Israelis (and three Palestinians killed by a rocket aimed at Israel that fell inside Gaza). Injuries are probably higher, and there is the constant fear created by the fact that the rockets could come at any time.

This is a crime -- indiscriminate attacks that create terror in the whole population.

But it is not the only crime. In the same period, the Israeli government killed hundreds of Palestinians. After the official end of the occupation, Israeli authorities enforced total closure of Gaza for almost 40% of the year. That intensified this year, along with the economic blockade and refusal to remit taxes collected.

The rocketing from Gaza into Israel has continued off and on since then, and I haven't updated the casualty total. I'd be grateful for data fitting into the format below.

[trilobite]

i'm sure some hamas people want israel gone, just like some israelis want the palestinians gone.

Although literally true ("some" includes "all"), this statement is pallid to the point of being misleading. Jay already quoted the Hamas Party's official position. But I'm not even sure that any individual Hamas member has gone on record as saying that Israel's continued existence is acceptable. Anybody happen to know?

Please note that "member" is not the same as "voter." Many more people voted for Hamas, or against Fatah, than are members of Hamas. If by "Hamas people" you meant, people who once voted for Hamas, then the statement is fine.

On the general subject, I agree with Stuart. It's not about blame, it's about what can work, and negotiating with the Palestinians does not seem to work. I don't claim that Israel treated the PA with perfect good faith or good will after Oslo, far from it, but I think they came about as close as you're going to get in the real world when vital national interests are so sharply opposed. Had the Palestinians as a collective been ready and willing to make peace, it could have happened despite Israel's lapses. They weren't, it didn't, and I'm starting to believe it never will. I'd like a solution, but I don't have one.

[Perry]

>>"To be clear, I reject (denounce, condemn,
>>etc.) firing rockets into civilian areas –
>>that’s got to stop."

>Why does that have to stop? Are you saying
>that purely as a theoretical moral
>proposition? What will be the consequences if
>it does not stop?

Well said Sebastian.

It seems really really hard to get people to answer those questions.

[Brett Bellmore]

"But it is not the only crime. In the same period, the Israeli government killed hundreds of Palestinians."

Launching a war of agression: Evil.

Continuing a war of agression in the face of a 10-1 kill ratio against you: Damn stupid.

[Nell]

Below are the cites for casualties I was able to find. Not all had links; some were quotes or clips of Israeli news stories without a link. The asterisks refer to instances where I found press documentation for a wikipedia article on Israeli casualties from rocket attacks from Gaza.

**June 28, 2004 - killed toddler Afik Zahavi and grandfather Mordechai Yosepov.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=459320

**Sept 29, 2004 - two children, 2 and 4, killed (2 year old Dorit Aniso and 4 year old Yuval Abele); 25 wounded

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=483598

**Jan 15, 2005 - 17 year old Ayala (formerly Ella) Abukasis, from the Israeli town of Sderot, died from shrapnel wounds 6 days later

href="http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=530502

April 7, 2005 - no damage; news significance is first time in several months, first time since ceasefire

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=562460
The area was the frequent target of Qassam fire from the Gaza Strip during more than four years of violence.
In March, Abbas secured an agreement from the militant groups to abide by a conditional truce until the end of 2005.

June 7, 2005 - {three killed} Salah Ayash Imran, 57, Muhammed Mahmoud Jaroun, and Bi Shude, 46, were killed, and five other workers were wounded, when a Qassam rocket hit a packing shed in Ganei Tal, in the Gaza Strip. The Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the attack. [In Gaza Palestinian victims, which explains discrepancy with counts only of Israeli deaths.]

**July 14, 2005 - {one killed} Dana Golcowicz[Glakowitz?], 22 kibbutz north of Gaza some stories say 'mortar', others rocket. Hamas claimed responsibility

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=600721
On Friday afternoon, 22-year-old Dana Glakowitz of Netiv Ha'asara, who was killed a day earlier by a mortar shell in the moshav, was buried in Kibbutz Brur Hayil. [NBL: focus on story is planned IDF response to rockets and shelling]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=600503
an Israeli woman was killed when a Qassam rocket slammed into her home on Moshav Netiv Ha'asara north of the Strip

February 5, 2006 - baby, mother, father in trailer wounded

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=678867

September 17, 2006 - one wounded, two treated for shock; farm, with damage to chickens and farm equipment

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/763546.html

July 5, 2006 - Ashkelon first time, furthest north ever; Israel plans to respond with heavy bombing (high school struck, no wounded; Hamas resp.)

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=734675

September 27, 2006 - IDF woman soldier wounded, city center hit, electrical power knocked out

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/767406.html

October 21, 2006 - seven rockets, no significant damage (anti-tunnel, anti-smuggling IDF activity, lots of targeted killings in Gaza over last three months)

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/777252.html

October 29, 2006 - two rockets, no damage; rallies outside Peretz' house

**November 16, 2006 - woman killed, a man and a boy wounded
"Peretz also decided against resuming artillery fire on Gaza, which was stopped after errant shells killed 19 civilians in Beit Hanun last week."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/788352.html

November 20, 2006 - politicians decry businessman Gaydamak's evacuation vacation as 'stunt'
"Since 2001, Seven people have been killed in 1,487 Qassam rocket strikes in Israel." {also other good stats}

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/789862.html

**November 22, 2006 - Louise Arbor visit, poultry plant worker killed, fire at plant (response to Israeli 'targeted killing')

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/790450.html

November 23, 2006 - more IJ rockets, security cabinet meets to decide how to respond

[Nov 25 ceasefire in Gaza, but IDF ops continue in West Bank]

December 15, 2006 - rockets, damage, no casualties (apparent response to assassination of al-Aqsa leader in Nablus by Is special forces)

December 25, 2006 - more IJ and PRC rockets in context of Abbas-Olmert talks

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/805295.html

**?{see Jan 30, 2007}December 26, 2006 - two 14-year-olds hurt, one critically; 30 rockets in that week, 53 total since ceasefire (Islamic Jihad claims this attack)

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/805807.html
Islamic Jihad explicitly claims effort to undermine ceasefire; IDF resumes responding to attacks

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/806084.html

January 22, 2007 - Ashkelon, Sderot no damage IJ takes responsibility
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/816480.html

**?January 30, 2007 - those teens died? [cannot find confirmation]
low moment but Olmert says they will maintain ceasefire

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/819151.html
attacks from the Gaza Strip, and particularly the number of Qassam rockets fired against Israel, have been on the decline in recent weeks.
Several weeks ago, Olmert authorized the IDF to strike at Qassam rocket crews caught on their way to launch an attack. These orders came in response to **?the deaths of two teenagers in Sderot as a result of a rocket attack**?. However, carrying out these orders has been nearly impossible, because of the difficulty in locating Qassam rocket crews.
The continued infighting between Fatah and Hamas has also contributed to diverting the attention of Palestinian militants away from Israel, and, conversely, Israel is not currently interested in intervening in the internecine warfare in Gaza.

February 3, 2007 - Bloomberg visit to Sderot

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/821296.html [AP story]
Although the rockets are crude and rarely cause casualties, they have killed nine people since 2001.
{eight recorded to this point in stories noted here. 'People' apparently excludes Palestinians.}

April 8, 2007 - damage to factory, Abbas warning, Peretz

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/846282.html
On Monday, Defense Minister Amir Peretz authorized the army to carry out limited operations just inside Gaza against militants, despite a cease-fire agreement reached between Israel and the Palestinians in November.
Tensions are running high in Gaza despite the formation of a unity government on March 17 between the ruling Hamas movement and President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah faction.

More on IDF response
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=856795

April 24, 2007 - (Hamas takes responsibility, first time since ceasefire; Abbas intercedes, asks for restraint)
The attack Tuesday morning is the first time in five months that the military wing of Hamas has claimed responsibility for a Qassam attack on Israel. The group said the strikes were revenge for IDF operations over the weekend, in which nine Palestinians were killed. {IDF incursion right after Riyadh restart of Arab proposal.}

May 6, 2007 - latest round begins; two wounded (Islamic Jihad takes responsibility)

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/856150.html

May 16, 2007 - 21 rockets, 8 on Sderot; four wounded (Hamas??)

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=859908

**May 21, 2007 - Shir-El Feldman [Friedman?] killed in Sderot, two others wounded

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6678295.stm

May 26, 2007 - three lightly injured Sderot, two rockets, one hits house (Hamas claims responsibility)

http://www.pr-inside.com/rocket-lands-in-israeli-town-of-r135263.htm [AP story]
http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=819132007

**May 26, 2007 - one man Oshri Oz, 35, killed Sderot, rocket explosion wounds with shrapnel, causes his car to careen into wall (Hamas claims, promotes launcher)

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/863335.html

----
Rocket attacks are real, damaging, and criminal. The Israeli response has been, in my view, wildly disproportionate and also criminal.

U.S. involvement goes beyond massive economic and political support for the government of Israel regardless of the nature of its actions toward Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. The current ruling regime promoted one side in the Palestinian election, and when that side didn't win, funded a dirty war designed to destroy the government of Gaza.

Any U.S. citizen who holds the Palestinians collectively responsible for rocketing Sderot and surrounding areas must also hold his/her fellow citizens collectively responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Palestinians at the hands of the IDF and Dahlan's death squads. I don't think that's a useful way to think about the issue, and certainly it's not useful at finding a way back from the brink.

[Gary Farber]

First, let me say that my not responding to a point or comment in this or any other thread doesn't constitute agreement with it.

Having said that: "But I'm not even sure that any individual Hamas member has gone on record as saying that Israel's continued existence is acceptable. Anybody happen to know?"

2006:

The Hamas movement is ready to recognize agreements signed with Israel, and in fact recognize Israel, but only within the '67 borders, senior Hamas member Khaled Suleiman said Wednesday.

According to Suleiman, the movement will be ready to accept a Palestinian state inside the '67 borders and will not operate to thwart diplomatic negotiations held by Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

In a Ramallah conference, the Hamas faction spokesman in the Palestinian Legislative Council said that "the Palestinian government is unauthorized according to the Palestinian constitution to negotiate with Israel, but does not oppose a possibility that Abbas will do so."

"All the government can do is reach a calm, and we, Hamas, are committed to a calm up to this moment," he added.

Suleiman noted, however, that his government will not arrest any Palestinian gunmen under any condition. He added that this was unacceptable as long as Israel continues its targeted killings and enters Palestinian towns and communities.

Referring to the international Quartet's demands of the Hamas-led government to recognize agreements signed by the PA with Israel, Suleiman said that "these agreements are a reality which we view as such, and therefore I see no problem."

Yasser Abed Rabbo:

[...] Yasser Abed Rabbo, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organisation's executive committee and a lead negotiator on the prisoners' document, said Hamas had agreed to sections which call for a negotiated and final agreement with Israel to establish a Palestinian state on the territories occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem.

"Hamas is prepared to accept those parts of the document because they think it is a way to get rid of a lot of its problems with the international community. That's why it will accept all the document eventually," he said.

Khaled Meshal has a more complicated position:

[...] KM: I think the Western world has understood by now that Hamas will never recognize Israel. How can I recognize the one who occupies my land? It is illogical that it is demanded of Hamas to recognize Israel. I am the victim. I am the man who is not free. I am the man living in the Diaspora away from my land. Israel has got a kind of a nation that was imposed as a fait accompli by the United Nations. We don't have a nation. More than half of the Palestinian people are living in the Diaspora, mostly in camps, and they can't go home. Because of Israel they can't go home – and we should recognize Israel? Who is actually in the wrong, us or Israel?

RR: But the two-state theory which the Americans are promoting envisages a Palestinian state next to an Israeli state. Is this also absolutely unacceptable for Hamas?

KM: No. No. Let me say that the Hamas movement will only establish a Palestinian state within the borders of 1967; that includes East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Up till now, Israel does not recognize this right for us. All the Palestinians are demanding is this right. But Israel keeps violating Palestinian rights, and the West is unwilling to force Israel to recognize the Palestinian rights.

[...]

RR: Have I understood you correctly that you would be prepared to negotiate with Israel and accept it within its borders of 1967, before it started its wars of aggression, stealing Palestinian land?

KM: Good, that has been made clear.

[...]

Because of many factors, we now accept to build a Palestinian state within the borders of 1967. But that doesn't mean that we recognize Israel. But we are prepared to make a long-term truce with Israel. Accepting the status of Israel without recognizing it.

RR: But no recognition? Doesn't that mean continued tensions and war?

KM: No. There are plenty of examples where no recognition does not mean war. China and Taiwan, for example, have not recognized each other, but they trade and cooperate with each other. By withholding a formal recognition, we just don't want to give Israel the legitimacy for having taken our land in the first place.

Make of that what you will.

I believe there's potentially room for progress that should be explored by unconditional negotiations with Hamas, who genuinely represent some of the Palestinian nation, but whose support by most Palestinian voters whose vote they got is, I believe, dependent upon circumstances, and a very fluid environment.

I don't think insisting that Hamas can't be negotiated with until they recognize Israel first makes sense. It's not unreasonable for recognition to be part of the negotiation process, rather than a pre-condition. If agreement can't be reached, it can't, but ruling out negotation entirely until Hamas gives up their most important card, while Hamas will continue indefinitely to hold the power to stymie any progress, and the situation will only grow slowly but inexorably worse for Israel in the longterm, isn't sensible.

Of late I keep pointing to Efraim Halevy on this.

But this latter is simply opinion, of course, whereas my primary intent was to answer the asked question to some degree.

[Nell]

Despite my not making the links 'live', my comment documenting casualties from the rocket attacks is being held for moderation.

Publius or anyone, could you facilitate its release? Thanks.

[Sebastian]

I had a stern talking to with the spam authorities, and they agreed to release your suspect for lack of evidence.

[and in a fit of pique the filter then immediately disallowed THIS comment!]

[Donald Johnson]

>>"To be clear, I reject (denounce, condemn,
>>etc.) firing rockets into civilian areas –
>>that’s got to stop."

>Why does that have to stop? Are you saying
>that purely as a theoretical moral
>proposition? What will be the consequences if
>it does not stop?

"Well said Sebastian.

It seems really really hard to get people to answer those questions."

Yeah, now for some balance, simply replace the Palestinian crimes with Israeli crimes and repeat.

[Nell]

Thanks, Sebastian.

[Phil]

>>"To be clear, I reject (denounce, condemn,
>>etc.) firing rockets into civilian areas –
>>that’s got to stop."

>Why does that have to stop? Are you saying
>that purely as a theoretical moral
>proposition? What will be the consequences if
>it does not stop?

"Well said Sebastian.

It seems really really hard to get people to answer those questions."

OK: If it doesn't stop, I think we should kill every last Palestinian.

Is that the answer you're looking for?

[Nell]

And thanks, Publius, for posting about something other than the primaries.

Can't help but note the amazing coincidence of the House FISA collapse happening at the exact same moment that otherwise aware and concerned Dems are transfixed by the election spectacle.

[Sebastian]

"Is that the answer you're looking for?"

Nope.

[Phil]

Well, then, help us all out a little, Sebastian. What do you think is the answer?

[Bill]

What is the answer?

Many of the ‘Palestinians’ moved to the area in the run-up to 1948 for political reasons. Since then I think the birthrate is somewhere around 5-6 kids per woman, mostly fed with someone else’s food. The ‘Palestinians’ could be given refuge in the surrounding Muslim countries. The oil-rich OPEC States could fund the re-settlement.

Perhaps food aid for those who are unable or unwilling to provide for their families should be tied to some China-style program to stop the unsustainable population growth. In my opinion, population controls now are more ethical than mass starvation later.

That is a humanitarian solution. That’s not in the game plan though. The ‘Palestinians’ are being used as pawns in the chess game of kill the Jews. Uppity Jews are an embarassment in the middle of Dar al-Islam.

Whatever happened to those Gazan greenhouses that people raised millions to donate, free of cost?

[Brett Bellmore]

Who says there IS an answer, (A morally acceptable one, anyway...) so long as the Palestinians aren't willing to accept the existence of Israel? The answer is that the Palestinians have to stop attacking Israel. When they do, Israel, which lacks any other motive for attacking the Palestinians, will stop, and there will be peace.

The real threat here is that the Palestinians will eventually get the capacity to do serious damage to Israel. Israel can go easy on them, (And given the disparity of forces, what we've seen IS going easy on them.) only so long as the damage remains minimal. If the threat from the Palestinians becomes existential, if Israel is faced with a choice of either the Palestinians or Israelis being obliterated, there isn't much doubt which they'll chose. They're reasonably enlightened, by the standards of the region, but martyrdom is something they won't consider for an instant.

[dutchmarbel]

What will be the consequences if
it does not stop?

The Israeli's allready answered that one, didn't they?

"The more Qassam [rocket] fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves," Matan Vilnai, Israel's deputy defence minister, told army radio.

Appearantly this is the 'small shoah', the small holocaust. At least half of the killed Palestinians civilians, about a quarter children.

There is a (pdf) report about Gaza, detailing what happened between Feb 27th and March 3d, so allready outdated. Including destroyed housing and the effects of shortages of medicine, fuel and electricity on caring for the wounded.

Yeah, the use of rockets by Palestinians is a war crime. Officially it would be a war crime even if they only used them against militairy objects because they are so low tech that they cause too much risk for civilians. But the amount of deatch they cause is about the same as the amount of death caused by refusing Palestinians to pass checkpoints when they need medical aid - which is also a war crime.

In fact, if you look at crimes commited against the other party the ones commited by the Palestinians are only a small percentage of what the Israeli's do. But even in Europe you only see a small portion of the latter and we are allready perceived as anti-Israel by most Americans, who do not realize how slanted their own media are.

[Hartmut]

I doubt that either side would stop should the other side do. On both sides there are fractions that will torpedo any attempt at peace at all costs and both side's radicals have support from entities outside the country, like certain Islamist clerics or Kristianist Armageddonistas (both with big purses and sociopathic personalities).
---
Quarantine the whole territory with a 500m high wall for a generation and let nobody in or out! Those still alive then may come to an agreement. If not, nuke the site form the orbit, it's the only way to be sure.
Maybe one could also swap population and territory with Cyprus. That way the conflict would be a bit more isolated. [/sarcasm]

[Anarch]

Continuing a war of agression in the face of a 10-1 kill ratio against you: Damn stupid.

It's working for the Iraqis...

[Phil]

It's an interesting idea to think that, despite that "10-1 kill ratio," the "real threat" is that the Palestinians might, possibly, at some future date, be able to kill a lot more Israelis.

Misguided, but interesting.