Israel's Terrible Choices in Gaza

[Shaktimaan]

In effect, three stark realities stand out, and beyond them, almost everything is shrouded by controversy:

The suffering of the people in the Gaza Strip is real and often horrifying; true, it is regularly manipulated (in full view of international cameras) so as to discredit Israel, but this does not change the fact that for over one million people, trapped in the vicious grip of the conflict--with many or even most of them unemployed or underemployed, and living near subsistence level--their basic realities are an ongoing nightmare. Given that terrorists are in control, Israel was obliged to prevent the entry of workers from Gaza, and as bills remain unpaid, supplies are dwindling.

>snip<

So is the suffering of targeted Israeli populations, which is not as quickly trumpeted in the international media, let alone on Al-Jazeera. (We do not allow cameras within range of Israeli body parts, or in the faces of people suffering from shell shock.) But nevertheless the agony runs deep, and poses a dangerous question to any leader in Israel: Have you delivered on the most basic of contracts between a government and its people, namely, doing what needs to be done to keep us alive? Sderot once had a population of 25,000 people--the real numbers are now distinctly lower--most from the peripheral groups of Israeli society: North African olim who came in the '50s and '60s, and their Russian and Central Asian counterparts a generation later. Their sense that they have been abandoned, because they matter less, is compounded by the fact that the IDF responded more vigorously when Gilad Shalit was abducted, or when Ashkelon was attacked, than when they were the main or only targets.

>snip<

Even so, it is more difficult to define the scope of the problem than to design a workable policy that will not collapse at the first challenge--or it would have been done long ago. The options are well-known. None is appealing, but the choice cannot be delayed much longer:

http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000679.htm

This subject comes up constantly here. What are Israel's options for Gaza; how to alleviate the average Palestinian civilian's suffering while protecting the average Sderot civilian? How to simultaneously fight Israel's true enemies, those not looking for a peace treaty if it means accepting Israel's legitimacy, while keeping the hope of a permanent peace treaty alive and moving the process forward? What are Israel's options, really? (answer: Nothing even remotely ideal.)

A common sight here is a demand for peace and justice, or the saying that "peace is impossible without justice." I find this concept naive considering the subject. The sad fact is that there's a trade off that's unavoidable. If you want peace then you're going to have to be willing to compromise on your idea of justice. This formula applies to both sides. It's been a common sight throughout world history, no one should be surprised by it. Just be aware that when you state, "No peace without justice!" what you are realistically implying is "No peace!"

[Vegasaurus]

1. I agree with this completely

If people are interested in any sort of peace, in any of our lifetimes, there will be compromise.

There may not be the "justice" that the Palestinians demand. In fact, I am sure there won't be. But there could be peace.

[Shaktimaan]

2. Yup. And I think it goes both ways.

No, even in the best case scenario the Palestinians won't be able to get full justice to compensate for all the ways they've been wronged. Being unwilling to accept anything less than "complete justice" is a setup for either failure or never-ending conflict.

And while it's undoubtedly cold comfort for those individuals who have lost a great deal, if there is one truly universal aspect of "universal justice" it is that justice itself is universally unattainable. It isn't just denied to the Palestinians. Even the "winners" in this situation, the Jews, have no hope of attaining any semblance of justice for the crimes committed against them, both historically and individually.

If we look at examples of conflict throughout history we can see that the winners who demanded justice as payment for their pains have often received it at the expense of hard won peace. Those who focused on building a viable peace that benefited the losers as well as the winners are the ones who actually got what they wanted. Consider the ultimate cost of the justice that europe extracted from Germany after WWI. The cost of that justice was peace. WWII's winners did not make that same mistake, to everyone's benefit. Nelson Mandella also took a smarter tact in denying many of his countrymen justice because he predicted the cost would likely be the loss of his true goal, a free South Africa itself.

Justice is an arbitrary term anyway. Justice for one usually requires its loss by another; it is a finite and limited resource. And like all scarce resources its use requires us to be pragmatic, not idealistic. Neither Palestine nor Israel will end up with the exact country they want. Neither will even get the country they both deserve. But if cooler heads eventually prevail they can both end up with viable, successful countries. Neither will truly get justice. But that's probably the fairest outcome possible.

[pelsar]

3. Justice?

one always knows that when someone puts the word "justice" in the argument that, either they know little about the conflict, little about "justice" or that they have a subjective view towards what defines their version of justice....


other than that the article was quite interesting.....seems the gazans are really getting it from Hamas as their "elected leaders"......

[kayecy]

4. Or perhaps those avoiding the word "Justice" do not know what it means....

......and have been taught to believe that it is not relevant to this conflict.

Sorry to repeat myself, but if it is too late to give Justice to the losing party, the least the winner could do is to offer an apology.

An apology would cost Israel nothing in blood, nothing in security and probably save it a lot of defense expenditure.....Why not give it a try?

[pelsar]

6. give me an example of justice..

i will be more than happy to show you just how your version of justice is unjust to at least one individual.....

[azurnoir]

8. June 1 1962

Israel hanged Adolf Eichmann

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Eichmann

So who was that unjust to? Eichmann?

[pelsar]

10. he may have been guilty

For many it wasnt enough...no punishment could to "justice" for his crimes....it was unjust to the victims and survivors....

The fact that this group of students
is inevitably frustrated in its efforts
teaches an important lesson about
crime and punishment—a justice system
may sometimes find itself incapable of
exacting justice.


http://journals.cambridge.org/download.php?file=%2FPSC%2FPSC38_01%2FS1049096505055800a.pdf&code=61c17ffc7f1041526cb278dbfe6e39fd

[azurnoir]

12. You can only execute some once

and "unfortunately" drawing and quartering went out with middle ages, I am sure there were some that were disgusted with Merckles visit a couple of weeks back too, in a way I don't blame them.

[azurnoir]

14. Should have been someone not some oops n/t

[kayecy]

9. "...at least one indivual." is rather extreme, but try these examples......

...... i will be more than happy to show you just how your version of justice is unjust to at least one individual.....

1. To whom was the West being ‘unjust’ when it forced the Serbs to allow Kosovo Albanians to return to their homes?


2. To whom was the UK being ‘unjust’ when it evicted the Argentines from the Falklands?


3. To whom was the US being ‘unjust’ when they evicted Saddam from Kuwait?


4. To whom were the Allies being 'unjust' when they drove the Nazis from France, Belgium, Holland etc


Omnia vincent veritas et iustitia
.

[pelsar]

15. are you serious?

there will be always individuals who dont get their justice when group actions are taken.....

in everyone of those scenarios innocent people were killed......was that the "justice' that they deserved?

for instance when the allies bombed/attacked french towns.... innocent french people were killed, thousands...was that justice?

in forcing the Serbs to retreat..how many innocent people were killed...was that the justice that they deserved?
____

you write of "absolute justice"...that is a finite quality that includes everybody....

[kayecy]

25. Another idiosyncratic use of the word 'justice'?

in everyone of those scenarios innocent people were killed......was that the "justice' that they deserved?

I have given you the definition of 'justice' that you will find in the O.E.D and other reputable dictionaries and I agree with their definition.....I regard all those conflicts as conforming to the dictionary definition of 'justice'.....Anyone who thinks 'justice' is a subjective term which can cover honour killing can hardly claim to be an authority on the subject.

...you write of "absolute justice"...that is a finite quality that includes everybody....

I don't believe I have used the term "absolute justice".
.

[Shaktimaan]

23. Some of these are easy...

1. To whom was the West being ‘unjust’ when it forced the Serbs to allow Kosovo Albanians to return to their homes?

The serbs. Because when the albanians returned they immediately evicted hundreds of thousands of serbs from bosnia. The west has done little to nothing thus far to force their repatriation as it was not accompanied by rumors of genocide. While it is great that the albanians were able to return to their homes it came at the direct expense of the massive amounts of serbs who were ethnically cleansed from the region.

3. To whom was the US being ‘unjust’ when they evicted Saddam from Kuwait?

There's a long list here. The palestinians living in Kuwait for starters. They supported Saddam, who always treated them well compared with other Arab states, so following Saddam's eviction the Kuwaiti's forced their palestinian refugee population out of the country. Next, despite US assurances of support, we hung minority revolutionaries within Iraq out to dry, pulling out of the country and leaving them defenseless. Saddam took revenge, killing people estimated to number in the hundreds of thousands.

[kayecy]

26. Wrong war old fellow.......

The serbs. Because when the albanians returned they immediately evicted hundreds of thousands of serbs from bosnia.

You have the wrong war there old fellow, I was referring to Kosovar refugees which of course the West returned to Kosovo, NOT Bosnia!

There's a long list here. The palestinians living in Kuwait for starters. They supported Saddam, who always treated them well compared with other Arab states, so following Saddam's eviction the Kuwaiti's forced their palestinian refugee population out of the country

You are right, but again I was not talking about what the Kuwaitis chose to do after the war, merely that the war was conducted by the US to evict Saddam and I don't think many Kuwaitis thought they had suffered an injustice.

Next, despite US assurances of support, we hung minority revolutionaries within Iraq out to dry, pulling out of the country and leaving them defenseless. Saddam took revenge, killing people estimated to number in the hundreds of thousands.

Again you are right but the US hung 'minor revolutionaries out to dry" some time after the liberation of Kuwait....i did not claim that the betrayal of the Shias was "injustice-free"
.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

5. The framing of the question reveals the basic problem.

The issue isn't what to do about Gaza, as though it's a separate entity.

The issue is what to do about Palestine. You can't separate the WB and Gaza, and it's Israel's attempt to do so that has created this mess.

[oberliner]

7. But there are two different governments that do no recognize the other's authority

The West Bank and Gaza each currently have their own prime minister who does not respect the legitimacy of the other.

Is it not fair to say that, at this point at least, the West Bank and Gaza are two separate political entities?

Would an agreement reached with Fayyad be respected by Haniyeh, or vice versa?

[azurnoir]

13. True however that situation did not happen in a vacuum

it had plenty of outside help, and it is not like Israel wants to see a reunion either, until recently they were quite vocal with threats to "halt" the so called peace process if Abbas talked to Hamas, they have been a tad quieter on that subject since the "Gaza Bombshell" came out, but I dought the divide to conquer attitude has changed.

[pelsar]

16. thats almost funny...

the hamas/fatah split is israels fault?.....they hate each other far more than they hate israel. Whats interesting is that neither of them blame israel for their feud....so why do you?

[Vegasaurus]

17. I think the Blame Israel First crowd

can't let the Palestinians accept responsibility for any of their own problems, including those that have nothing at all to do with Israel.

Hamas and Fatah would be killing each other, even if Israel wasn't in the neighborhood. Israel is just a great scapegoat for all of the Palestinian internal problems, of which there are many.

[azurnoir]

18. they had a unity government

until someone decided to pay one side to off the other, but the other got to them first, that was not Israel's doing BTW,

[Vegasaurus]

19. That unity government lasted about five minutes

there is so much bad blood between the two groups. The only thing they hate more than each other is Israel, but even that hatred isn't enough for them to put aside their disputes and blood feuds.

[azurnoir]

20. Ah huh if you say so n/t

[Vegasaurus]

21. Don't take my word for it

just look at the actions of Hamas and Fatah. Their actions speak much louder (and more clearly) than my words.

[pelsar]

22. so by that theory..

all of israels unity govts, coalition govts that fail must be the Palestinians fault....or somebody elses at least

why havent the Palestinians, hamas and fatah blamed israel?......

who paid off who to toss the fatah guys off the building?...or the execute the hamas guys in front of their family?..or to execute the fatah guys children coming to school?.....the US? Israel?...gosh those Palestinians cant even shoot their own without someone else taking the blame...except the funny thing about it, is that neither hamas nor fatah blame anybody else for their doings.....where does your information come from? How is it that you know something that they dont seem to?

[azurnoir]

24. Which theory is that?

You want to compare today's well established for 60 years by your own word stable unified Israeli governmewnt to that of the Palestinians? Of course you do, but it is not a very good comparison to compare a long established government to one that was still in the formation.

Who's fault is the Palestinian civil war? It was fomented from outside, by the US, that is undeniable, so yes the start of that civil war was created by the US, but what happened during that civil war is the Palestinians.

except the funny thing about it, is that neither hamas nor fatah blame anybody else for their doings.....where does your information come from? How is it that you know something that they dont seem to?

How disingenuous and a bit behind the times. That got blown out of the water when Vanity Fair published "The Gaza Bombshell".

[pelsar]

27. the civil war was not Created by bush....

bush and company chose a side....as do all countries involved in geopolitics and that includes up and coming countries as well....the Palestinians are no different in that respect than any other "not yet a country" group and that would included the americans, israelis etc when they were in that same situation. All up and coming countries have groups that conflict with each other....how they handle them is the key to their future state....

the jews/israelis get an A (Ben Gurion and Begin understood their priorities)..the Palestinians get an F.....blame outsides all you want...whats happening then, whats happening now, is 100% Palestinian. Whatever the attempts to influence them, its remains their own decisions, something about responsibility for ones actions.

[azurnoir]

28. The US armed Fatah prior to the

outbreak of the war, just whom was the US arming Fatah against, Israel?

[Vegasaurus]

29. The point is that there would be conflict between those two groups

no matter what Israel or the US did. These are tribal, family, historical, blood related feuds that are part of the culture.

[pelsar]

30. who armed Hamas?

because they were well armed, trained had communication weapons, and had a plan for taking over gaza...if fact they were armed better than fatah......

[azurnoir]

31. If I remember correctly

there were reports that Hamas stole shipments of American weapons meant for Fatah.

[pelsar]

32. try iran..

for weapons and training...guess that means iran instigated the civil war.....

[Vegasaurus]

11. Gaza is a separate entity

Hamas and Fatah can't even talk to each other, much less to Israel.

They have to get their own house in order first.