Replies: 5 Comments
What about a three state solution? One each for Israelis, Peaceful Palestinians and and Non Peaceful Palestinians?
If Gaza and/or the West Bank need to be reoccupied the aim should be to offer each individual the chance to declare which state they wish to belong to. If they choose Peaceful Palestine then they have to make a public commitment to not only peaceful activities but also co-operation with Israel in ensuring security. Israel in return would provide substantial economic and organisational assistance and friendship, plus support for viability and independence. The size of Peaceful Palestine would depend on the numbers opting for citizenship of that state, but would offer room for those choosing the peaceful route at a later time.
Those who refuse the offer of citizenship of Peaceful Palestine or whose behaviour is contrary to peaceful principles would be given an area to run themselves with sufficient space for them to live ideally in an area whose border can be effectively policed by Israel.
Israel could then demonstrate its desire to live in peace and generosity with those who wish to live in peace with it.
Judy W, Monday, May 21st
Perhaps the organizations who make the payments to those who launch the rockets could be targeted.
Steve M, Thursday, May 3rd
I find it unlikely that the fence and roadblocks alone would have stopped suicide bombings. Nor does it explain why we kassams have not developed in the West Bank. Surely it's not a lack of technology.
It seems to be that defensive shield with its massive arrests, the constant incursions and arrests afterwards, and the improved intelligence afterwards also helped. There might also be other reasons concerning the cultural differences between Gaza and the West bank. But it is the duty of the army to provide the best possible answers as if there is no diplomatic solution, and it is the duty of the government to seek diplomatic solutions.
Although after Shalit was kidnapped there were incursions into Gaza, I don't think they were as massive as defensive shield. It is also hard to gage their value if there's no follow up. Prior to Defensive Shield I remember one or two incursions into Nablus/Schchem prior to Defensive Shield that did not have sufficient results.
It is right to reject simplistic and perfect solutions to complex problems. But we can't give up on solutions completely.
Micha, Thursday, May 3rd
A mop can clean up spilt milk, but it cannot clean up an ocean. Ashkenazy is proposing another defensive shield in Gaza. But we already had quite a few of those. Gaza got several defensive shields when Shalit was captured, and more during the Lebanon war. Please tell me if it accomplished anything. Also, the suicide bombers were stopped by the fence and checkpoints. The rockets can't be stopped that way.
Ami Isseroff, Thursday, May 3rd
Is there no way to fight a neighboring enemy who is attacking you other than conquering the territory completely or doing nothing?
"An invasion will strengthen the Hamas, because like the Hezbollah they would survive, and like the Hezbollah, even if there were only ten of them left at the end, they could claim "victory" and recruit new followers very quickly."
I don't think the analogy works. The Hizballa were not able to claim victory just because they had ten men standing. And I think if they had only ten men standing (or even more) they could not have claimed victory, or if they did, they would find it difficult to convince others.
If there is no non-military way to deal with Gaza, then the realistic alternatives are either:
a) A continuous occupation.
b) A short but large scale distructive invasion folowed by withdrawl, that will weaken the fighting force significantly, weaken it morally, and create deterrence.
c) Many quick small scale incursions over time that will engage the Palestinian fighting forces and weaken them materially and morally.
d) Improved defensive measures.
e) Combination of the above.
These are certainly not perfect methods, far from it. Any military strategy requires first trying diplomacy. Any miliitary strategy requires to be combined with diplomacy sooner or later if it is to be effective at all. And, for a strategy to work, the army has to be trained well for it. But you can't reject a strategey for being imperfect if the alternative -- not acting -- is worse.
Operation Defensive Shield and following operations in the West Bank combined all of these strategies: the fence and roadblocks, the occupation of areas, the large scale attack, and the constant short incursions into Palestinian cities. And although it was by no means a perfect strategy, and its effect will not last forever if Israel does not take diplomatic measures, there is no doubt that it did improve the personal security of Israelis. From almost daily suicide bombings we have reached a situation where the attacks are pretty rare and not that effective. It's not perfect but it is an improvemernt. The quiet that was gained this way also made it possible for Israelis to think of peace and withdrawl again, making the disengagement from Gaza possible.
Micha, Thursday, May 3rd
Constructive comments, including corrections, are welcome. Do not use this space for spam, publishing articles, self promotion, racism, anti-Zionist propaganda or character defamation. Inappropriate comments will be deleted. See our Comment policy for details. By posting here, you agree to the Comment policy.