2 Responses to “Withdrawals And Crackdowns”

1. expertlaw, on January 5th, 2009 at 2:08 pm Said:

   Let’s not forget something else that likely helped load the powder keg in Gaza - internal exile, Israel’s historic practice of transferring troublesome West Bank residents into Gaza. (An example.) And let’s not forget what “withdrawal” looks like.

   Kristol writes, “Hamas is only one manifestation of the rise, over the past few decades, of a terror-friendly and almost death-cult-like form of Islamic extremism.” - but look at how this namby-pamby leftist group describes Hamas: “HAMAS’ political and strategic development has been both ignored and misreported in Israeli and Western sources which villainizes the group, much as the PLO was once characterized as an anti-Semitic terrorist group”. No, let’s not pretend Hamas is all hugs and kisses, as that’s anything but the case, but let’s also stop advancing the fiction that Palestinians had a real choice here and “chose terror”. The choice was between a corrupt, inefficient, self-serving, secular organization that had been negotiating for a “land for peace” deal for a decade as Israeli settlements expanded and living conditions worsened, versus a religious, much more efficient, much less corrupt organization that was delivering food, education and medical services to the people.

   Meanwhile, post-”withdrawal” Gaza was scarcely more habitable than it was when it earned its characterization as the world’s largest prison camp. It’s a testament to Palestinian rejection of the stated political goals and religious extremism of Hamas that, under the most favorable of circumstances, Hamas obtained only 57% of the seats in Parliament. Also, let’s not forget that Bush was warned both by Abbas and Israel that Hamas would likely win the election, and pressed for it anyway - then reacted in a manner typical of a man who gives lots of lip service to democracy but seems to have no respect whatsoever for elections. The election result, of course, provided a convenient excuse not to actually work for peace. But then, maybe that’s what Bush wanted.

   There’s plenty of low hanging fruit to choose from today - are you going to take on Bolton?

2. mbsocol, on January 8th, 2009 at 5:53 am Said:

   With respect, Daniel, it’s simply not true that it cost Sharon no capital to withdraw from Gaza. I agree with you in principle that Gaza was and has continued to be a mess under Israel, and that pro-Israel writers who fault the Palestinians for this are misrepresenting the enduring blockade on Gaza. But if you think that Sharon was taking a popular stance with the withdrawal, you’re badly misinformed.

   It took everything Sharon had to make the withdrawal a reality, and it ought to tell you something that he had to create a whole new political party just to get it done. (Not that new parties aren’t created all the time in Israel’s system — they are — but to create a new *major* party from whole cloth was completely unheard of before Sharon.) I’m struggling with what I see as your continued failure to understand the mindset of the Israeli electorate in so many aspects of this conflict. I’ve always thought of you, for better or worse, as a “realist” when it comes to foreign policy (insofar as you’re more willing and able to spell out hard truths that most writers I know of). But as you have continued to misunderstand how this operation fits into the Israelis’ narrative of themselves, I find that a lot of what you’re saying is reduced to empty moralizing — a crime which you share with something like 99% of other American bloggers, but which nonetheless doesn’t seem up to your standards.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.