We blog (We do)

Peace This Year

Condoleeza Rice recently said that she still thinks it’s possible to have peace in the Arab-Israeli conflict by the end of the year.  I greatly admire this woman’s faith in the face of these countervailing tendencies:

1. Prime Minister Olmert of Israel is about to be arrested and the cops say he will have to step down.
2. Mahmoud Abbas of the PA is 73 years old and is unlikely to last long enough to bring peace; He doesn’t look very healthy.  There is no designated successor.  Except maybe Hamas.
3. Creation of a Palestinian State, which is what Secretary Rice is referring to, is not likely to bring peace.  It will bring about the next phase of the war.  Hamas will probably take over, anyway.
4. Hamas is still sworn to the destruction of Israel.
5. Iran is likewise dedicated to the downfall of Israel, and is close to developing nuclear weapons.
6. Hezbollah is widely reported to have re-armed and then some, and is building a regular military army.
7. If Iran builds a nuclear bomb, Israel will have to attack both Hamas and Hezbollah, in simple self defense.  They get their arms from Iran and their suicidal and murderous habits mean they cannot be trusted.
   
8. Halfway measures against Iran would probably be like halfway measures against Saddam Hussein; To be completed later.  Or like the compromise armistice of 1918; to be followed by Hitler and World War Two. 
   
9. If Israel or the US takes down Iran with military force, many in the region will be Very Irritated.
10. If neither Israel nor the US takes down Iran, many in the region will die in a nuclear war.
11. Hamas is shelling the fuel depots that supply Gaza, forcing a shutdown.  They are still trying to commit some sort of large scale suicide, or at least some sort of large scale economic self-mutilation.    Since everybody knows they’re doing this, they must know they aren’t going to get sympathy for their troubles.  Maybe Hamas is just insane.   Insanity is not good for peace.
    

We have to wonder what the Bush administration is up to with the Israel/Palestine situation.  The (Bill) Clinton administration did a similar thing with the Arafat-at-Camp-David process.  This was probably the cause of the Second Intifada.  Great job with the peace-making, guys.

We have to ask whether there is personal motivation for Presidents to indulge in unrealistic end-of-term peacemongering.   Are they jealous of the Carter legacy of peace?  Do they want to build a bigger and better Presidential Library?  Are the Saudis or somebody offering big bucks for a good settlement?  What’s the story?

And why exactly is Israel still supplying food and fuel to it’s enemies in Gaza?  Are they simply trying to prove to those last die-hard doubters that indeed logic and proportion are completely absent?  Could the Israelis be as insane as Hamas?

Is it just something in the water?  Israel is trying to provide free fuel to Gaza, and Hamas is trying to blow it up.  Am I the only one who sees a problem here?

Firstly, what is Hamas and what do they believe in? So read the Hamas Covenant. Tell us what you think of this document. Did they write it as a prank or are they serious? Are they radical or just out-and-out insane? I’d like to know your opinion.

Hamas believes in suicide, at least for it’s members. Not so much for it’s leaders though. They believe that killing Israelis is a positive virtue. And they seem to be wishing for their supplies from Israel to be cut off, so that they can have a crisis, and get in the news. The way this thinking seems to go is that if they can have a war with Israel, and lose it on television, they can get sympathy. Especially, sympathy from the Europeans. This is kind of the opposite of the “Strong Horse” theory. It’s more of a “Dead Horse” theory.

The Israelis have also adopted a version of the “Death Point” system. If they can get Hamas to kill enough kids in Sderot, they’ll have the justification they need to launch a big counterattack. So how many Death Points does Israel need to launch 100 tanks? Do you need twice as many Death Points to launch 200 tanks? And how many Death Points for each aircraft? Israeli Defense Minister Barak is continually going on about the “Big Operation” he’s going to do in Gaza. But I don’t think he means it; Israel is doing okay with a steady drumbeat of low-level operations.

Of course, it’s not okay for the Israelis who live in Sderot. They get to be the sacrifice for their country. The attacks on Sderot are politically ideal, though; they get sympathy from the world for Israel, without being a strategic or existential threat.

I’ve come around to the point of view that the most effective anti-Hamas measures, at least for Gaza, are essentially passive methods. The “Wall” is working pretty well. If Israel can seal off the border between Egypt and Israel, they should be able to stop the smuggling of rockets into Gaza. This could, in theory, eliminate the need for the IDF to enter Gaza at all. This would be a very desirable result.

In terms of the much vaunted “Humanitarian Crisis” in Gaza, the Israeli approach should basically be to “Boil the Frog”. That is, turn the heat up slowly. But each time the Gazans complain, point to the new statistics showing the number of Palestinians being killed is going down. Hence, the importance of passive measures over kinetic operations.

This approach has the possibility of taking Gaza out of the news, which would be to Israel’s advantage. It also should lead to a reduction or elimination of weapons firing against Israel. Gaza could be sealed off and forgotten. Later on, when skinny Gazans come to offer peace, hat in hand, Israel can make a better deal.

As a side benefit, putting the Gazans on a diet will probably help them live longer and reduce Global Warming. For the story on the benefits of a Calorie Restricted diet, check out this article from the New York Times.

The news and the blogosphere has been bubbling with reports of the contest between Iraq Prime Minister al-Maliki (the government) and al-Sadr. The anti-Bush types pump up the accomplishments of al-Sadr and the Bush supporters go the other way around.

Today’s headlines show that al-Sadr is in a strategic retreat, refusing to fight the government out of either principle or fear. He’s saving his forces and hoping to win another day. Some are saying the Fat Lady has sung, others that she’s just warming up. The British are taking some heat for the results of their permissive strategy in Basra blowing up in their faces.

As if confusing the names Iraq and Iran weren’t bad enough. One of al-Sadr’s opponents is the Badr Brigade, an alternate Shiite group. The government of al-Maliki is also mostly Shiite. So it’s mostly intra-Shiite warfare these days in Iraq.

The Sunnis are split, with al-Queda becoming more desperate as they sink slowly into the sand, and the Anbar Awakening moving ever closer to the government. The Kurds, who are also Sunni, have been pro-government for quite a while, and have been living very peacefully.

The overall Iraq situation is that of a coalition of feisty clans, not a unified culture. It could end up like Yugoslavia, with Kosovo and all those other states, or like Ireland, partly divided and partly united. Or like the US after that nasty disagreement about slavery, that is, united enough, but with simmering differences.

Meta: Most analysis of Iraq isn’t really about Iraq. It’s about the upcoming US elections. The Republicans and conservatives beat a pretty consistent line about how good things are, and the anti-Bush forces (from Code Pink to Hillary, and everybody in between) tend to paint Iraq as a mess made by an idiot. Anybody who has loyalty to a political party has at least the motive to lie.

I think it is fair and honest, though, to recognize that the various parties in Iraq (including al-Sadr) are behaving more like parties jockeying for position in the final configuration of the central government, and less like a determined band of revolutionaries. With, of course, the exception of al-Queda, who becomes more violent as they become less relevant. Overall, this is reasonably good news for Iraqis. But is of no comfort if the last car bomb, so to speak, happens to get you.

On the other hand, of course, it is still possible for the nucleus of the new government-by-coalition to undergo violent fission, to the detriment of everybody. The current job is to prevent that.