Former
ambassador to the US Michael Oren supported
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to call for a ceasefire in
Gaza.
"Regarding the Gaza issue, the prime minister made a very difficult but very responsible decision. Despite the massive fire on the south and the terrible suffering of the residents of the Gaza border communities, the prime minister acted out of a deep strategic vision," Oren said.
"Regarding the Gaza issue, the prime minister made a very difficult but very responsible decision. Despite the massive fire on the south and the terrible suffering of the residents of the Gaza border communities, the prime minister acted out of a deep strategic vision," Oren said.
I usually support Netanyahu and would vote for
Michael Oren for PM if it were possible under the Israeli voting system, but
this time I disagree with them both.
I am quite
aware of the strategic danger Israel is under. The existential threat from Iran
which could start a nuclear war where Iran would not be deterred by
MAD, the horrific threat from Hezbollah with their 150000 rockets ready to attack any
point in Israel, the threat from Hamas with tunnels and Grads, and on top of
that we have the Russians who in their blindness are repeating the mistakes of the Ribbentrop-
Molotov agreement and siding with Iran whose ideology and
true danger to the world and themselves they underestimate.
So
Netanyahu is fully aware of the Iranian and Hezbollah threat. Fully aware that a ceasefire with Hamas will
be broken
by Hamas the minute they find it convenient since they would be following
Muhammad’s
Hudaybiyya precedent, and fully aware of the Russian duplicity with Putin’s
supply of the S-300 to Syria after the IL-20 downing
and Putin’s recent rhetoric
on MAD .
Constrained
by so many factors from all sides what is it that Netanyahu has done wrong? It
is a very tough position to be in.
Bibi should
not have continued this balancing act at the expense of Israeli citizens in the
south because near Gaza it has really become almost impossible to live and people
there do not see Iran in every analysis, but see that the rockets keep falling
and the government doing nothing for months. Furthermore, despite Netanyahu’s denial
that Hanegbi’s comments “Hamas’s
response was minor – there is a difference between Tel Aviv and other
communities “ are government policy, it
is clear to all that had Tel Aviv been attacked Israeli reaction would have
been different. After all, even Hamas has an escalation scale: 1. Sderot and settlements
around Gaza, 2. Ashdod and Beer Sheva,
3. Tel Aviv. Had Israeli policy been to
react the same whether Hamas attacked Sderot , Be’er Sheva or Tel Aviv, we would have not gotten
into this situation in the first place, and Israeli citizens in the south would
not be feeling as second class citizens and marching to Tel Aviv in protest.
What the
government had definitely failed to do is expose both the jihadi ideology of
Hamas and the Iranian Twelver eschatology, which would have helped deflect
some of the world opprobrium against the action Israel should have taken
against Hamas. No one is going to convince me that killing three Hamas terrorists after 470 rockets on Israeli population centers is a deterrent. Tougher action from the air should have been
taken, and less concern about what the world would say. Imagine
that Brighton were Gaza.
Netanyahu
has been a great fan of Winston Churchill.
He has read
biographies of Churchill and in a way has been put in a similar position.
See Standing
Alone - Churchill 1940 - Netanyahu 2013
Yet
Netanyahu, for all his public relations skills, has failed to do what Churchill
managed to do best - tell the truth about the enemy and tell the truth to
British people what they are up against.
Netanyahu quoted Bernard Lewis in his speech to
the UN
General Assembly in 2012:
There’s a great scholar of the Middle East,
Prof. Bernard Lewis, who put it best. He said that for the Ayatollahs of Iran,
mutually assured destruction is not a deterrent, it’s an inducement.
Michael Oren quoted Bernard Lewis
in his article in the L.A.
Times:
As famed Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis once observed, “Mutually assured destruction” for the Iranian regime “is not a deterrent — it's an inducement.”
Michael Oren on France
24 quotes the head of Hamas: “the goal of the demonstration was to enable
the people of Gaza to eat the livers of Israelis”
The terrible
suffering of the residents of the Gaza border communities could have been
relieved if the government had hit Hamas hard from the air. To make that
possible they should have had a public relations campaign during the months the
Gazan’s were sending incendiary balloons and kites
with swastikas into Israel. This was not done.
Update:
Update:
This also
was published as a JP Letter to the Editor on November 21, 2018 under Not
Churchillian enough