The STRATFOR analysis raises a serious question with me. If we have advanced so far as a people, and the internet has opened up information flows to the level that we celebrate how informed we are as a people, then why is it that so many smart people are able to so easily fall for what are clearly populist political infowar efforts intended to shape perception despite the facts - which are still in short supply.
For example, there were three members of the IDF commando team hospitalized. One of the soldiers was injured when thrown overboard, but I find it interesting the other two were hospitalized with gunshot wounds.
But facts really don't matter when faced with overwhelming populist agendas playing to a predetermined bias - a bias that swings both ways. A good example of how it swings both ways is the recent comments by Charles Krauthammer quoted by The Corner.
The fundamental deception here is the use of the word "humanitarian." . . . Humanitarians don't wield iron clubs, and [they] would have killed the Israelis had the Israelis not drawn their pistols in self-defense.Charles Krauthammer fails when he attempts to forward the Israeli official government view of the maritime blockade. No question part of the intent is to prevent weapon smuggling - and that is certainly a legitimate purpose of a maritime blockade (indeed the UNSC has a similar maritime blockade established against North Korea in regards to arms sales).
But there‘s a larger issue here. What exactly is the humanitarian crisis that the flotilla was actually addressing? There is none. There’s no one starving in Gaza. The Gazans have been supplied with food and social services, education, by the U.N., by UNWRA, for 60 years, in part with American tax money.
Second, when there are humanitarian needs, the Israelis allow — every day — food and medicine overland into Gaza. The reason that it did not want to allow this flotilla is because, as the spokesman for the flotilla said herself, this was not about humanitarian relief. It was about breaking the blockade.
And the reason the Israelis have a blockade is because they only want to allow humanitarian supplies and not weaponry. Look, the proof of that is the fact that if you look at a map of Gaza, you'll see that Israelis only control three sides of this rectangle. There’s a fourth side on the Egyptian side. So it is an Egyptian-Israeli blockade.
The Egyptians have the same problem with Gaza. People accuse Israeli of the blockade [saying it’s because] because they're racist, they’re anti-Muslim, anti-Arab. The Egyptians are Muslim and Arab and they’ve gone to war three times on behalf of the Palestinians. So why do they have exactly the same blockade? Because Gaza is run by Hamas, a terror entity that wants to import weaponry and resume the war against Israel.
The man who made the announcement that we saw earlier, explaining the commando raid is the defense minister of Israel. He‘s not a right-winger. He‘s not Likud. He’s Ehud Barak, who’s the leader of Labor, the party of Yitzhak Rabin, Golda Meir, the party of the left, and the man who ten years ago this summer offered the Palestinians a peace agreement that would have [provided] a Palestinian state, division of Jerusalem, and an end of the conflict.
The Palestinians said no. And Gaza two years ago declared war on Israel. That's why you have a blockade. . . .
If these people had wanted humanitarian aid, Israel offered to take the ships into Haifa, peacefully, unload all the stuff inside and to allow all the humanitarian aid immediately into Gaza, all the food and medicine. And it was refused because it was meant to be a provocation and to create an incident.
What isn't mentioned is how the maritime blockade is also intended to be part of the economic war on Gaza. Is that a legitimate military tactic? Yep, but don't ask me to sympathize with Israel when on one hand they intentionally deny economic opportunity to a huge population then complain with the other hand that the enemy is actively fielding plenty of unemployed young men in a war against them. Israeli policy perpetuates the violence, so Israel doesn't get any sympathy from me when complaining they are constantly under attack. The war goes both ways.
But Krauthammer nails the rest of his argument, and it is a point dismissed in the populist political rhetoric shaping the perception of the Gaza flotilla event. When IDF soldiers are being treated for gunshot wounds, clearly this was not a 'peace' movement. The blockade isn't just an "Israeli" thing either; Egypt has also been a partner in the blockade until this incident. One of the more interesting results so far is the Egyptian reaction to drop the blockade. In theory, the second flotilla could approach from the Egyptian maritime zone and avoid the Israeli blockade - except that running the maritime blockade has already been announced as the intent of the second flotilla - thus Israel again already has the right to interdict the second flotilla in international waters.
How the second flotilla is dealt with will tell us a lot about the policy at work in Israel. Obviously I believe Israel is going to stop the flotilla - it will not be allowed to run the maritime blockade. The only question to be asked is whether Israel treats this as a serious military operation - like it did the first time, or if Israel changes tactics to treat it as part of the global infowar campaign Hamas is trying to make it.
One final thought. My impression is that this does represent a strategic blunder by Israel, but there is a cynical alternative that does merit mentioning. It has been suggested that further isolation of Israel by the United States would give greater flexibility to Israel for undertaking unilateral military action by Israel against Iran. That isolation would need to be more than just the NPT discussions that force Israel to disclose their nuclear arsenal, and more than just a diplomatic disagreement regarding the use of UN sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program. This event would seem to be in line with creating additional political separation between Israel and the US needed for Israel to act unilaterally. Time will tell, but a brute force response to the second flotilla could easily give President Obama the flexibility he needs to create additional political separation from Israel on the US end.
I'm not really a subscriber of this point of view, but I do agree further political separation between Israel and the US right now would give Israel more flexibility to unilaterally attack Iran, and as the Danger Room article notes - Israel went into this flotilla operation understanding the infowar unfolding. Israel never plays expecting to lose something for nothing, suggesting something bigger may be at work here.
No comments:
Post a Comment