Either/Or
August 8, 2006
The news today is filled with happenings at the UN. The Security Council was set to vote today (Tuesday) on a joint US-French resolution calling for a cease-fire and the establishment of a “robust” multi-national force to take over the policing of Southern Lebanon until Lebanon’s own forces can effectively implement Security Council Resolution 1559, calling for the disarmament of Hezbollah. Though opposed bitterly by Hezbollah’s leadership, this resolution has Israel’s support and the broadest international support imaginable (including Russian support that was slow in coming because the Russians were slighted in the drafting of the resolution). But, of course, there is a fly in the ointment.
Following a meeting of the Arab League at which Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora made a tear-filled entreaty to the assembled Arab delegates to intervene with the Security Council on Lebanon’s behalf, the League prevailed upon the Council to allow its representatives to address the body before a final vote. That presentation is scheduled to take place on Tuesday afternoon, making it unlikely that a vote on a resolution will take place any time before Thursday.
What does this mean? Simply, this means that there will be no call for a cease-fire to take place before Thursday. This, of course, assumes that the Security Council will have a resolution prepared to present by then. Thus Israel’s military operations will proceed unhindered by a Security Council brokered cease-fire until then. This has significant implications for Israel’s prosecution of the war during this window of operational opportunity.
This window, however, raises some important military questions. So far, the war has not been going well. This is not the kind of war for which the IDF is best suited. In Lebanon we face a deeply entrenched enemy making the kind of quick, innovative combat at which the IDF excels almost impossible. In order to effectively neutralize Hezbollah’s forces in their bunkers (from which or near which they launch many of their rockets against Israel civilian population) Israel military strategists are faced with an “either/or” option: raise the level of bombing with the consequent lethal effects upon Lebanese civilians; or significantly enhance Israel’s ground operations. The latter option will have the inevitable result of a large number of Israeli military casualties. While the other option will limit the number of Lebanese civilian deaths there is a nagging question about how many of its own military deaths the Israeli public will tolerate. This is as much a political as it is a strategic question. No Israeli decision maker, neither civilian nor military, wants to be responsible for the needless death of even one soldier.
It is not that Israelis are unwilling to make painful sacrifices—we have more than proved that in the past as well as in the present conflict—however, it must be clear that any and all sacrifices are necessary to achieve clear goals. And that, precisely, is the issue here: what are Israel’s specific goals in this war?
Obviously, the primary objective is to restore stability and safety to Northern Israel. At the very least, this means pushing Hezbollah out of Southern Lebanon beyond rocket range of Israeli territory. But, assuming that Hezbollah cannot be removed from Lebanon neither militarily nor politically, what would Israel consider a “tolerable” Hezbollah presence in Lebanon? What if the Arab League is successful in amending the Security Council resolution and Israel is compelled to pull out of Lebanon immediately, before a strong international force can be established? And, can Israel tolerate an end to hostilities that will allow Hezbollah to claim a “victory” and raise its ideological capital even higher in the Arab world? To what extent can Israel count on continued American support if it is unsuccessful in advancing America’s own interests in this conflict? And let us not forget Iran and Syria. Can Israel and the international community, de facto, accept an Iranian presence in Lebanon through its Hezbollah surrogate? What can be gained or lost by giving Syria a place at the negotiating table?
These questions and more occupy our Israeli leaders in the window of time before a formal resolution comes before the Security Council.
On the homefront, I will say that the Israeli public remains steadfastly behind the war effort. This is a battle for the homeland it is not about maintaining occupation or territorial issues. That, precisely, is at the crux of the hostilities with the Palestinians it is not germane to the fight against Hezbollah.
Although voices on both the Left and the Right see the fighting in the South and in the North as one and the same, they are not. Connected, to be sure, but not the same. As I have said before, I think that it is important to make that distinction. With the Palestinians there is much to negotiate and negotiation is more desirable than conflict. With Hezbollah there is no compromise and there can be no negotiation. Hezbollah is an illegal extra-national presence in Lebanon acting on behalf of a third nation, Iran, committed to the elimination of Israel. We Israelis may be divided about the military response to Hamas and the Palestinians; there is very little opposition to the war against Hezbollah. It is significant to note that even organizations such as Peace Now and Rabbis for Human Rights support the military actions in Lebanon, leaving only those on the extreme left to oppose the war.
No, these are not easy and tranquil times, though I must admit that Jerusalem seems so quiet and languid during these dog days of summer. But underneath our apparent summer lethargy, we are actively committed to this effort to bring peace to the North and open our hands, hearts and homes to the one million refugees from Hezbollah’s murderous bombardments. In this cause we will need the help of our friends throughout the world, but especially in America. We need your financial support to be sure (for example, it is estimated by the Jewish National Fund that it will cost upwards of $75 million over the next two years to repair and replant our forests destroyed by rocket fire), but we also need you to be in touch with US government leaders to prevail upon them to continue diplomatic support of Israel at this critical time.
There is much that you can do. You need not be a passive observer to this conflict you can help to make a difference. Take a stand and support Israel.
May God watch over us and all those who seek peace—Israeli, Lebanese and Palestinian alike.
Shalom from Jerusalem.
The news today is filled with happenings at the UN. The Security Council was set to vote today (Tuesday) on a joint US-French resolution calling for a cease-fire and the establishment of a “robust” multi-national force to take over the policing of Southern Lebanon until Lebanon’s own forces can effectively implement Security Council Resolution 1559, calling for the disarmament of Hezbollah. Though opposed bitterly by Hezbollah’s leadership, this resolution has Israel’s support and the broadest international support imaginable (including Russian support that was slow in coming because the Russians were slighted in the drafting of the resolution). But, of course, there is a fly in the ointment.
Following a meeting of the Arab League at which Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora made a tear-filled entreaty to the assembled Arab delegates to intervene with the Security Council on Lebanon’s behalf, the League prevailed upon the Council to allow its representatives to address the body before a final vote. That presentation is scheduled to take place on Tuesday afternoon, making it unlikely that a vote on a resolution will take place any time before Thursday.
What does this mean? Simply, this means that there will be no call for a cease-fire to take place before Thursday. This, of course, assumes that the Security Council will have a resolution prepared to present by then. Thus Israel’s military operations will proceed unhindered by a Security Council brokered cease-fire until then. This has significant implications for Israel’s prosecution of the war during this window of operational opportunity.
This window, however, raises some important military questions. So far, the war has not been going well. This is not the kind of war for which the IDF is best suited. In Lebanon we face a deeply entrenched enemy making the kind of quick, innovative combat at which the IDF excels almost impossible. In order to effectively neutralize Hezbollah’s forces in their bunkers (from which or near which they launch many of their rockets against Israel civilian population) Israel military strategists are faced with an “either/or” option: raise the level of bombing with the consequent lethal effects upon Lebanese civilians; or significantly enhance Israel’s ground operations. The latter option will have the inevitable result of a large number of Israeli military casualties. While the other option will limit the number of Lebanese civilian deaths there is a nagging question about how many of its own military deaths the Israeli public will tolerate. This is as much a political as it is a strategic question. No Israeli decision maker, neither civilian nor military, wants to be responsible for the needless death of even one soldier.
It is not that Israelis are unwilling to make painful sacrifices—we have more than proved that in the past as well as in the present conflict—however, it must be clear that any and all sacrifices are necessary to achieve clear goals. And that, precisely, is the issue here: what are Israel’s specific goals in this war?
Obviously, the primary objective is to restore stability and safety to Northern Israel. At the very least, this means pushing Hezbollah out of Southern Lebanon beyond rocket range of Israeli territory. But, assuming that Hezbollah cannot be removed from Lebanon neither militarily nor politically, what would Israel consider a “tolerable” Hezbollah presence in Lebanon? What if the Arab League is successful in amending the Security Council resolution and Israel is compelled to pull out of Lebanon immediately, before a strong international force can be established? And, can Israel tolerate an end to hostilities that will allow Hezbollah to claim a “victory” and raise its ideological capital even higher in the Arab world? To what extent can Israel count on continued American support if it is unsuccessful in advancing America’s own interests in this conflict? And let us not forget Iran and Syria. Can Israel and the international community, de facto, accept an Iranian presence in Lebanon through its Hezbollah surrogate? What can be gained or lost by giving Syria a place at the negotiating table?
These questions and more occupy our Israeli leaders in the window of time before a formal resolution comes before the Security Council.
On the homefront, I will say that the Israeli public remains steadfastly behind the war effort. This is a battle for the homeland it is not about maintaining occupation or territorial issues. That, precisely, is at the crux of the hostilities with the Palestinians it is not germane to the fight against Hezbollah.
Although voices on both the Left and the Right see the fighting in the South and in the North as one and the same, they are not. Connected, to be sure, but not the same. As I have said before, I think that it is important to make that distinction. With the Palestinians there is much to negotiate and negotiation is more desirable than conflict. With Hezbollah there is no compromise and there can be no negotiation. Hezbollah is an illegal extra-national presence in Lebanon acting on behalf of a third nation, Iran, committed to the elimination of Israel. We Israelis may be divided about the military response to Hamas and the Palestinians; there is very little opposition to the war against Hezbollah. It is significant to note that even organizations such as Peace Now and Rabbis for Human Rights support the military actions in Lebanon, leaving only those on the extreme left to oppose the war.
No, these are not easy and tranquil times, though I must admit that Jerusalem seems so quiet and languid during these dog days of summer. But underneath our apparent summer lethargy, we are actively committed to this effort to bring peace to the North and open our hands, hearts and homes to the one million refugees from Hezbollah’s murderous bombardments. In this cause we will need the help of our friends throughout the world, but especially in America. We need your financial support to be sure (for example, it is estimated by the Jewish National Fund that it will cost upwards of $75 million over the next two years to repair and replant our forests destroyed by rocket fire), but we also need you to be in touch with US government leaders to prevail upon them to continue diplomatic support of Israel at this critical time.
There is much that you can do. You need not be a passive observer to this conflict you can help to make a difference. Take a stand and support Israel.
May God watch over us and all those who seek peace—Israeli, Lebanese and Palestinian alike.
posted by RSJD at 10:32 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home