Gaza

[sleigh]

I have to say that I'm not a supporter of either Israel or Palestine. I am disappointed with the belligerent attitudes of both of them, and I despair of ever finding a solution there. Yes, Israel needs to defend itself, but the county's traditional response of bombing the crap out of neighboring countries in retaliation for terrorist activities such as suicide bombing or missile strikes seems perfectly designed to escalate tension and make reconciliation nearly impossible. 'Defense" doesn't necessarily need to be in the form of a military strike.

And the Palestinian factions are just as intractable and aggressive in return. As long as both sides remain stubbornly and intractably polar in their stances, this horrible situation is doomed to continue.

Israel/Palestine will be yet another turd sitting on Obama's plate when he takes office, joining the economic meltdown, the twin wars in iraq and Afghanistan, nuclear ambitions in Iran and North Korea, the looming presence of China, and the India/Pakistan conflict, which also has been bubbling uncomfortably. I don't envy the man his task.

And for the tattered King George who is abdicating his throne on January 20 and who had hoped to have a Middle East peace past as a consolation legacy for his disastrous eight years in office, well, it appears that now there not only won't be a peace agreement, but an open, festering wound. Yet Laura Bush and Condoleezza Rice are insisting that history will judge that the Bush presidency was a resounding success. "I think generations pretty soon are going to start to thank this president for what he's done," Rice said in an interview the other day.

Uh, yeah. Sure. That's gonna happen.

Meanwhile, bombs continue to fall in Gaza, and tanks gather at the border. I hope this latest conflagration ends soon, but I have little hope that it will be the last one, or the worst one.

Comments

[shsilver.livejournal.com]

Just wondering. If hundreds of missiles were launched into the United States each day from Canada or Mexico, what should the United States' response be?

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

They're not, and there's no sense in speculating on that. If you ask me what I think should be happening in the Middle East, I can answer. As I said above, Israel has a right to defend itself, but too often (to my mind) it seems that their response is too strong, too aggressive, and too 'shotgun,' which only exacerbates the situation.

The closest political analog to the Middle East that I can think of is Northern Ireland. There, violence always beget more violence. What worked was dialog, bargaining, and concessions and making conditions better for the people there, so that the violence of the rebels began to be opposed by their own people. I suspect that's what needs to happen in the Middle East, also -- conditions need to be made good enough for those in the area so that the people no longer support the actions of the radicals among them. Both sides need to feel safe.

How to get there? That, I don't know... but I feel that's the direction both parties need to be nudged toward. Bombs won't settle this, in my opinion.

[sethb.livejournal.com]

If the IRA had launched missiles into England, do you think England would have refrained from bombing the launching sites?

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

Again, that never happened, so speculating about is rather useless. But I suspect that wouldn't have done things much differently. If the bombing sites were static, yes, they'd try to destroy them. But if they were mobile, I suspect they'd have done little different from what they did.

[papersky.livejournal.com]

I think they'd have surrounded them and sent troops in to them, rather than bombed them. Northern Ireland was essentially occupied territory.

And actually the peace process there was much more complicated and longer than this makes it sound.

[sleigh.livejournal.com]

I agree. And yes, the process was much longer and had several up and downs, but ultimately things were resolved not by violence but by dialog, negotiation, and compromise.

[lizziebelle.livejournal.com]

I agree that this endless "eye for an eye" will never solve their problems, only exacerbate them. I don't understand why the U.S. has always unconditionally supported Israel when they continually act the aggressor. Any other country that does this tends to be invaded by us in the name of peacekeeping (Iraq, Kosovo, Afganistan, etc.).