Israel – Hamas War

The war between Israel and Hamas rages on as it passes the six month mark. Starting with the horrific and brutal attack into Israel on 7 October 2023, it has been a ferocious conflict. Now is the time to assess the policies involved and to reevaluate what Israeli war aims may be.

In so doing, two underlying assertions are necessary. First, Israel had and continues to have, every right to defend itself and to respond to the terrible attack that killed over 1200 innocent Israelis in October in order to preclude future attacks. Second, criticism of Israel’s government or Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies are not in themselves anti-Semitic, just as criticizing President Biden’s policies does not make anyone anti-American.

As the war continues with much of Gaza destroyed and approximately 1.7 million Palestinians displaced, no clear war aims have been articulated by Prime Minister Netanyahu. As announced to date, their goals are the destruction of Hamas, the infrastructure supporting their rule and terrorist activities, and the release of the hostages. These are not political solutions. Killing every member of Hamas is not possible. Indeed one could argue that current Israeli actions in Gaza are only ensuring another generation of pro-Hamas fighters, or at least anti-Israeli fighters. The only way to ensure that every member of Hamas is eliminated is to kill every male over the age of twelve.

Hamas war aims are simple and are the mirror image of Israel’s. Kill every Israeli and destroy the Israeli state. They have no means to achieve their war aims. Israel does.

Israeli Defense Force (IDF) spokesmen claim that they have “dismantled” twenty of the estimated twenty four Hamas battalions in Gaza. Assuming this is true, dismantled is not the same as eliminated. The command and control function of the organization is clearly degraded, if not destroyed, but guerrilla operations can continue indefinitely with groups of four or five fighters using hit and run tactics. From a fighting perspective, as I have explained in other, earlier posts, the loser decides when the war is over. If the enemy does not stop fighting, then the war continues, even if by conventional standards one side “won.” The IDF does not give detailed information on troop movements but has said that only two divisions of the IDF remain in Gaza, down from the original five that attacked into Gaza at the war’s start. All of the reserve units are said to have stood down and gone home — partly because those forces are no longer needed and partly because the economy of Israel was suffering with so many workers away from their jobs. A casual look at the situation in Gaza today indicates that the Israelis have won, but yet the war continues.

Indeed, Prime Minister Netanyahu plans on expanding the war by attacking Rafah, a city in the south of Gaza that is the primary location of the displaced Gazans from the north, especially from Gaza City, which will be discussed further below.

Although IDF troops on the ground are significantly fewer, air operations continue at a heavy rate. Bombs and drone strikes are a part of life in Gaza every day. Exact numbers of casualties are difficult to confirm as the IDF does not supply certified numbers of either their own or Palestinian losses and the Gaza Health Ministry — the source providing the number of Palestinian casualties — cannot be fully relied upon. That said, the international consensus is that over 32,000 Palestinians have died so far in the war with roughly 100,000 wounded, mostly civilians. There does not seem to be much consideration for collateral damage (civilians killed or wounded) in the indiscriminate bombing of areas such as Gaza City. The IDF is a modern, well-equipped, well-trained force. In the early stages of the war perhaps it was necessary to destroy civilian infrastructure to attack the Hamas infrastructure, especially Hamas tunnels that are said by the IDF to run for 350 to 450 miles under Gaza, using schools, mosques and other civilian structures as nodes. The current situation appears to preclude the need for mass bombings as a means to their ends and more pinpoint targeting could reduce the number of civilian casualties. So far, that does not seem to be happening, raising concerns in the U.S. and elsewhere that the Israelis are not just hunting down Hamas, but that they are punishing Palestinians in Gaza for “allowing” Hamas to carry out its terrorist attacks. Such indiscriminate attacks also calls into question the status of Israeli hostages in Gaza. Mass bombing puts the hostages in danger. One stated war aim is to recover all of the remaining 134 hostages (some of whom are known to already be dead), and yet only two have been rescued by the IDF. Three hostages escaped and tried to surrender to the IDF but were shot and killed while approaching IDF positions. (An additional 105 hostages were released in a prisoner exchange last November, four were unilaterally released by Hamas.) Are the hostages also collateral damage?

Prime Minister Netanyahu publicly stated that the IDF was preparing to attack Rafah, on the Egyptian border, to eliminate remaining Hamas forces. Rafah has 1.4 million Palestinians living there, many are refugees from the north living in dire circumstances in tents. The U.S. position is that Israel cannot attack Rafah without creating an even greater humanitarian crisis and any military operations must wait until a plan is put forward as to what to do about the people living there. Recently, Mr. Netanyahu agreed to send members of his government to Washington D.C. to explain the plan to the U.S. (That trip was canceled over a disagreement about U.S. votes in the U.N. Security Council calling for a cease fire, but it was just announced that now the trip is back on.) The seeming disregard for the plight of the Palestinians is the source of a growing rift between the U.S. and Israel and the cause for the growing number of protests around the U.S. in support of the Palestinians. (Unfortunately, there are protesters that are ignorant of the situation in the Middle East, its complications, and the fact that Hamas started the war. Sadly, there are also some folks that are just plain bigots.)

Israel has every right to root out Hamas to ensure the survival of Israel and to protect its citizens from further terrorist attacks. The issue is more a question of how it should be done. As a democracy concerned with human rights and as a full citizen of the international community, Israel must also consider the plight of the innocent children, women and men that are not members or supporters of Hamas but are suffering greatly from a lack of shelter, food, potable water and medicine. That should be part of their plan as well. To date, it is not, other than to allow some (too few) aid trucks into the Gaza strip as well as some air dropped supplies, also ineffective compared to what is required.

There is a growing rift between the Israeli and U.S. governments that I do not find surprising. Israel absolutely depends on U.S. political and military support. Much of their military equipment and ammunition comes from America. U.S. policy since President Truman is to support Israel and that policy of support has only grown stronger with time. That does not mean, contrary to some opinions, that Israel is a puppet or client state of the U.S. Our leaders do try to influence Israeli leaders but in the end, Israel is going to do whatever they want to do, whether or not it coincides with U.S. policy. Some of their decisions actually run counter to U.S. desires and can in certain circumstances actually hurt U.S. interests. Period. Blaming the Biden Administration or any other entity for what Israel is doing in Gaza and calling for them to stop it is not realistic. They are going to do whatever they want. As a result, some in government believe that we support Israel to a fault — arguing that support to Israel is critical, but not when it also undermines our own national interests.

Complicating the political elements of this crisis is that Prime Minister Netanyahu heads a far right government with members of his cabinet pushing for total Israeli control of Gaza and the West Bank — where even as the war in Gaza continues Israelis are settling in and pushing Palestinians out. Mr. Netanyahu will seemingly do anything to satisfy his far right coalition and thus remain in power. Prior to the outbreak of war, many Israelis were openly protesting his policies as being too extreme. His support throughout the population was rapidly eroding. Mr. Netanyahu also faces probable criminal indictments when he leaves office — an incentive to stay. Israelis will support him while the war continues, but it is widely expected that when elections are finally held, he will be voted out of office. If one were cynical, it could be that the war is good for Mr. Netanyahu’s personal fortunes.

So back to the original question. What are Israel’s war objectives? Put in other terms, what is the desired end state of the war? What does the solution look like?

The answer is nearly universal in the international community. The only way to reach a safe and secure status quo for both Palestine and Israel is a two state solution. A safe and secure Israeli state and a safe and secure Palestinian state encompassing Gaza and the West Bank. It will take years, billions of dollars and a lot of finesse to reach that point, but in the end, the U.S., Europe and much of the rest of the world see it as the only way to achieve a permanent. long term solution.

Prime Minister Netanyahu and his coalition right wing ultra-nationalist government roundly reject a two state solution.

On one level, it is understandable that Israelis would be skeptical that having a stable, sustainable, productive Palestinian neighbor would ever be achievable. Decades of experience tell them otherwise. On another level, those right wing ultra-nationalists in his government see Gaza and the West Bank as ripe for Israeli expansion and settlement. To them, the only way to secure the area is to occupy it themselves. While Mr. Netanyahu has not stated such an intent, he has indicated that Israeli forces will be in Gaza for some time to come. No other long term end state or political solution has come forward from his government. Israel may be in Gaza for years to come. The question is whether or not they put settlers there and turn it into a de facto Israeli satellite as they are doing in the West Bank. First, where do the Gazans go? Secondly, such a move would likely break U.S. and European unqualified support for Israel. Not abandonment, but it will cause a significant strain on our relationship and it will be irrevocably altered.

The Biden Administration in conjunction with our friends and allies has been working hard over these last months to resolve the long term tensions in the region. Many nations are willing to help to rebuild Gaza and to promote stability. Most importantly, there are increasing indications that Gulf Arab states along with Saudi Arabia are willing to step up to provide the money needed to rebuild and to support a new (as yet undefined) Palestinian government to replace the current Palestinian Authority that nominally holds power but has no practical way to govern. To get the Arab states actively involved in a peaceful solution will be a game changer.

Now is the time to lock it all in. A coalition of the willing can be put together to rebuild Gaza, provide security against a resurgent Hamas and provide increased security for all involved. It could be the dawn of a new age in the region. It could mean a new relationship between Israel and its neighbors. Israel could find itself allied with Saudi Arabia as a counter to block Iranian adventurism. There are lots of possibilities that would have been inconceivable in the recent past.

It will take years of patient negotiations and small, confidence building steps. It will take billions of dollars. It will not be easy as there are many bad actors that prefer the chaos and bitter conflict. None-the-less, it is in everyone’s best interest to try.


The Cavalry Will Not Get Here In Time

During this past week, both President Joe Biden and ex-President Donald J. Trump became their respective party’s presumptive nominees for president. Both have accumulated enough delegates from the primaries already completed to clinch the nominations at this summer’s political conventions.

Get over it. It happened. There is no wishing it away. There is no changing it. Now we have to deal with it. Although the election is still about eight months away and a lot can happen in that period of time, all of us need to assume that one or the other of them will be elected (actually, reelected).

What makes this election different from any I have experienced, and I would venture, different than any since the Civil War, is that this is not the typical “horse race” based on policies or popularity. This is not even a referendum on our current president as so many elections in the past have been. This is purely and simply a decision for our nation as to whether we want to continue as a democratic republic or become a fiefdom for a wannabe autocrat in the nature of Hungary or even Russia. Yes. I truly believe it is that bad and I do not consider such statements to be hyperbolic or a symptom of Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). Every day that Trump is campaigning or otherwise publicly speaking he tells us that in fact, he will be an autocrat. He publicly states that he will be a dictator on day one.

Some pundits may declare that our political parties have been “polarized” for the last 30 years or more and that we are just seeing more of the same. That may be a correct statement for previous elections, but today our country is not polarized. There is one party that is trying to govern, a bit left of center but more mainstream than not, and one party that is just crazy, dysfunctional, and radicalized. For those keeping score at home, more and more “normal” Republicans are retiring at the end of their terms or quitting before their terms are over because they cannot take the MAGA dysfunction and radicalization driving the Congress today. The latest is Republican Congressman Ken Buck (CO) who just announced that he is leaving at the end of of next week. Representative Buck is one of the most conservative Republicans in the House and according to his statements, his last straws were the impeachment of Secretary of Homeland Defense Alejandro Mayorkas and the continued attempt to impeach President Biden, neither effort includes any evidence of wrongdoing to support impeachment under the Constitution. (You may have noted that the Republicans’ two top “witnesses” against President Biden have been disgraced. One fled the country as he was about to be arrested for various financial crimes and the other was arrested for being an agent of Russian intelligence. You just can’t make this stuff up.)

President Biden currently is running behind Trump in national polls. Two things come to mind. One, national polls really are not relevant because the elections this century have revolved around five or six key states. Whoever wins those, wins the election. Since President George H.W. Bush won election in 1988, Republicans have only won the popular vote for president once — President George W. Bush in 2004. (The Electoral College in action!) Thus those states take on enormous importance and tend to be the focus of campaigns for both parties. Second, at this point in time, people are going to express their unhappiness about anything in their lives. When pollsters ask them about their presidential choices at this point, most voters are expressing their opinions about their perceived quality of life — which is important and politicians need to respond to that — but it is not necessarily who they will actually vote for in the election. In my view, when it comes time to mark their ballots, given all that they know about Trump now and how much they will observe about his maniacal behavior in the months to come, more people will vote for Mr. Biden than for Trump.

In a free and fair election.

Which we have no guarantee will happen. In 2020 Trump and the men and women in his gang tried their hardest to stage a coup through many avenues of attack, culminating in the storming of the capitol. Their intention was clear — negate the results of a free and fair election and keep Trump in power. There is no reason to believe that they will not try again — probably through voter suppression, intimidation and outright violence — and now they have all of their lessons learned from their first try. At a rally in Ohio on 16 March Trump proclaimed that “if I don’t get elected its gonna be a bloodbath. That’s the least of it. It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country.”

The guardrails of our democracy held in 2020, even if only barely. The brave Republican men and women in office that saved the day then have largely been replaced by stooges loyal to Trump. More troubling, those of us that thought the judiciary would work in accordance with the laws of our land to hold Trump accountable in a timely way are going to be sadly mistaken. There are lots of fingers that can be pointed in lots of directions, starting with Attorney General Merrick Garland who delayed and delayed (presumably hoping it would just all go away) authorizing an investigation into the lawless behavior of Trump. Once the investigations began and grand juries returned indictments, the delay game began. And Trump is winning that game.

If any of us were innocent of crimes, then I presume we would want to quickly go before a judge in a fair trial and clear our names. Not with Trump. To date, I have not noticed that his legal teams are arguing against the facts, presenting alternative explanations or otherwise trying to prove his innocence. Instead, it is a constant stream of motions, many of them legally dubious, that drag on and on. The play is simple. Delay until Trump is elected and then he will pardon himself or otherwise create a Constitutional crisis (and probably an actual physical crisis) if the courts continue to pursue holding him accountable. And so far, even as I understand that everyone has a right to contest the charges against them, the judiciary has allowed him to get away with it. Under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974, as amended in 1979, with exceptions, a trial is to start no earlier than 30 days after an indictment and no later than 70 days. Trump and his lawyers have managed to work around this, seemingly at will as judges bend over backwards to appear unbiased, even as you or I would not be afforded the same leeway. Trump is using their efforts to appear fair to his advantage in the way that a mob boss would employ all elements at his disposal to intimidate witnesses, judges and other members of the court.

Remember that the right to a speedy trial works both ways. The defendant cannot be held without the processes moving apace but equally important is the fact that the public deserves to have a timely and fair trial. It is vital that voters know before they cast a ballot whether or not one of the candidates is a convicted felon responsible for trying to prevent the peaceful transfer of power after an election.

In particular, the cases surrounding the events of 6 January 2021 and Trump’s keeping highly classified documents in his beach club in Florida — and trying to obstruct the investigation into that — are moving baffling slow. Starting in December of last year the Supreme Court had the opportunity to review Trump’s claim of absolute immunity. Finally taking the case, they will not hear arguments until 25 April — the last day of the current session. That means that it is likely that a ruling on the claim will not be handed down until June or July. Even then they may rule in a way that returns the case to a lower court for further review. Should the Supreme Court clearly rule this summer, it is still increasingly difficult to get the trial completed before voting starts, given the time that the presiding judge intends to give the Trump team to prepare their defense.

Consider also that in the recent Trump v Anderson case, the Supreme Court eviscerated Article 3 of the 14th Amendment that prohibits an office holder that took an oath to defend the Constitution from holding future office if they “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the United States.” On a 9-0 vote they decided that no single state can invoke the amendment and keep someone off the ballot. Fair enough. But digging deeper the vote was actually 5-4 as the majority opinion stated that only a two-thirds vote in the Congress could prohibit an insurrectionist from running for office. To most people, including four Supreme Court justices, that was over reach and not in keeping with the original intent of the amendment. Apparently, it is okay to foment an insurrection to keep oneself in power and then run again to try and do it again, unless Congress overwhelming says no. And oh, by the way, the Supreme Court expedited that hearing and the decision, unlike with the immunity issue.

In Florida the judge presiding over the documents case in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida — Judge Aileen Cannon — is taking an unusually long time to move that case forward given that most legal experts opine that the case is the most straightforward of all of those for which Trump was indicted. It is becoming increasingly apparent that she is slow rolling the trial until after the election. (I might speculate that since she has been ruling in Trump’s favor on various motions for over a year now, and since she was appointed by Trump shortly before he left office, it might be that she is auditioning for the Supreme Court under a second Trump term.)

In numerous movies in 1950’s and 60’s westerns it became a cliche that as the beleaguered settlers were running out of ammunition and about to be overrun and killed, bugles would sound and the cavalry would come riding over the hill to save the day. When it comes to holding Trump accountable for his actions and to know whether he is a convicted felon or not before voting, there will be no cavalry riding over the hill to save the day. Not when it comes to the judiciary and not when it comes to Congress. Only we the voters will be able to save our democracy.