THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume XI, Issue # 10, January 11, 2009
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
ISRAEL'S STRATEGIC INCOMPETENCE IN GAZA
By Dr. Daniel Pipes
THE ISRAELI-HAMAS WAR: WHICH SIDE IS WINNING, WHICH SIDE IS LOSING? THE NEED FOR A COOL
STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT -- THE REAL ISSUE: BAD DECISIONS MADE IN JERUSALEM -- CONSIDERING THOSE
DECISIONS, HOW WELL HAS ISRAEL'S LEADERSHIP PERFORMED? JERUSALEM'S PROFOUND STRATEGIC
INCOMPETENCE & DISASTROUS PERFORMANCE -- THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT'S FAILED POLICIES SINCE 1993 THAT HAVE
ERODED ISRAEL'S REPUTATION, STRATEGIC ADVANTAGE, & NATIONAL SECURITY -- HOW THE ISRAELI LEADERSHIP
CREATED THE GAZA PROBLEM -- ISRAEL AS A POLITY FULL OF TALENT, ENERGY & RESOLVE, BUT LACKING DIRECTION
FULL STORY:
Commentary on the Israel-Hamas war has tended toward partisan pleading, making the moral case for or against Israel.
That's a crucial debate, but not the only one; there's also a need for a cool strategic assessment; who is winning, who
is losing?
Hillel Frisch argues that Hamas (which he calls "a small isolated movement that controls a small strip") has "grossly
miscalculated" by antagonizing the Egyptian government and making war on Israel. He concludes Hamas has
embarked on "strategic suicide."
Perhaps, but scenarios exist in which Hamas gains. Khaled Abu Toameh notes the powerful and growing support for
Hamas around the Middle East. Caroline Glick offers two ways for Hamas to win: a return to the status quo ante, with
Hamas still in charge of Gaza, or a ceasefire agreement whereby foreign powers form an international monitoring regime
to oversee Gaza's borders with Israel and Egypt.
As this suggests, an assessment of Hamas' war record depends primarily on decisions made in Jerusalem. Those
decisions being the real issue, how well has Israel's leadership performed?
Disastrously. Jerusalem's profound strategic incompetence continues and heightens the failed policies since 1993 that
have eroded Israel's reputation, strategic advantage, and security. Four main reasons lead me to this negative
conclusion.
First, the team in charge in Jerusalem created the Gaza problem. Its leader, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert immortally
explained in 2005 the forthcoming unilateral Israeli withdrawal from Gaza: "We [Israelis] are tired of fighting, we are
tired of being courageous, we are tired of winning, we are tired of defeating our enemies."
Olmert had a vital role in (1) initiating the Gaza withdrawal, which ended the Israel Defense Forces' close control of the
territory, and (2) giving up Israeli control over the Gaza-Egypt border. This latter, little noted decision, enabled Hamas
to build tunnels to Egypt, smuggle in matériel, and launch missiles into Israel.
Secondly, Olmert and his colleagues failed to respond to the barrage of rockets and mortar shells. From the Israeli
withdrawal in 2005 until now, Hamas has launched over 6,500 missiles into Israel. Incredibly, Israelis endured nearly
eight attacks a day for three years; why? A responsible government would have responded to the first rocket as a
casus belli and immediately responded.
Thirdly, a committee of the French Parliament published an important technical report in mid-December, 2008,
establishing that "there is no longer doubt" about the military purposes of the Iranian nuclear program, and that it
will be up and running in 2 to 3 years.
The waning days of the Bush administration, with the current President nearly out the door and the President-Elect
yet in the wings, offers a unique moment to take care of business. Why did Olmert squander this opportunity to
confront the relatively trivial danger Hamas presents, rather than the existential threat of Iran's nuclear program? This
negligence has potentially dire repercussions.
Finally, from what one can discern of the Olmert government's goal in its war on Hamas, it seems to be to weaken
Hamas and strengthen Fatah so that Mahmoud Abbas can re-take control of Gaza and re-start diplomacy with Israel.
Michael B. Oren and Yossi Klein Halevi captured this idea in a recent article title: "Palestinians need Israel to win: If
Hamas Gets Away with Terror Once Again, the Peace Process Will Be Over."
Bitter experience, however, invalidates this thesis. For one, Fatah has proven itself a determined enemy intent on
eliminating the Jewish state. For another, Palestinians themselves repudiated Fatah in 2006 elections. It strains
credulity that anyone could still think of Fatah as a "partner for peace." Rather, Jerusalem should think creatively of
other scenarios, perhaps my "no-state solution" bringing in the Jordanian and Egyptian governments.
More dismaying even than Olmert's ineptitude is that the Israeli election a month from now pits three leaders of his
same ilk. Two of them (Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak) currently serve as Olmert's
main lieutenants, while two (Barak and Binyamin Netanyahu) failed badly in their prior prime ministerial stints.
Looking beyond Olmert and his potential successors comes the worst news of all, namely, that no one at the upper
echelons of Israel's political life articulates the imperative for victory. For this reason, I see Israel as a lost polity, one
full of talent, energy and resolve, but lacking direction.
© Daniel Pipes 2009
Originally Published in the Jerusalem Post, January 11, 2009
Republished with the Permission of Daniel Pipes
Reprinted from the Daniel Pipes Mailing List, January 11, 2009
Article URL: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/6118
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Israel & the Arabs -- The Israeli-Arab Conflict
Middle East -- Arabs, Arab States,
& Their Middle Eastern Neighbors
American Foreign Policy -- The Middle East
Islamism & Jihadism -- Radical Islam & Islamic Terrorism
Page Three
Page Two
Page One
International Politics & World Disorder:
War, Peace, & Geopolitics in the Real World:
Foreign Affairs & U.S. National Security
Page Two
Page One
Islamist Terrorist Attacks on the U.S.A.
Osama bin Laden & the Islamist Declaration of War
Against the U.S.A. & Western Civilization
Islamist International Terrorism &
U.S. Intelligence Agencies
U.S. National Security Strategy
Dr. Daniel Pipes, a Ph.D. in Islamic History (Harvard University, 1978), is the Founder and Director of the Middle East Forum,
the Founder of Campus Watch, a signatory of the Project for the New American Century, a former board member of the U.S.
Institute of Peace, a former adjunct scholar at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, a Golden Circle supporter of the
U.S. Committee for a Free Lebanon, a former member of the U.S. Department of Defense Special Task Force on Terrorism and
Technology, and a former lecturer at the U.S. Naval War College, Harvard University, the University of Chicago, and the
University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Pipes was the Director of the Foreign Policy Research Institute from 1986 to 1993.
Author or co-author of eighteen books, Dr. Pipes is a regular columnist for Front Page Magazine, the New York
Sun, and the Jerusalem Post. His analyses of world trends and of forces and developments in the Middle East
have appeared in numerous North American newspapers, including the Washington Post, the New York Times,
and the Wall Street Journal. He frequently appears on American network television, as well as at universities and
think tanks, to discuss the Middle East, Islam, and the Islamist threat to the U.S.A. and the West. He also has appeared on
BBC and Al Jazeera, and has lectured in approximately twenty-five countries.
Dr. Pipes is a Polish-American Jew whose parents fled Poland in 1939, immigrated to the U.S.A., and assimilated well into
American society and culture. His father is Richard Pipes, an American historian specializing in Russian and Soviet history
and serving as Professor of History at Harvard University from 1950 until his retirement in 1996. During the Cold War, the
worldview of Richard Pipes was strongly anti-Soviet and anti-Communist.
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume XI, 2009
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity