July 18, 2001

Israel's options for preventing all-out war

Daniel Pipes National Post

Back in December I warned of "winds of war" blowing in the Middle East. A few days ago the far-left Israeli politician Naomi Chazan echoed my warning, down to using that same three-word English expression.

But we understand the dangers a bit differently. For her, the danger stems from "the failure of the ceasefire and the absence of any movement on the diplomatic front." In contrast, I emphasized "Israeli demoralization over the past seven years, [which has] reignited Arab overconfidence."

Not surprisingly, we recommend polar opposite policies. Ms. Chazan's solution lies in Israel resuming what I call the "Oslo niceness" -- overlooking Palestinian violence, promoting the Palestinian economy, withdrawing forces from the territories, and now recognizing a Palestinian state.

Haven't we already seen this movie? Oslo niceness between 1993 and 2000 brought Israel to its present predicament. Arabs and Iranians watched as a majority of Israel's population clamoured to hand over territory in return for scraps of paper and (correctly) concluded from this that morale in the Jewish state had deeply eroded.

They also (wrongly) concluded that the state was therefore militarily vulnerable. With this, the grudging acceptance that Israel had won from many Middle Easterners, via six wars and six victories, was rapidly undone. As Arabs and Iranians smelled blood, their ambition to eliminate Israel, previously in remission, re-surfaced rapidly and widely.

Survey research shows its extent. The (Arab-run) Jerusalem Media and Communication Center revealed in June that 46% of Palestinians want the current violence to lead to the "freedom of all Palestine" -- code words for the destruction of Israel. A nearly simultaneous Birzeit University poll found an even more resounding 72% of Palestinians support the "liberation" of Israel.

These vaulting hopes have spawned an Arab war-fever reminiscent of the terrible days of May, 1967. Ze'ev Schiff, dean of Israeli military correspondents, finds that, just as "on the eve of the Six-Day War, Arab leaders are issuing threat after threat against Israel, stirring their own passions and those of their audiences." A few sober-minded Arabic-speakers share this concern. "It's 1967 All Over Again" is the title of a dissident's article coming out of Damascus full of worries about a repeat disaster.

Unless Israel sends clear signals of strength, the current bout of sabre-rattling could, 1967-style, lead inadvertently to another all-out war.

Although elected to send precisely those signals of strength, Ariel Sharon began his prime ministry by unexpectedly continuing his predecessors' passive response to Palestinian violence (though this has changed somewhat in recent days).

Whatever Sharon's reasons for inaction -- win Western favour? maintain his coalition government? redeem his reputation? -- such a soft policy has major implications. If even this most feared of Israeli leaders absorbs the death of 21 teenagers without retaliation, it confirms the belief that Israel is nothing but a paper tiger. Or, in the evocative metaphor of Hezbollah's leader, it is "weaker than a spider's web."

To combat this perception, Israel needs to take more active steps. With a nod to Effi Eitam and Steven Plaut, here are a few suggestions:

Bury suicide bombers in potter's fields rather than deliver their bodies to relatives (who turn their funerals into frenzied demonstrations). Freeze the financial assets of Yasser Arafat, the PLO, and the PA. Prevent PA officials (including Arafat) from returning to the PA. Permit no transportation of people or goods beyond basic necessities. Shut off utilities to the PA.

Implement the death penalty against murderers. Seize weapons from the PA and make sure no new ones reach it. Re-occupy areas from which gunfire or mortars are shot. Raze the PA's illegal offices in Jerusalem, its security infrastructure, and villages from which attacks are launched. Capture or otherwise dispose of the PA leadership. Destroy the PA. Reach separate deals with each Palestinian town or village.

Sharon, in short, has no lack of choices. The hard part is finding the political will to act on them.

The stakes are high. Unless Israel takes steps to deter its potential enemies by reasserting its strong image, today's war fever could lead to tomorrow's war.

To help avoid such a war, the outside world (and especially the U.S. government) should do two things: end its repetition of the illogical mantra that "there can be no military solution to this conflict" and instead urge Sharon to take the steps needed to resurrect Israel's once-fearsome reputation.

Daniel Pipes is the director of the Philadelphia-based Middle East Forum.

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001

Answers

Of course, one problem with retaliation is the chicken-and-the-egg syndrome. The PA will ALWAYS say that our act of retaliation was the first step that incited them to do something more.

-- Anonymous, July 18, 2001