Superb piece of information on a very difficult political subject. It makes one wonder why Israel under the present Bibi government appears to have given up on the quite meticulous care its government, notably under Meir, displayed in previous military strained periods. Furthermore, by sinking to Nazi-methods against the ‘enemy population’, that already suffered from the Hamas method of doing business, their need for western co-operation is now slowly but certainly unravelling. Not a good position to be in.
Excellent article. I had never thought about why Israel chose to maintain 'strategic ambiguity' but your analysis is plausible. I have also heard it repeated that if Iran had succeeded in testing a nuclear weapon, Saudi and perhaps other ME countries would have rushed to acquire their own - is that true?
Thank you very much, very informative. Now how about an analysis of Israel's conventional forces. as compared with those of other states in the region? Sorry to be pushy, but I think you guys enjoy this work!
Enlightening. I had no idea about the non introduction position or non testing. I also agree that it seems clear from its acts that the intent of Israel is indicative of genocide. Hamas are clearly at fault in starting the "war", if that is the right word? , as I think you pointed out at the time, it was likely aimed at breaking an Israel/Saudi, other Arab states alignment. But the reaction since the Hamas atrocities is completely disproportional, the Israeli killings alone indicate this , leave aside the state that the Palestinian people are now living in. This is way past what is a defensive reaction.
Interestingly (an understatement). Vanunu is still "effectively" a prisoner. Despite his prison sentence having been served. He cannot leave Israel.
Israel is a tiny country of 9 million people surrounded by billions of hostile Arabs who have never accepted the presence of a Jewish state in their midst. Israel's cause is just and it faces certain annihilation if it does not have a the ultimate deterrent. Why should it have to explain that? Lawrence is wrong to blame Israel for failing to resolve it conflict in Gaza and beyond. The war could end today if Hamas released its hostages(their abduction was a war crime), disarmed and renounced its genocidal intentions.
As I stress in the article the nuclear option was geared to an existential threat and in that Israel is no different to other nuclear powers. Other nuclear powers however make this explicit. Israel probably feels it has enough deterrent effect for the moment with an implicit threat. The issue here is whether that might need to change.
On Gaza I disagree. Of course Hamas is culpable and has had its own reasons for opposing a ceasefire. My issue from the start is that Israel has never had a credible political strategy to end this war, which requires a view of the governance of Gaza. Because the coalition would collapse if this involved a Palestinian role - which would be demanded by all the other states who would be involved in reconstruction - nothing happens. Which means that Hamas can survive inside Gaza because Israel can't occupy the whole territory while the harshness of the Israeli campaign has earned them more recruits. The lack of governance explains the problems of aid distribution as well. As the occupying power Israel is responsible even if others are also at fault.
Unfortunately also the comments and policies of the far-right - on the West Bank as well as Gaza - have been catastrophic encouraging the view here and elsewhere that the aim is genocide.
I’m no expert but I have connections to Israel and have been following events closely. Here’s where I disagree. Israel’s policy is to retrieve the hostages and dismantle Hamas to the point where it cannot retain power in Gaza. This is not a far right position, it is seen as vital self defence and supported by the majority of Israelis. It would be a starting point since there’s no negotiation to be had with an entity that aims to kill all the Jews and destroy Israel. Very kind of western countries to fall over themselves to offer a two state solution but Hamas has never asked for one. It openly declares it wants one state with noJews and with its capital in Jerusalem. Hamas propaganda, which Israel fails dismally to counter, and thorough indoctrination in Jew hatred and victimhood by Gaza’s Unwra run schools, rather than Israeli actions, provide more than enough crazed recruits for Hamas’s vicious attacks. None of which suggests a strategy but right now I think the international pressure should be on Hamas to release the abused and starving hostages and finally recognise Israel’s right to exist. That would be more productive than constantly blaming Israel as if it Jews have no right to live in peace and Palestinians have no agency.
Superb piece of information on a very difficult political subject. It makes one wonder why Israel under the present Bibi government appears to have given up on the quite meticulous care its government, notably under Meir, displayed in previous military strained periods. Furthermore, by sinking to Nazi-methods against the ‘enemy population’, that already suffered from the Hamas method of doing business, their need for western co-operation is now slowly but certainly unravelling. Not a good position to be in.
Excellent as always, thanks for this analysis and the bibliography.
Excellent article. I had never thought about why Israel chose to maintain 'strategic ambiguity' but your analysis is plausible. I have also heard it repeated that if Iran had succeeded in testing a nuclear weapon, Saudi and perhaps other ME countries would have rushed to acquire their own - is that true?
Thank you very much, very informative. Now how about an analysis of Israel's conventional forces. as compared with those of other states in the region? Sorry to be pushy, but I think you guys enjoy this work!
Enlightening. I had no idea about the non introduction position or non testing. I also agree that it seems clear from its acts that the intent of Israel is indicative of genocide. Hamas are clearly at fault in starting the "war", if that is the right word? , as I think you pointed out at the time, it was likely aimed at breaking an Israel/Saudi, other Arab states alignment. But the reaction since the Hamas atrocities is completely disproportional, the Israeli killings alone indicate this , leave aside the state that the Palestinian people are now living in. This is way past what is a defensive reaction.
Interestingly (an understatement). Vanunu is still "effectively" a prisoner. Despite his prison sentence having been served. He cannot leave Israel.
Thanks, great write up.
Excellent use of Tom Lehrer.
Great article.
Israel is a tiny country of 9 million people surrounded by billions of hostile Arabs who have never accepted the presence of a Jewish state in their midst. Israel's cause is just and it faces certain annihilation if it does not have a the ultimate deterrent. Why should it have to explain that? Lawrence is wrong to blame Israel for failing to resolve it conflict in Gaza and beyond. The war could end today if Hamas released its hostages(their abduction was a war crime), disarmed and renounced its genocidal intentions.
As I stress in the article the nuclear option was geared to an existential threat and in that Israel is no different to other nuclear powers. Other nuclear powers however make this explicit. Israel probably feels it has enough deterrent effect for the moment with an implicit threat. The issue here is whether that might need to change.
On Gaza I disagree. Of course Hamas is culpable and has had its own reasons for opposing a ceasefire. My issue from the start is that Israel has never had a credible political strategy to end this war, which requires a view of the governance of Gaza. Because the coalition would collapse if this involved a Palestinian role - which would be demanded by all the other states who would be involved in reconstruction - nothing happens. Which means that Hamas can survive inside Gaza because Israel can't occupy the whole territory while the harshness of the Israeli campaign has earned them more recruits. The lack of governance explains the problems of aid distribution as well. As the occupying power Israel is responsible even if others are also at fault.
Unfortunately also the comments and policies of the far-right - on the West Bank as well as Gaza - have been catastrophic encouraging the view here and elsewhere that the aim is genocide.
I’m no expert but I have connections to Israel and have been following events closely. Here’s where I disagree. Israel’s policy is to retrieve the hostages and dismantle Hamas to the point where it cannot retain power in Gaza. This is not a far right position, it is seen as vital self defence and supported by the majority of Israelis. It would be a starting point since there’s no negotiation to be had with an entity that aims to kill all the Jews and destroy Israel. Very kind of western countries to fall over themselves to offer a two state solution but Hamas has never asked for one. It openly declares it wants one state with noJews and with its capital in Jerusalem. Hamas propaganda, which Israel fails dismally to counter, and thorough indoctrination in Jew hatred and victimhood by Gaza’s Unwra run schools, rather than Israeli actions, provide more than enough crazed recruits for Hamas’s vicious attacks. None of which suggests a strategy but right now I think the international pressure should be on Hamas to release the abused and starving hostages and finally recognise Israel’s right to exist. That would be more productive than constantly blaming Israel as if it Jews have no right to live in peace and Palestinians have no agency.
I had no idea that Israel was not open about their possession of nuclear weapons.