About that ceasefire

While there’s been some talk of a truce between Israel and Hamas, according to today’s NYT, Israel likely to reject 48 hour cease fire plan.

The idea of a 48-hour cease-fire emerged from a conversation between Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner of France and Defense Minister Ehud Barak of Israel. It was supposed to establish at least a temporary pause in the fighting that would allow humanitarian relief to be delivered to the besieged coastal strip. Aides to Mr. Barak said he was interested in exploring it with Prime Minister Olmert and the rest of the cabinet at a security meeting on Wednesday.

“The leading option right now is still a ground invasion, but the target of this operation is an improved cease-fire, and if that can come without the invasion, fine,” a close aide to Mr. Barak said Tuesday, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he is not Mr. Barak’s authorized spokesman. “But, of course, Hamas has to agree, and there has to be a mechanism to make it work.”

In Paris, Mr. Kouchner met with his European Union colleagues Tuesday over the Gaza crisis and called publicly for a permanent cease-fire. A similar call came from the so-called quartet of powers focused on the region — the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia.

The devil, of course, is in the details. The “mechanism” the anonymous source talks about will be nearly impossible to implement. While the talk of a “permanent cease-fire” sounds noble, the reality Elder of Ziyon observes is somewhat different.

Rocket attacks occurred before, during and after disengagement; before, during and after Hamas elections; before, during and after the Hamas/Fatah unity government; through the Hamas coup, through the worldwide blockade of Gaza, through the 2007 “truce” and through the 2008 “truce.” They happened while Gazans were happily employed at the Erez Industrial Park in Gaza as well as when it was shut down, they happened while Jews lived in Gush Katif and when they didn’t, when the crossings were opened and when they were shut.

In recent there have been a number of truces between Israel and Hamas and rocket fire continue throughout them all. So should Israel agree to a ceasefire, it would essentially be tying its own hands from responding.

This is something even the State Department acknowledges according the Times:

“That is different from the cease-fire that existed in the last six months,” said the spokesman, Gordon Duguid, noting that Hamas had routinely violated the previous agreement by firing rockets into southern Israel.

Of course, given that Israel has stated that its purpose is to eliminate the possibility of even more rockets from Gaza, a “cease-fire” – that magic concept – would effectively be a defeat for Israel.

There are two other interesting observations in the Times article:

In Gaza, Hamas militants issued a taped statement vowing revenge for those killed in the Israeli air raids since Saturday and warning that a ground invasion would prove painful for Israel. Palestinian officials say that more than 370 people have been killed, among them, the United Nations says, at least 62 women and children and an unknown number of civilian men. Two sisters, ages 4 and 11, were killed in a strike in the north as concern was growing around the world that the assault was taking a terrible toll on civilians.

Of course the statement’s taped. There’s no way they’re doing anything that might give away their positions.

And then there’s this:

His 13-year-old son, Yousef, was with him. When asked his view of the situation, Yousef took an unusual stand for someone in Gaza, where Israel is being cursed by most everyone. “I blame Hamas. It doesn’t want to recognize Israel. If they did so there could be peace,” he said. “Egypt made a peace treaty with Israel, and nothing is happening to them.”

Remember this isn’t the only case of a child saying this.

[Interviewer] “How many were you?”

[Girl] “Seven.In the other room were my mother, my father, my yonger brother and another sister, who is 13 days old. I say, Hamas is the cause, in the first place, of all wars.”

PMW – the source of the interview – noted in a followup e-mail that the girl’s statement was likely a reflection of the views adults around her hold.

While two data points hardly represent a trend, they are remarkable. The NYT reported yesterday (h/t BotWT):

In the fourth-floor orthopedic section, a woman in her late 20s asked a militant to let her see Saleh Hajoj, her 32-year-old husband. She was turned away and left the hospital. Fifteen minutes later, Mr. Hajoj was carried out by young men pretending to transfer him to another ward. As he lay on the stretcher, he was shot in the left side of the head.

Mr. Hajoj, like five others killed at the hospital this way in 24 hours, was accused of collaboration with Israel. He had been in the central prison awaiting trial by Hamas judges; when Israel destroyed the prison on Sunday he and the others were transferred to the hospital. But their trials were short-circuited.

In a land of summary executions, taking a stand against the ruling authority can be rather dangerous. I’m surprised that anyone would express an opinion that didn’t blame Israel.

Israeli author David Grossman, on the Times’ op-ed page though argues that Israel should fight fire with a cease-fire.

NOW, after the heavy blow that Israel has dealt to the Gaza Strip, we would do best to halt, turn to the leaders of Hamas and tell them: Until last Saturday, we restrained ourselves in responding to the thousands of Qassam rockets fired at us. Now you know how severe the retaliation can be. So as not to add to the death and destruction that has already taken place, we intend, unilaterally and absolutely, to hold our fire for the next 48 hours.

Even if you continue to fire on Israel, we will not respond by resuming combat. We will grit our teeth, just as we did in the days and months before our attack. We will not be drawn into using force.

Furthermore, we hereby invite all concerned countries, nearby and distant, to mediate between us and you, in order to reinstate the cease-fire that ended earlier this month. If you also cease hostilities, we will not renew them. If you continue to shoot while we hold ourselves back, we will respond accordingly when the 48 hours end. But even then we will leave the door open to negotiations to re-establish the truce, and even seek a broader agreement.

This should be Israel’s next move. Is it possible, or are we already captives of the all-too-familiar ritual of war?

Huh? So if Israel holds it fire for 48 hours unconditionally, that will accomplish what? It will free Israel from the “all-too-familiar ritual of war?”

Will the 250,000 people living within range of Hamas missiles object to being fair game. But at what point would Grossman say that it’s proper for Israel to defend its citizens? He concludes with this:

And one more inevitable thought. Had we taken this approach in July of 2006, after Hezbollah kidnapped two of our soldiers — had we held our fire then, after our initial retaliatory strike in Lebanon and declared that we were waiting for a day or two to calm the situation and give mediation a chance — we would likely be in a better position today. That, too, is a lesson that Israel’s government should have learned from that war. In fact, it is the most important lesson we must learn.

Perhaps, I should not fault Grossman for this thought, as his son was killed defending Israel in 2006. But the problem wasn’t that Israel fought Hezbollah, it was that Israel didn’t finish the job.

UPDATE: A question about the proliferation of Grossman’s op-ed.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.