Enough! Already! (... and mythic diversions)

[tcpip]

The Israeli invasion of Gaza continues, with the number of civilian deaths rising dramatically. Claims that Israel has been using cluster bombs and white phosphorus. Two UN schools are bombed killing forty, just after UN ambulances were hit killing paramedics. The definition of a 'terrorist' and a 'valid target'seems to get a bit rubbery according to the IDF. In contrast, Australian Jews denounce the invasion. A former Israeli soldier, and now Oxford professor, has come to some hard conclusions as a result of the invasion. Avaaz (a remarkably effective group) has a cease-fire petition, which I urge all to sign and pass on. Also, go vote for Prof. Juan Cole's 'blog Informed Comment as Best Middle East or Africa 'Blog.

I sometimes find myself drawn into this discussion and over the years have found myself increasingly in support of the "one (democratic, secular) state solution". The partition of Palestine was perhaps the worst early decision made by the United Nations and was not supported by any neighbouring state or by the former colonial power. Under such circumstances it is hardly surprising that there have been seemingly endless violence and wars as a consequence. Resolving the issue would involve ending the pseudo-soveriegnity (as Hannah Arendt put it) of a Jewish state in favour of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. Apart from applying laws equally over what it is currently Israel and the occupied territories, it would involvd ending existing discriminatory institutions and laws (e.g., Knesset Election Law, the control of the Israel Land Administration by the Jewish National Fund, the Law of Return, Nationality Law etc) would have to be abolished in favour of secular alternatives. Of course, having such considered opinions does attract detractors; dear readers, I present you my own troll from Tel Aviv.

Have engaged in a few mythic diversions of late. Last Sunday's RuneQuest Prax game included defeating the witch-queen of disease and visiting a moment of the non-sequential reality that is the Godtime. darknova666's character jumped between misfortune and elation on several occassions in the scenario. On a further Gloranthan theme I've introduced The Crimson Bat in my HeroQuest pbem. Have also extracted and modified the review of Pathfinder from the latest issue of RPG Review (issue #3 already has three articles, awesome!) to submit to RPG.net. On an oddly related topic, on Sunday week I'm presenting on "A Unitarian-Univeralist View of the Economic Crisis" - how's that related? Afterwards we're playing Credo: The Game of Duelling Dogmas, which is attracting some interest from members of the congregation.

Comments

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

I don't think a single secular state is within the realm of possibility; it would seem to me that the Jewish state is a fait accompli. But what interests me is this -- what are the long-term military and political goals of Hamas? The interests of peace may require for them to reverse their... strict... position on Israel and Judaism, and to do so before Israel reciprocates the gesture and acknowledges them. If they cannot do that when necessary, or if they choose not to do that if necessary, then they will have failed to stop Israeli advance much more thoroughly than they can imagine.

It is to some extent irrelevant to Israel and the US whether Palestinians vote Hamas for the soup kitchens, the schools and for the charity work -- the collective multi-million dollar zakat, as it were, of the organisation -- or for its militant stance. It is only relevant to Israel and the US that Fatah is losing the gravity of power.

Indeed, that is the most significant tactical blunder of recent times, and I am inclined to think it is one of Fatah. I suppose I should include Marwan Barghouti's al-Mustaqbal under this umbrella. Once Fatah and Mr Barghouti had collectively lost the popular vote, they had little choice but to take part in that incharitable Palestinian parlour game, Toss The Other Side's Politicans Off A Rooftop, which Fatah played for many rounds with Hamas for no long-term gain whatsoever.

[madali.livejournal.com]

Hamas accepted and observed a six-month cease-fire. This means that they have were looking beyond their slogans.

Realistically, if the west cared, they'd know that resistance group that were standing by certain ideals since their conceptions from 1980s, couldn't just abandon them all the instant they get elected into office, even if they wanted to. It would be a huge blow to their group structure.

The group could have slowly weaned itself off from their slogans if they gained some grounds in terms of improving the lives of the Palestanian people and their independence.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

They did accept a six-month cease-fire -- and then they, alas, rather inadvisedly and spectacularly broke it (although Karen Abu Zeid, for instance, certainly disagrees about this point). While Israel's retaliation is arguably far beyond proportional, depending on their exact true war aims, and certainly a humanitarian tragedy by any measure, the strategic blunder is on Hamas's side. I do not think Israel is particularly eager to cater to the niceties of Hamas's internal and ideological group spirit if it means continued rocket and mortar fire.

I'd also love for Hamas to wean itself off its slogans, in the way Fatah largely has after the Oslo accord. Fatah should've fought harder to win the vote and keep the reins, and they failed. Alas, it seems that Hamas's fighting ideology much goes rather beyond sloganising -- there are plenty of Hamas leaders who consider "the Zionist Occupying Entity", as it were, insatiable, and it's impossible to talk to an insatiable enemy -- and it may be so fundamental they cannot come to recognise Israel, or consider a substantial long-term armistice, until it's too late.

[madali.livejournal.com]

They didn't actually break. It was a six-months cease-fire with certain conditions to be met by both sides. The term ended and because Hamas considered that none of the goals of the truce was achieved (main point was trucks passing the border), the ceasefire was not renewed.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

I don't think a single secular state is within the realm of possibility; it would seem to me that the Jewish state is a fait accompli.

Well, we disagree on that point. There is momentum both in the Arab world and in Israel (along with European and American conferences) that are considering it as an alternative.

The following brief from Al Arabiya is a good summary of the position - I was especially impressed by the second paragraph
http://www.alarabiya.net/views/2009/01/02/63327.html

... and the following article from Haaretz is bluntly honest in the prospects of the two-state solution - and this is from a supporter.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1011859.html

But what interests me is this -- what are the long-term military and political goals of Hamas?

Strictly speaking? It's the creation of an Islamic state in historic Palestine. But as we know, that is not a realistic goal. They are a product of their circumstances, a product of Fatah's corruption, and Fatah's failure to deliver a Palestinian state with an East Jersusalem capital. They are a product of Fatah's lack of charitable institutions, a product of Fatah's inability to engage in armed resistance against the occupation. Hamas simply filled a void where Fatah failed (along with some - in hindsight - odd support from Netanyahu)

The ball, I think, is in Fatah's court to take back the ideological agenda.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

The ball, I think, is in Fatah's court to take back the ideological agenda.

I'd be inclined to think you're right. We'll have to see if they can. Henry Kissinger once wrote that a nation defeated militarily can broadly speaking adopt one of two options. One is rearming and fighting harder, trusting on its internal moral order and physical resources to ultimately carry the day, and the other is to restructure the moral order and adopt a policy of collaboration and appeasement.

My thinking has become such that serious armed resistance to Israel must cease before accommodation can be reached. That is to say, the Israeli military machine cannot be defeated with armed struggle. Even if Israel does turn out to be insatiable, and not simply aiming to secure its ragged, chaotic and disputed internal borders, a policy of appeasement still seems to me the only possible long-term choice. It is a gamble and as Mr Kissinger said, it's not heroic, but it's more likely to keep the remaining Palestinian people alive and out of those refuge camps over in the direction of Jordan. Fatah has the werewithal to adopt such a strategy. Hamas, I don't think so.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

Hmmm.. I wonder (given his complicity in the affair) how Henry Kissinger would explain what happened in East Timor. By 1999 FRETILIN were in no position to win a military victory...

You are right, Israel cannot be defeated militarily. But nor can Israel defeat the militia, either Hamas or Hezbollah. So the problems will continue until someone takes the moral initiative.

[zenicurean.livejournal.com]

But nor can Israel defeat the militia, either Hamas or Hezbollah. So the problems will continue until someone takes the moral initiative.

Perhaps not without carrying out extreme measures that would cost them even the support of the United States. But yes -- a succesful moral initiative would be in order, you're entirely correct, I think. I would welcome one.

But if Israel provides itself with a moderate government that is willing to produce, say, a two-state solution in good faith, the central problem remains: The man with the gun trumps the man with the piece of paper with the signature on it, because he has the power to break the treaty. A negotiating Israel despairs because they must give land and loose their grasp in exchange for a promise to stop the struggle, which is liable always to be withdrawn, over and over again. That would support what you say about Fatah having to come to the forefront, and furthermore Hamas must restructure its morality; it must compromise on its fundamental good ethics and lay down, grimacing and ashamed, some of its green flags and its copies of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.