Gaza
On this third day, Israel's attacks are now targeting buildings that are "symbols" of Hamas. (BBC outlines some of the "symbols.")
The Guardian carries a story that the Israelis have been planning this for six months with a few other interesting assessments. 1) It's also about the Israeli election in February. 2) This planning is seen as a correction to the Lebanon/Hezbullah disaster. 3) The Israelis really believe this will undermine Hamas. and 4)
It's one article making guesses, so judge it for what it is, but I found the bullet points thought provoking.
(NYTimes) Obama Defers to Bush, for Now, on Gaza Crisis
(I would love to hear the contacts between the Obama transition and the Israelis.)
Later: Another interesting "News Analysis" in the NYTimes suggesting that the Israelis primary goal is showing that they're no paper tiger, to reestablish fear across the Arab world after the Lebanon disaster. (Again, for "thought provoking," it's worth a read.)
And, the WaPo has an editorial pointing out that any gains against Hamas are likely to be small or none, while these attacks undermine the efforts against Iran's nuclear program.
(And Turkey and Syria have already canceled their negotiations.)
Later: For a US propaganda "loss," one of the significant bombs being used by the Israelis is the US made and supplied GBU-39 guided bunker buster.
The Guardian carries a story that the Israelis have been planning this for six months with a few other interesting assessments. 1) It's also about the Israeli election in February. 2) This planning is seen as a correction to the Lebanon/Hezbullah disaster. 3) The Israelis really believe this will undermine Hamas. and 4)
The three weeks before Barack Obama's inauguration were Israel's last chance to assume automatic diplomatic support from Washington, as it got from George Bush over both West Bank settlements and the Lebanon war.
It is hard to imagine an Israeli government testing Obama, whom it views with foreboding because of a sense he has more sympathy for the Palestinians, with a crisis of these dimensions during his first days or weeks in office.
It's one article making guesses, so judge it for what it is, but I found the bullet points thought provoking.
(NYTimes) Obama Defers to Bush, for Now, on Gaza Crisis
(I would love to hear the contacts between the Obama transition and the Israelis.)
Later: Another interesting "News Analysis" in the NYTimes suggesting that the Israelis primary goal is showing that they're no paper tiger, to reestablish fear across the Arab world after the Lebanon disaster. (Again, for "thought provoking," it's worth a read.)
And, the WaPo has an editorial pointing out that any gains against Hamas are likely to be small or none, while these attacks undermine the efforts against Iran's nuclear program.
(And Turkey and Syria have already canceled their negotiations.)
Later: For a US propaganda "loss," one of the significant bombs being used by the Israelis is the US made and supplied GBU-39 guided bunker buster.
posted by mikevotes at
7:11 AM
6 Comments:
Lots of good analysis there. Thanks mikevotes.
By
Anonymous, at 7:54 AM
I figure everyone already has opinions on this, so I'm just trying to link key points.
By
mikevotes, at 8:22 AM
Also, Alot of my blogging is an effort to think out loud to try to predict, and no matter how I look at this, I can't see an effective Israeli endgame, unless the whole goal is to punch simply to let people know you will. And that rarely works.
By
mikevotes, at 8:28 AM
I'm not intelligent or informed enough to engage in analysis, but I have been wondering how much of this (at least the timing) is to force Obama into a particular foreign policy position -- vis a vis Israel-Palestine -- before his inauguration.
Also, do Israeli politicians feel they need to create (or enflame) violent instability at it's borders in order to secure blind, unquestioning American support? I wonder if everyone in the region is so acclimated to a degree of violence (or war) that they no longer have a real lust for peace.
There is a certain security, I suppose, in the predictability of the offensive that isn't afforded by peaceful defense... (waiting for something "bad" to happen.) We sometimes see this in foster kids who've been moved around a lot. Once they're in a placement too long, they start to test the permanency of the placement by behaving in ways that are self destructive.
By
-epm, at 8:38 AM
There's a certain cynicism in Israel's actions too I think epm. They've given up on the so-called 'two state solution'.
By
Anonymous, at 9:38 AM
EPM, that's definitely a possibility, but, this could also give him pretext to push the other way.
Israel does have a history of trying to establish "facts on the ground" before going into any sort of negotiations.
Really, I just can't see the motivations because I can't see how this will be long term productive from a tactical standpoint.
Certainly US politics is playing in, but I think that Israeli politics is playing in more. They have an election in Feb, and the ruling party's challenge comes primarily from the right. After this party performed so badly on Lebanon, I think they're trying to establish themselves as more hawkish/capable.
In the end, though, there is rarely one reason a country goes to war. It's usually a confluence of reasons, pushed by a number of interests.
By
mikevotes, at 10:35 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home