Below is a blog that I thought was worth posting from my colleague, James Robbins, Senior Fellow in National Security Affairs at the American Foreign Policy Council.  It covers the absurd notions of proportionality that have been buzzing around newsrooms with Israel's offensive in Gaza.  The original is posted here.

By: James Robbins

Criticism of Israel for using excessive force in combating Hamas in Gaza fails to make several critical distinctions between the contesting parties. Hamas chose not to renew the six-month ceasefire that had created a modicum of peace ("state of calm," officially) in the area. Hamas then resumed indiscriminate attacks on civilian targets in Israel. Israel’s response, by way of contrast, seeks to target only Hamas and its infrastructure, and any civilian casualties are unintended, unwanted, and usually the result of Hamas placing its weapons and command posts in civilian neighborhoods.

By: Matthew RJ Brodsky

With the expiration of the six-month lull in Hamas rocket fire into Israel, the IDF is set to invade Gaza and attack Hamas’s terrorist infrastructure.  There are several reasons for the timing of Israel’s operation.  Firstly, many in Israel’s security establishment never signed on to the purpose of the cease-fire to begin with.  It merely granted Hamas a respite from Israeli attacks while giving them the opportunity rearm and better train themselves.  For two years, since Hamas’s takeover of Gaza in 2007, they have been working hard to develop their military power with Iranian assistance using Hizballah as a model.  The new rockets they have smuggled in pieces through tunnels from Egypt now have the capacity to strike the outskirts Beersheba.  Since more fighting is inevitable given Hamas’s pledge to destroy the Jewish state, it is better to attack when they have fewer weapons at their disposal.  A ceasefire only works in Hamas’s favor.

By: Matthew RJ Brodsky

The following is an article I wrote for the American Foreign Policy Council.  It was originally published here at the Jerusalem Post.

As the new president-elect begins to weigh the carrots and sticks he can employ when dealing with the Middle East, he will run into the question of how to handle Syria.  Bashar al-Asad was the first to reach out with a telegram to Mr. Obama on November 7 that “expressed hope for constructive dialogue so that the difficulties can be overcome which have hampered the advance of peace, stability and progress in the Middle East.”

The list of these “difficulties” is indeed long.  The regime in Damascus supports terrorist groups such as Hizballah and Hamas, continues to destabilize Lebanon, strives to become a nuclear power, and is politically and tactically wedded to Iran – and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

By: Matthew RJ Brodsky

Israel faces several challenges today including a stalled peace process with an increasing worldwide call for a bi-national state solution; Iran’s nuclear program; and the growing social divide in Israeli society between religious and secular Jews.  A two-state solution should remain the only acceptable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  However, the calls for one state for Jews and Palestinians alike will continue to gather steam in the future.  Given the current demographic situation and problems in Israeli society, maintaining the status quo does not benefit Israel.
Haaretz reports on another glarring example of UNFIL's inability to stop Hizballah from re-arming.  It would be an understatement to say that UNSC Resolution 1701, adopted on August 11, 2006 in order to end the Second Lebanon War, has been yet another unimplemented United Nations resolution:

The following is Haaretz's article:

Adopted: August 11, 2006

The Security Council,

PP1. Recalling all its previous resolutions on Lebanon, in particular resolutions 425 (1978), 426 (1978), 520 (1982), 1559 (2004), 1655 (2006) 1680 (2006) and 1697 (2006), as well as the statements of its President on the situation in Lebanon, in particular the statements of 18 June 2000 (S/PRST/2000/21), of 19 October 2004 (S/PRST/2004/36), of 4 May 2005 (S/PRST/2005/17) of 23 January 2006 (S/PRST/2006/3) and of 30 July 2006 (S/PRST/2006/35),

Back in June, when shortly after the secret talks between Syria and Israel became known, two contrasting opinions were shared on the prospects of peacemaking.  Since MEO seeks to foster debate on the Middle East, below the two articles are shared.  The first is by David Schenker, the Director of the Program on Arab Politics from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.  Responding to his article is Joshua Landis, the Director of the Center for Peace Studies and host of the blog, Syria Comment.
Few people can grasp Israeli society and emotions better than Daniel Gordis . His website entitled, "Dispatches from an Anxious State," brings the Israeli experience to the lay-person.  Rather than raw political analysis, the reader is engaged in a real story from Gordis's life and that of his family since moving to Israel in 1998.  While the Web is abuzz with different interpretations of the political meaning of the prisoner swap between Israel and Hizballah - did Hizballah win; did Olmert cave; was the return of the remains of two kidnapped and killed Israeli soldiers worth the release of the notorious Samir Kuntar?
Bradley Burston of Israel's daily newspaper, Haaretz, wrote this article about Israel's prisoner swap with Hizballah including Samir Kuntar.  It is well-worth the read.  The original can be viewed at Haaretz.

The pleasure that Hezbollah takes in torture
By, Bradley Burston
July 15, 2008


Torture takes many forms. We take it and we hand it out, we live with it and we live with ourselves knowing that we may be subjecting our loved ones to it, that our loved ones may be engaging in it, that innocent people on every side may be torture's direct victims.

Patrick Seale, author and biographer of the late Syrian president, Hafiz al-Asad recently shared his views on the prospects of a Syrian-Israeli peace.  The original article can be read at Middle East Online.

The Prospects for a Syrian-Israeli Peace
By, Patrick Seale
May 2, 2008


A faintly hopeful aspect of the current frost between Syria and Israel is that Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan seems determined to bring the two countries to the negotiating table. Turkey has emerged over the past year as the principle, indeed the only serious, broker between these bitter enemies.
Syndicate content