The Israeli-Palestinian Thing

Okay, so this is my understanding of this whole Israeli-Palestinian thing. IF the facts are as I believe them to be, and have concluded them to be after reading the news about the middle east for some thirty-odd years. There are roughly two distinct viewpoints on this matter, as evidenced most glaringly if one reads several publications from both sides of the political spectrum, the 'left' and the 'right.' Leftist sources would repeatedly blame Israel for being heavy-handed, right-wing publications consistently insist Israel is only defending itself against terrorist attacks, and trying earnestly to avoid 'collateral damage.' In my humble and perhaps uninformed opinion (always open to new information that might change it), The truth is probably more accurately represented (though still perhaps not very objective) in the right-wing publications, because of one glaring omission from most of the more liberal articles: the undeniable and insurmountable fact that the 'terrorists' target civilians with their suicide bombings and their rockets, refusing to participate in political solutions. This fact alone (and there are many others, such as the fact that they have no legitimacy in negotiations as they are not governments and can't control their own factions anyway...) renders whatever arguments they might have rhetorical. So...

A World Court, or some such international body, granted Israel a homeland in 1948 by dividing up some land in Palestine. This same international body apparently made no provisions, or at least not any adequate or viable ones, about what was to happen to the displaced "Palestinians," and the nations of the Arab community didn't invite them into their various countries, so they were in effect relegated to some smaller areas within their original lands. A situation ripe for revolution. Then there was this big dispute between religious groups about who got to have control over some religious sites, too. That didn't help. Religion rarely does.

Hostility grew, and in 1967 Israel was attacked by most of their neighbors. They kicked ass, and occupied some of the surrounding territory in order to prevent further attacks. The defeated people, the Palestinians, have apparently refused to accept either the partitioning of their land or their subsequent defeat in '67, and continue attacking Israel. Having little in the way of resources, and no plan, or even thought, for mutual peaceful coexistence, they resort to sending suicide bombers and launching crude rockets to kill Israeli civilians. For years various Palestinian groups espoused terrorism against civilians as a valid path to accomplishing their goals - they meant it, too, and suited actions to words by conducting a seemingly endless string of atrocities. Israel then continues in its efforts to prevent the attacks on its citizens, eventually becoming a rather onerous burden to the Palestinian people - who unfortunately, and for some unfathomable reason, are unwilling to curb the more violent elements in their society. I avoid saying unable, as such groups couldn't exist without the support, tacit or overt, of the people.

International outcry over the inevitable civilian casualties caused by Israel's aggressive campaign to stop the bombing (where was the outcry over the terrorist bombings?...) eventually pressures Israel into withdrawing from Gaza and parts of the West Bank in an effort to loosen the tensions, and as an indication of their intentions to seek a negotiated two-state solution - but the attacks don't stop. Note here that the civilian casualties caused by Israel were collateral damage (I know, that's politically incorrect, but that never stopped me from telling it like it is) that occurred in spite of efforts to minimize it, and in spite of the fact that the various terrorist groups embed themselves in areas with high civilian populations, or in mosques or other religious sites, using them as shields, and their deaths or destruction as anti-Israeli propoganda, while the innocent civilians killed by the Palestinians were targeted.

In the final analysis it all seems pretty cut and dried, to me. Though there are almost certainly some very valid complaints about the way Israel has treated the Palestinians, these complaints need to be pursued through normal political channels, negotiation, appeals to international bodies, communication, education, illumination, and other peaceful means, to the fullest extent possible. Cripes, hire a Madison Avenue advertising firm to pitch your cause, they can sell darn near anything! If, however, at some point, the level of frustration with the situation and the lack of progress becomes too much to bear, and the Palestinians and their various factions decide they must resort to violence to achieve their ends, then so be it. They have chosen war, and they must be prepared to pay the price. I guess that's the case - they did, after all, elect Hamas, a violent terrorist group, to run their country. What were they thinking?

What, Israel is supposed to sit there while people blow up on the streets and rockets come raining in a few times a day? Uh uh. I'm not saying Israel hasn't made its share of mistakes, I'm just saying that by employing terrorist tactics as the Palestinian groups have done countless times, targeting innocent civilians, is completely unacceptable. It not only renders any legitimate argument they might have had moot or irrelevant, but also invites severe retribution - and the hellish cost of war will be paid by innocent civilians on both sides. It's about time the Palestinian people woke up and realized that they must turn away from the violence promoted by their radical elements, and convince each other that they must pursue peaceful strategies to accomplish their objectives.

In the end it's their choice, though - and if they choose violence, then it's pretty inevitable that they're going to reap what they sow. If that sounds callous, it's not. It isn't as if I don't sympathize and empathize with the plight of the Palestinians, I do, conditions are so bad there I can't even imagine living like they do, under occupation, with a collapsed economy, a history of massive corruption in their various "governments," and so on. But I also sympathize and empathize with the plight of the Israelis... and they're the ones who've been on the receiving end of terrorist attacks for decades, and certainly have a right to defend themselves. There are many nuances and subtleties to all of this, I realize that it's really not quite as cut and dried as this, but I maintain my opinion that it's up to the Palestinians and the other elements that support terrorism (attacking civilians to instill terror in a populace in order to achieve your political goals) to put a stop to this insanity. Then, AFTER the killing stops, we can talk about what Israel needs to do to be a good neighbor to its Palestinian brothers and sisters.

Brief history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Your thoughts?

P.S. (7/30/2006): Just found an article in the Washington Post that explains the legal basis for Israel's response.