Swamppundit

Dear Salam,

Your part of the world is got even more destructive recently. Hamas and Hizbollah kidnapped some Israeli solders, and, well, Israel took offense.

Whenever people start killing other people over there a lot of people over here blame their own leaders for the killing. Somehow the killing done by others is due to the failure of leadership and diplomacy by Western (particularly American) leaders.

A relevant parlor room quiz: It is 1936. Imagine you had the ability to hand pick the leader of every country in the world except Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union. Imagine that every leader you picked was the ablest diplomat, and the most brilliant strategic thinker, of his/her generation. The question is this: could these hand-picked leaders have avoided WW II without the use of military force?

My short answer: No.

In 1936, Germany, Japan, and the Soviet Union were not going to be persuaded by anyone, or anything, from expanding beyond their borders. Only guns, bullets, bombs, and the blood of troops could keep these 3 aggressors in check. Replace Chamberlain et al with best of the best and you still get war. Ironically, you would probably have gotten an earlier war – and a war much of the world would have proclaimed as “avoidable, a result of failed leadership and diplomacy.”

In 2006, can Hizbollah and Hamas be diplomatically persuaded to accept Israel’s right to exist in the Middle East?

The short answer is No. If Israel wishes to live in a world without periodic incoming rockets, Hizbollah and Hamas must be defeated – not accommodated, not finessed, not intimidated, not isolated, not verbally condemned, not diplomatically persuaded – defeated.

This is not necessarily to say that they must be defeated in the summer of 2006, or that they should be bombed from the air at the present time. It is only to say the evaluation of the “tactic” of dropping bombs must begin and end with the realization that the end goal is not the peaceful coexistence with Hizbollah and Hamas, but the eventual defeat of Hizbollah and Hamas.

Therefore, any argument that asserts that a ceasefire is good idea because it will facilitate successful diplomacy leading to Israel someday living in peace is fundamentally wrong because diplomacy, alone, will never lead to Israel living in peace.

Therefore, any person advocating such an argument for a ceasefire is a person who is fundamentally wrong. The most depressing part of all the recent events is how much of the world is fundamentally wrong.

I still love you, Salam, but this is not a good week to be optimistic about your future, or ours.

Love,
Clarence