There is no military solution

The critique that there is no military solution is not always stated explicitly but is, rather, obliquely made. During Operation Cast Lead, this notion undergirded nearly all of NYT's reporting. At every step, reporters suggested that nothing the IDF could do would weaken Hamas. The flip side of this - that each action that could weaken Hamas will actually backfire is often put forward. The IDF action, the reasoning goes will be looked upon by the Gaza populace as an aggression against them. Now, here is where the complication sets in, and it turns out to be an ongoing question, which is What do Palestinians really think?

Polls are often proferred as evidence of what Palestinians believe, but few analyze the society and how opinions are generated. With a strong of conformism and violent coercion the opinions of the most aggressive and violent often win out. Those who express disagreement are often targeted. 

Thus, even when NYT is able to quote several people who express anger at Israel during Operation Cast Lead, for example, the reader must recognize that expressions of anger at Hamas are much riskier and more dangerous. Whether or not a Gazan expresses anger at Israel, Israel's interaction with him and the rest of the populace will be unchanged. But an open, public expression of anger against Hamas can often be dangerous to one's person. 

The notion that "there is no military solution" also discounts severely how military strength, and even victory, has played a role in reaching agreements. Surely, military success against Egypt, Jordan, and even the Palestinian Liberation Organization, have brought these parties to the negotiating table. 

A more measured, and accurate statement would be that there is no exclusively military solution to the conflict. However, NYT gives readers the impression that only through negotiations - diplomacy - can Israel gain recognition, security, and peace from its neighbors. The record, especially the Oslo Process, demonstrates otherwise.