The Matrix of the Conflict

"Israel Deepens Gaza Incursion as Toll Mounts"
A1, Tuesday 1/6/09
By Ethan Bronner

In another article summarizing the day's military and diplomatic activities, the NYT continues to fail to understand the matrix of the conflict.

The Times writes:

Israel has long argued that Hamas exploits civilians by operating among them. Hamas has responded that it is a people’s movement.

How does being a people's movement rationalize the exploitation of civilians as human shields? It is amazing that the NYT needs to say that Israel argues that Hamas exploits civilians when this is abundantly clear. The Intelligence & Terrorism information center has produced an extensive report on Hamas' exploitation of civilians as human shields. And if that is not enough evidence, the NYT could observe Hamas' own rhetoric. In this video, a Hamas representative extols the Palestinian death industry. Here is the text:

For the Palestinian people death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the Jihad fighters excel, and the children excel. Accordingly [Palestinians] created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the Jihad fighters againset the Zionist bombing machine, as they were saying to the Zionist enemy: We desire death as you desire Life.

Beyond the obvious fact that Hamas is anti-humantiarian group that exploits its own civilian populace as cannonfodder in the conflict, the NYT seems unable to comprehend that Hamas can be both a terrorist organization as well as a national-religious movement, as is the case. The two are not mutually exclusive. Hamas can represent a large swathe of the Palestinian people, and practice terrorism at the same time. The NYT thought process seems to be that Hamas must be accorded legitimacy as a mass movement, despite the fact that it clearly commits acts of terrorism. But regardless of how much popular support Hamas has, it cannot be accorded legitimacy as a nihilistic group that employs terrorism as one of its principal means. That is beyond the pale of civilization, but the Times will not take it to task.