Denying Israel's Fight in Self-Defense

"Fight Fire with a Cease-Fire"
A27, Wednesday 12/31/08
By David Grossman

In the coup-de-grace for Wednesday's coverage, the Times gives platform to David Grossman, the noted author and leftist that was vociferous in his opposition to an expanded military operation against Hezbollah in 2006. It is essential to note that Grossman is not a military or diplomatic expert, making it somewhat inappropriate that he would be selected to offer his views on the ceasefire.

In what seems to be a rehash of his 2006 opposition, but now reshaped against the military activity targeting Hamas, Grossman incredibly writes:

Until last Saturday, we restrained ourselves in responding to the thousands of Qassam rockets fired at us. Now you know how severe the retaliation can be. So as not to add to the death and destruction that has already taken place, we intend, unilaterally and absolutely, to hold our fire for the next 48 hours.

Even if you continue to fire on Israel, we will not respond by resuming combat. We will grit our teeth, just as we did in the days and months before our attack. We will not be drawn into using force.

What is incredible is how little logic there is to Grossman's proposal. He is essentially condemning the Israeli populace within Gaza's rocket range to living a life of mortal danger and fear. Hamas has shown no indication that it would support such a ceasefire and has continued to fire rockets at Israeli civilians to show its dedication to the 'resistance.' But that doesn't have any bearing on Grossman's proposal, which is unyielding in its support of restraint, regardless of what the situation on the ground dictates.

Grossman believes in restraint because he is "against the deadly logic of military power and the dynamic of escalation.... If we demonstrate that we can do this, we will not lose international support. We will gain even more if we invite the international and Arab communities to intervene and mediate." But how often has Israel displayed restraint to no avail? How many thousands of rockets and mortars fell on Israeli towns before Israel responded to eliminate this unbearable military threat? And what has Israel gained from the international community from following this policy of restraint and accomodation, such as its 2005 withdrawal from Gaza?

In the end, Grossman tops it off by saying that Israel is repeating the same mistake as in the 2006 War against Hezbollah - Israel is allowing the situation to escalate rather than stopping it before it spirals out of control. It is clear, however, that Grossman failed to learn the lesson that the majority of his compatriots internalized after failing to stop Hezbollah: Israel must not waver in exercising its inalienable right to self-defense and must reestablish its deterrent capability in order to prevent terrorist organizations such as Hezbollah or Hamas from attacking Israel with impunity.

Failing to support Israel's undeniable right to defend its people from terrorist aggression, Grossman demonstrates once again how far out of step he is with the rest of the country, particular those Israelis that live in the shadow of this rocket threat, from the north to the south.

It is unfortunate, and is deeply unrepresentative of the views of the general Israeli populace, that the Times gives voice to such a fringe character.