Israel: Over-Experienced, Under-Appreciated

In grade school, there were students who had all the answers and volunteered them in class, saving all the others the embarrassment of being called upon to supply an answer they did not have. Despite being helpful, the students with the answers were ridiculed for being "too" smart and shown no appreciation or respect.

Israel is today's school know-it-all and no more respected.

Early this year, Israel fought Hamas in Gaza. Known for dozens of deadly suicide bombings in Israel earlier this decade, Hamas this time had been shooting rockets into southern Israeli cities. Israel was forced to act. Still, a United Nations report accused Israel of war crimes. This type of criticism, unfortunately, has become the norm.

The irony is that the world has so much to learn from Israel's experience. Yet, that experience is constantly and consistently under attack.

Today, the Wall Street Journal reported that a dual U.S.-Egyptian citizen living near Boston had planned to attack shopping malls. A mall representative acknowledged, "it is difficult to prevent someone from carrying out an act if they do not care about dying in that act." True, but vigiliant Israeli security has foiled many an attack on Israeli malls, and the Israeli experience could be instructive here.

Similarly, NBC News reported tonight that U.S. authorities on the Arizona-Mexico border have discovered 18 underground drug-smuggling tunnels this year. One tunnel passed beneath a church playground, reminiscent of Hamas weapons-smuggling tunnels in Gaza some with entrances and exits in Palestinian childrens' bedrooms. Like those dug by Hamas, drug tunnels found were elaborate, with wood frames and ventilation systems. (Are Mexican drug-smugglers taking a lesson or two from Hamas?) U.S. authorities say it is a "daily struggle, a cat-and-mouse game" to disrupt the tunnels, and they admit the border is "not secure." U.S. and Israeli military forces are training together in the U.S. on new techniques to locate and destroy underground tunnels. Again, we can and are learning from Israel's experience.

Israel is also routinely criticized for its policy of demolishing homes of terrorists and their families as a deterrent. However, other countries now facing terrorism inside their own borders are adopting the same technique. The Wall Street Journal reported today that Pakistani troops are "facing stiff resistance" with militants "fighting for every space" in that country's stepped-up campaign against the Taliban. Sounds a lot like Israel's battle against Palestinian terrorists in the West Bank city of Janin in 2002, during which Israel was falsely accused of massacring civilians. Interestingly, the Journal reports that Pakistani troops "demolished the houses" of a Taliban leader and a "main trainer of [Taliban] suicide bombers." Pakistan has taken a page from Israel's counterterrorism playbook.

The next time countries like Pakistan are called upon at the UN to condemn Israeli actions against terrorists, they would be well-advised to recall their own actions. Unfortunately, Israel has a lot to teach the world about successfully fighting terrorism. It's about time the world show some gratitude and respect.

(A few days after I wrote this entry, the Israeli daily Yisrael Hayom essentially made the same points, suggesting that the UN learn from Israel's experience and "adapt the acceptable laws of war to the situation of countries -- and Israel is not the only one -- that are fighting terrorist organizations. It would be better to ask how they would have us act next time that terrorists shell us.... so that perhaps [Israel might receive] a little respect.")

It's Business As Usual in South Lebanon

In the summer of 2006, Israel and the Lebanese terrorist group Hizballah fought a war. Hizballah shot rockets into northern Israel, and Israel re-occupied parts of South Lebanon and bombed areas of Beirut to try to get the Lebanese goverment to reign in Hizballah.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701 stopped the fighting. Among its requirements was that Hizballah retain no military presence in South Lebanon. Predictably, UNSCR 1701 has proven worthless.

Last week, a weapons cache exploded in a building within a civilian area of a Southern Lebanon town. Hizballah operatives immediately sealed the area, preventing UN monitors and Lebanese military forces from entering and investigating what had happened. Hizballah then emptied the site of stored weapons and transferred them elsewhere for safe-keeping. The Israelis got it all on videotape, which is accessible within this report the Israelis issued.

The whole episode, similar to one earlier this year, demonstrates the following:

1. Hizballah is in flagrant violation of UNSCR 1701 and is operating in South Lebanon as it pleases;
2. Hizballah conducts military activity, including storing weapons, in civilian areas with no regard for potential harm to civilians;
3. Hizballah is rebuilding its weapons inventory in South Lebanon, including according to Israeli estimates some 20,000 rockets that can travel 25 miles and other rockets capable of reaching 125 miles; and
4. UNIFIL, the UN force charged with monitoring Hizballah activities in South Lebanon and preventing the group from rearming, is a scared bunch of intimidated cowards who won't lift a finger to Hizballah, and the Lebanese army -- which provided Hizballah political cover for the cache explosion -- is no better.

What's to be learned from it all? More people should second-guess the efficacy of a UN-broked solution to any future conflict and allow Israel to finish the job. Of course, that also requires an Israeli government to make the necessary decisions to do so.

Reward Outcome Not Effort

Ok, call me crazy, but I think that public servants should be honored and rewarded based upon the outcome of their efforts rather than those efforts in and of themselves.

Sure, merely trying hard is important and deserves recognition, but if nothing honorable comes of those efforts -- or, worse, they are a miserable failure -- then they don't merit praise.

Wouldn't you know it, I have two examples in mind.

The first is Mohamed ElBaradei, chief of the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA. The Wall Street Journal recently reminded us that Mr. ElBaradei and the IAEA were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2005 "for their work to prevent nuclear proliferation for military uses."

Meanwhile, the Journal reports that American and European officials recently accused ElBaradei of "playing down evidence pointing toward Iranian attempts to advance its nuclear program." European and U.S. officials have been "hearing much more alarming assessments" from IAEA technical experts than what ElBaradei is publishing or stating publicly. For instance, ElBaradei said recently that the IAEA "has no concrete proof of an ongoing nuclear weapons program in Iran." The buzzwords here being "concrete" and "ongoing," which ElBaradei uses to detract from the significance of the evidence he does have but doesn't want to share.

The truth of the matter is that ElBaradei's downplaying, for whatever reason, Iran's progress on nuclear weapons is delaying either economic sanctions or military action necessary to prevent a nuclear Iran from becoming reality. The point being: honoring ElBaradei with one of the world's most preeminent prizes was premature.

A second example: Dennis Ross, President Clinton's Middle East negotiator. Occasionally, I attend an event where Mr. Ross is a guest speaker and, invariably, after Ross speaks, some Jewish attendee prefaces his or her question with a statement lavishly praising Ross for all he's done for Israel and the Jewish people.

In reality, what Mr. Ross has done is the following: During the run-up to the outbreak of Palestinian violence in September 2000, Mr. Ross and his team ignored dozens of intelligence reports I wrote sending up warning signs of the peace process' imminent collapse. These reports revealed the revolving door of Palestinian prisons, weapons smuggling activity, and cooperation between Palestinian security services and terrorist groups. They also revealed Palestinian incitement and malintent. However, instead of stopping the process, Ross pushed on and what resulted was a war in which over 1,000 Israelis, and many more Palestinians, lost their lives. By holding Arafat to account, the war might have been prevented.

Nevertheless, Mr. Ross is continuously praised. People will say, "Well, he tried" to end a seemingly intractable dispute, but trying is not enough. Both ElBaradei and Ross have little positive to show for their efforts and must shoulder some responsibility.

I think the people who we honor should have clear achievements to their name, and not just a record of trying.

Prisoner Release Unnecessary

Israel's security cabinet reportedly has approved the release of 20 female Palestinian prisoners in exchange for videotaped proof that captured IDF soldier Gilad Schalit is alive and well. After the names of the 20 prisoners are published online, the public will have 48 hours to appeal the decision.

The prisoner release is risky. It once again sends the message that terrorism works. It also may be unnecessary. A German mediator, we are told, has already seen the tape. He has a moral obligation to reveal the nature of its contents and this alone could suffice as prove of Schalit's condition.

I understand the Schalit's family, as well as others, would prefer to see the tape themselves, but it is simply not worth the release of security prisoners, even ones without Israeli blood directly on their hands. (Some were indirectly involved in attacks on Israelis, but did not commit murder themselves.)

It is hard to understand why the Israeli government would release prisoners in this case when the information it seeks about the soldier is already known. The German could tell them. Considering that the Red Cross or anyone else has been denied any access to Schalit and that his capture was an act of terrorism, the German has no duty -- and, in fact, has a responsibility -- to report his condition.

An Historic Speech Not to be Missed

Amid recent assertions by Iran's President that the Holocaust never occurred, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu yesterday presented the UN archival material maintained by the German government proving Nazi plans to exterminate Jews. Netanyahu also unequivocally rebuked a UN panel's report accusing Israel of war crimes in Gaza and urged the UN reject it. His audience listened intently to his every word, at one point interrupting with applause.

If you haven't seen the speech -- surely to be remembered as one of the best ever delivered by a world leader at the UN or anywhere -- make it a priority to do so this weekend, and tell your family and friends. Here is a link to part 1.

No Progress is Good Progress

One problem with the leftist peace camp is that it believes it is up to Israel to deliver peace and that Israel alone is to blame for any lack of progress. Consider for example the following:

Since again becoming Prime Minister some six months ago, the “peace process” had yet to advance and already Netanyahu is being blamed. On September 13, the Israeli daily Ma’ariv opined that Netanyahu, like former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir, “does nothing.” Another leading Israeli daily, Ha’aretz, claimed “Netanyahu has not made one significant political achievement” and is “leading us astray.”

The most difficult lesson of the Oslo period which the political left cannot seem to grasp is that an apparent lack of “progress” on the peace process is, ironically, exactly what the process needs to succeed. The longer the Palestinians go without Israeli concessions on land, settlements and other tangibles, the more likely they are to finally realize the need to make concessions of their own. (Palestinian violence may increase in the short-term but only until the masses finally realize it is useless.) The Palestinians need to understand that they must meet Israel half-way on most, if not all, issues, just as the political left needs to understand that peace is a two-way street. The political left believes that if only Israel met Palestinian demands, peace would be at hand. They're entirely wrong.

The Oslo process demonstrated that signed agreements are useless if one of the signatories has no intent to live up to them. By refusing to produce “progress” for the sake of progress alone, the Netanyahu government signals the Palestinians that the ball is in their court. The political left would best serve the cause of peace if they pressured Palestinians, not Israel, to show good faith and make tangible proposals as to how to advance peace.

Norway's Folly

If Israel's so-called separation barrier between it and the West Bank has, by most accounts, put an end to Palestinian suicide attacks inside Israel, what sense does it make to boycott a company that makes that barrier possible?

Absolutely none.

Yet, that's exactly what Norway's state pension fund has done. It reportedly divested itself on Friday of $5.4 million dollars in stock in Elbit Systems which supplies surveillance detection equipment for the barrier.

Norway says Elbit "directly contributes to violations of international humanitarian law," and it secretly sold Elbit stock, probably to limit bad press and pressure not to divest. It says the barrier "unacceptably restricts" Palestinian movement.

In a handful of locations, the barrier indeed impedes Palestinian movement, but certainly the benefits of the barrier -- saving Israeli lives -- necessitates any such inconvenience.

What is really behind Norway's decision? Do the Norwegians simply misunderstand the facts surrounding the barrier? Or, does something more sinister lie behind their decision? It is notable that Norway provided no advance warning of its decision, thereby depriving Israel or its defenders an opportunity to explain why divestment is wrong.