A Dangerous Strategy

On December 27—as both the inauguration of President-elect Barack Obama and Israeli elections began to approach—Israel responded to a recent increase in rocket attacks out of Gaza with a series of bombardments on Hamas targets that has now lasted almost two weeks. The Israeli Defense Force followed the bombardments with an incursion into the territory after night fell on Saturday. Most sources now report the death toll in Gaza at around 550 and the United Nations has stated that at least a quarter of these people are civilians. The strikes have been successful in destroying symbols of Hamas’s governance in Gaza and killing at least one major military leader.

The international appeal for a ceasefire on both sides of the conflict must not be ignored. The indiscriminate rocket attacks perpetrated by Hamas have killed several Israeli civilians since the conflict began and amount to little more than criminal terrorist action. Hamas’s method of securing and maintaining power through such violence is illegitimate and appalling.

Nonetheless, the Israeli response has been inappropriate and short-sighted. The number of Gazan civilians killed far exceeds the death toll in Israel, and Israeli attempts to evacuate civilians in Gaza have proven unsuccessful. The New York Times reported Monday that civilians forced by Israeli soldiers to move to different homes later fell victim to airstrikes in those new buildings. While Israel can and should defend itself against terrorist attacks, the number of civilian dead is tragic and unwarranted.

With two extremely different political bodies on either side of this conflict, any comparison of proportionality and civilian body count may be irrelevant. Israel cannot and should not wish to be held to the same standards as an organization that defends and establishes itself illegitimately through terrorist action. We expect more of Israel as a legitimate, democratic state. This includes a greater degree of restraint and protection of Gazan civilians in defending itself against Hamas attacks.

Moreover, the Israeli blockade of Gaza that has now lasted more than 18 months has only worsened the suffering of civilians there. Despite Israeli claims that it is allowing and even aiding humanitarian agencies in the territory, a million Gazans do not have electricity and 250,000 do not have running water as a result of the clash. Meanwhile, the NGO Save the Children reports a “severe shortage of food” and the World Food Programme’s stores have been rendered inaccessible by the fighting, while the International Committee of the Red Cross has had difficulty getting medical resources to injured or dying civilians. No matter how the conflict ends, the primary concern should be delivering aid to those who need it.

Regardless of the moral calculus of the clash in Gaza, Israel’s short-term, violent tactic will, in result, counter what should be the ultimate goals for the region: a lasting peace and stability.

Both Israel’s blockade and its military actions will only serve to galvanize public support for Hamas among residents of Gaza. It is clear that Hamas is willing to both use and exploit the civilians who it purports to represent by operating in civilian areas and intimidating those who act to end violence. However, Israeli aggression that starves and kills civilians while also cutting them off from basic humanitarian necessities will only increase in a growth in anti-Israeli and pro-Hamas sentiment. In order to achieve real success in those long-term goals, Israel must devise a radically different strategy for countering Hamas’ influence and action.