International Herald Tribune Editorial - A harsh, healthy verdict on Israel's war in Lebanon
International Herald Tribune Editorial - A harsh, healthy verdict on Israel's war in Lebanon
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: May 2, 2007
The government of Israel badly botched the war in Lebanon last summer. But you have to admire the work of the investigating commission that same government appointed to analyze what had gone wrong.
In its initial report, the commission pointed to "severe failures" of "judgment, responsibility and prudence" on the part of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The commission found that Olmert was too hasty in deciding to go to war, that he proceeded without a detailed military plan, that his goals were unrealistic and that he failed to consult beyond an inner military circle of true believers.
In the words of the commission, the government rushed into military action without considering other options, "including that of continuing the policy of 'containment,' or combining political and diplomatic moves with military strikes below the 'escalation level,' or military preparation without immediate military action." That should sound more than a little familiar to Americans.
Straight-talking investigating commissions are an admirable, and enviable, Israeli tradition. Israelis know they live in a dangerous neighborhood, with little margin for poorly conceived and executed military adventures. They also know that the swiftest route to recovering from costly blunders must begin with acknowledging what went wrong and who was responsible. It would be nice to see that kind of constructive candor take root in Washington.
Initially, Israelis applauded Olmert's decision to conduct sustained airstrikes in Lebanon. They saw it as a firm and justified response to provocative cross-border Hezbollah raids and rocket attacks.
But when 34 days of destructive warfare ended with Hezbollah's military capacities largely intact, its political standing enhanced and much of the world blaming Israel for the damage inflicted on Lebanese civilians, opinion turned sharply against Olmert, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and the top Israeli military leadership.
The panel did not explicitly call on Olmert to resign, but its findings leave him gravely weakened. Political weakness is not what Israel needs.
One major lesson of the Lebanon experience is that Israel cannot defeat its most dangerous enemies by brute force alone. Its security and survival require a more active diplomacy toward the Palestinians and Syria - and a willingness to take risks. More than ever, Israel needs a government and a leader strong enough to steer it wisely through the uncertain hazards of war and bold enough to test the equally uncertain possibilities for peace.
Copyright by The International Herald Tribune
Published: May 2, 2007
The government of Israel badly botched the war in Lebanon last summer. But you have to admire the work of the investigating commission that same government appointed to analyze what had gone wrong.
In its initial report, the commission pointed to "severe failures" of "judgment, responsibility and prudence" on the part of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The commission found that Olmert was too hasty in deciding to go to war, that he proceeded without a detailed military plan, that his goals were unrealistic and that he failed to consult beyond an inner military circle of true believers.
In the words of the commission, the government rushed into military action without considering other options, "including that of continuing the policy of 'containment,' or combining political and diplomatic moves with military strikes below the 'escalation level,' or military preparation without immediate military action." That should sound more than a little familiar to Americans.
Straight-talking investigating commissions are an admirable, and enviable, Israeli tradition. Israelis know they live in a dangerous neighborhood, with little margin for poorly conceived and executed military adventures. They also know that the swiftest route to recovering from costly blunders must begin with acknowledging what went wrong and who was responsible. It would be nice to see that kind of constructive candor take root in Washington.
Initially, Israelis applauded Olmert's decision to conduct sustained airstrikes in Lebanon. They saw it as a firm and justified response to provocative cross-border Hezbollah raids and rocket attacks.
But when 34 days of destructive warfare ended with Hezbollah's military capacities largely intact, its political standing enhanced and much of the world blaming Israel for the damage inflicted on Lebanese civilians, opinion turned sharply against Olmert, Defense Minister Amir Peretz and the top Israeli military leadership.
The panel did not explicitly call on Olmert to resign, but its findings leave him gravely weakened. Political weakness is not what Israel needs.
One major lesson of the Lebanon experience is that Israel cannot defeat its most dangerous enemies by brute force alone. Its security and survival require a more active diplomacy toward the Palestinians and Syria - and a willingness to take risks. More than ever, Israel needs a government and a leader strong enough to steer it wisely through the uncertain hazards of war and bold enough to test the equally uncertain possibilities for peace.
posted by Carlos T Mock at 10:42 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home