To: Peace,

Re. "What would you have Israel do in response to rocket attacks by Hezbollah and Hamas from Lebanon and the Gaza?"

Yes, I agree, it is quite a conundrum. The most natural reaction when attacked is to defend yourself. I am just not sure if what Israel is doing is in fact the most effective form of defence in the long term. In the short term, maybe, if they suceed in killing all the members of Hizbullah. But this looks very unlikely. Since Israel's invasion of Lebanon, rocket attacks have increased hundredfolds. Even if they do wipe out most of the present group of Hizbullah, there will be plenty of new recruits to step forward, and so the situation will be an endless cycle of violence, which I don't think is to either sides advantage. One problem has been the tendency of Western administrations (e.g the White House, Blair) to portray Hizbullah as criminal lunatics, madmen from outer space etc., summarised in the convenient term 'terrorist'. As Oscar Wilde said 'an alcoholic is someone you don't like who drinks as much as you'. I'm not saying that Hizbullah don't terrorise Israeli people living near the border with their rockets, but the Lebanese are equally terrified of being killed by 500 lb bombs that might come through their ceilings at any moment. The Israeli's have a primary responsibility to their own citizens, of course. But to get peace in the area we need to get at the root problems, not just kill or imprison a few gunmen here or there, or flatten half a country. Like I said in a previous thread, it is the mentality of all sides that the problems can be solved with bomb and bullet that is the problem. It is not enough to say Hizbullah must stop its rocket attacks. Hizbullah are fighting for their survival too, and if I was in their situation, I wouldn't give up my arms to be shot down like a dog or thrown in prison for the rest of my life. Nor are the Israelis going to see any sense in just going home. Knesset has said this would be a sign of weakness and invite further trouble. But Knesset may be wrong about that. As the militarily more powerful country by a big margain, Israel could make a real break with the cycle of violence by agreeing to an immediate ceasefire. Remember rocket attacks greatly increased since the invasion, halting it and even pulling back a little as a show of faith might well have the effect of stopping or reducing the attacks. Hizbullah at present feel no need to show any restraint since there is a de facto war in progress. A cessation by Hizbullah alone would not be a sign of magnaminity, but simply a sign of capitulation by the logically weaker combatant. Little moral effect could be achieved from this. Israel has stated that the kidnapping of IDF soldiers was one of the principal motivations for the invasion, but I have shown in a previous post why this is far removed from the truth. On the other hand Israel itself kidnapped a number of palestinians shortly prior to the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers, and most recently kidnapped a prominent member of the Hamas government, who claims he was beaten in custody. They also hold hundreds of palestinians in prison, many for years without trial. As a goodwill gesture they could release large numbers of these, especially those that have been there longest. Israel could gain enormous propaganda value from such moves, and it would be an enormous moral boost to prospects for peace. You might ask 'why should Israel be the one to make these moves?' Well, first off, you could equally ask why is it that when Rice and Bush open their mouths it is always to ask Hamas or Hizbullah to make the first move, and never Israel. But more importantly it is, as I said, precisely because Israel IS the stronger party, that they have most to gain from making such moves. They create a strong moral precedent that is hard to ignore. It doesn't help that the Western leaders tend to keep regurgitating the same old claptrap that Hamas and Hizbullah are above all, 'terrorists' (before they are human beings) and that you can no more negotiate with them than you could with whooping cough or diptheria. That in turn tends to back Israel into a corner where they feel any negotiations to be a sign of weakness rather than magnamity and maturity. Whatever extremist element drives Hamas and Hizbullah (and indeed, the IDF) could be isolated far more effectively by modertaion and negotiation, though this may not be as glamorous and in keeping with the 'hard man' image so popular at present. You would find fewer arabs willing to support Hamas or Hizbullah if Israel could barter a just and fair deal with the palestinians. This would mean reviewing the route of the infamous wall that cuts through palestinian territory, not creating new settlements into palestine while demolishing old ones, not cutting off / blockading aid to the Hamas government (elected democratically as the choice of the palestinian people) etc., Hamas in turn would have to clamp down on the extremist elements. But though it flies in the face of conventional wisdom, I think it would be better for Israel to make the first moves, and not allow the US to bully Hamas / Hizbullah to do so, as usual. Sure, it's a big gamble, and we're talking years or even decades, but everyone has a lot to gain - except the extremists, who will find themselves in a minority pretty fast. There's nothing like a little prosperity, stability and peace to de-radicalise a people. At present, with 70% unemployement, and practically no public money available, young palestinian men have little to do except stand round watching IDF artillery shells flatten their houses, feel resentful and seek revenge. And as the militarily stronger country, they could quickly regain lost ground (or pulverise it, anyway) if none of this worked out. The 'iron fist' advocated by Bush (who eggs Israel on for his own reasons) has been shown to be a profound failure in creating a better world order / a more peaceful world. Extremism is far more widespread, previously lethargic people all round the world have been radicalised by his blatant bias and hypocrisy, countries like Iraq have been reduced to ashes in the name of 'democracy' and driven to civil war. This is no way forward,and we need people with longer-range vision than Bush and his cabinet of cronies. Knesset / Israel could break the mould here and not just follow the tired old warmongering rhetoric under the shadow of the White House.