WarSclerotic

Spain suspends sales of military arms to Israel over Gaza operation
Ynetnews Published: 08.05.14, 18:35

The cluster f8ck continues… – LS

Spain has resolved to momentarily ban sales of military arms to Israel due to the conflict in Gaza, government sources stated last week, according to Spanish newspaper, El Pais.

On Thursday, Spanish Foreign Minister José Manuel García-Margallo stated in Congress that the amount of Gaza civilian deaths as a result of the bombings in the Strip were “heart-rending,” and while he recognized Israel’s right to defend its citizens, he also asserted that the IDF should take proportionate action “under respect for protection that civilians deserve, which is no less than a manifestation of international humanitarian rights,” reported El Pais.

Over the past year, Israel’s purchases of Spanish weaponry cost €4.9 million ($6.5 million), about one percent of the country’s total defense exports. Previously, the sales ban has also been put on Egypt, Ukraine and Venezuela, according to the report.

The Spanish government said it will review this suspension at their upcoming meeting in September.

The Independent reported that the UK was also evaluating their sale of £8 billion ($13.5 billion) in military equipment to Israel.

The Middle East Problem, You Tube, Dennis Prager, April 28, 2014

(A good if simplistic summary of Israel’s problems. — DM)

As observed in an article (where I found the video) by Walter Hudson at PJ Tatler titled Hamas Is to Blame for Civilian Deaths in Gaza,

The death of innocents is always a tragedy. But the nation that kills is not necessarily the nation at fault. Deaths should not be tallied for balance, as if fairness necessitated a Jew die for every Palestinian killed, or as if the United States should have allowed 200,000 of its citizens to be bombed as an offset to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The fault for death and destruction lies squarely with the aggressor. As Dennis Prager states concisely in the video on the next page, the aggressor in the Middle East is clearly Hamas.

Hamas chief declares victory over Israel
Roi Kais Latest Update: 08.05.14, 20:58 / Israel News

Seriously folks…who did not see this coming.-LS

Political bureau leader Ismail Haniyeh says military resistance, strength of Palestinians will lead to lifting of blockade during Cairo talks.
“We won,” said Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in his first statement since the ceasefire on Tuesday.

“The military victory by the resistance, and the legendary strength of our people will lead us to a lifting of the blockage on the Gaza Strip,” said the former prime minister of Hamas in the Strip in a formal statement released on the terror organization’s media outlets.

The Hamas chief said that Palestinian unity helped reach the agreement in Egypt. “A unified people stood behind our delegation in Cairo. We complied with all the diplomatic procedures and contacted our brothers in Qatar and Turkey and, now, in Egypt in order to end the aggression.”

Haniyeh stressed that “what the enemy could not achieve on the physical battlefield it will not achieve in the diplomatic battlefield.

The leader of Hamas’ political bureau said: “I am confident that our Egyptian and Arab brothers all want to help lift the blockage permanently. We support the unified Palestinian delegation in order to produce the most appropriate diplomatic solution and to bring about a resolution that would reflect both the immeasurable sacrifices of our people and the work of the resistance. The delegation stuck to our demands.”

He added that with the start of the ceasefire “the image of destruction seen by the world is the proof to the extent of the IDF’s defeat and its failure in fighting the brave resistance.”

The Hamas political leader said the organization “will be loyal to our people who were hurt by the brutal aggression. The blood spilled by the deceased and the injured is the leadership’s responsibility, we will not abandon them.”

Meanwhile, senior Hamas officials began leaving their underground bunkers. Khalil al-Haya, in his first TV appearance in Gaza, said: “We are leaving for the negotiations in Cairo to lift the blockage once and for all. Our finger remains on the trigger.”

Al-Haya and Imad al-Alami from Hamas and Khaled al-Batsh from Islamic Jihad all left Gaza for Cairo. They received guarantees they would not be hurt on the way to talks, similar to the guarantee received by Ahmed Jabari during the negotiations for the release of captured IDF soldier Gilad Shalit.

The empty spaces in Gaza, Gatestone Institute, Alan M. Dershowitz, August 5, 2014

How many times have you heard on television or read in the media that the Gaza Strip is “the most densely populated area in the world”? Repeating this statement, however, does not make it true. There are dense parts of Gaza, especially Gaza City, Beit Hanoun and Khan Younis, but there are far less dense areas in Gaza between these cities. Just look at Google Earth, or this population density map.

(Image source: Peace Now)

The fact that these sparsely populated areas exist in the Gaza Strip raise several important moral questions: First, why don’t the media show the relatively open areas of the Gaza Strip? Why do they only show the densely populated cities? There are several possible reasons. There is no fighting going on in the sparsely populated areas, so showing them would be boring. But that’s precisely the point—to show areas from which Hamas could be firing rockets and building tunnels but has chosen not to. Or perhaps the reason the media doesn’t show these areas is that Hamas won’t let them. That too would be a story worth reporting.

Second, why doesn’t Hamas use sparsely populated areas from which to launch its rockets and build its tunnels? Were it to do so, Palestinian civilian casualties would decrease dramatically, but the casualty rate among Hamas terrorists would increase dramatically.

That is precisely why Hamas selects the most densely populated areas from which to fire and dig. The difference between Israel and Hamas is that Israel uses its soldiers to protect its civilians, whereas Hamas uses its civilians to protect its terrorists. That is why most of Israeli casualties have been soldiers and most of Hamas’ casualties have been civilians. The other reason is that Israel builds shelters for its civilians, whereas Hamas builds shelters only for its terrorists, intending that most of the casualties be among its civilian shields.

The law is clear: using civilians as human shields—which the Hamas battle manual mandates—is an absolutewar crime. There are no exceptions or matters of degree, especially when there are alternatives. On the other hand, shooting at legitimate military targets, such as rockets and terror tunnels is permitted, unless the number of anticipated civilian casualties is disproportionate to the military importance of the target. This is a matter of degree and judgment, often difficult to calculate in the fog of war. The law is also clear that when a criminal takes a hostage and uses that hostage as a shield from behind whom to fire at civilians or police, and if the police fire back and kill the hostage, it is the criminal and not the policeman who is guilty of murder. So too with Hamas: when it uses human shields and the Israeli military fires back and kills some of the shields, it is Hamaswho is responsible for their deaths.

The third moral question is why does the United Nations try to shelter Palestinian civilians right in the middle of the areas from which Hamas is firing? Hamas has decided not to use the less densely populated areas for rocket firing and tunnel digging. For that reason, the United Nations should use these sparsely populated areas as places of refuge. Since the Gaza Strip is relatively small, it would not be difficult to move civilians to these safer areas. They should declare these areas battle free and build temporary shelters—tents if necessary—as places of asylum for the residents of the crowded cities. It should prevent any Hamas fighters, any rockets and any tunnel builders from entering into these sanctuaries. In that way, Hamas would be denied the use of human shields and Israel would have no reason to fire its weapons anywhere near these United Nations sanctuaries. The net result would be a considerable saving of lives.

But instead the UN is playing right into the hands of Hamas, by sheltering civilians right next to Hamas fighters, Hamas weapons and Hamas tunnels. Then the United Nations and the international community accuses Israel of doing precisely what Hamas intended Israel to do: namely fire at its terrorists and kill United Nations protected civilians in the process. It’s a cynical game being played by Hamas, but it wouldn’t succeed without the complicity of UN agencies.

The only way to assure that Hamas’ strategy of using human shields to maximize civilian casualties is not repeated over and over again is for the international community, and especially the United Nations, not to encourage and facilitate it, as it currently does. International law must be enforced against Hamas for its double war crime: using civilian human shields to fire at civilian Israeli targets. If this tactic were to be brought to a halt, then Israel would have no need to respond in self-defense. Applying the laws of war to Israel alone will do no good, because any country faced with rockets and tunnels targeting its civilians will fight back. When the fighters and tunnel builders hide behind human shields, there will inevitably be civilian casualties—unintended by Israel, intended by Hamas—regardless of how careful the defenders are. Israel has tried its hardest to minimize civilian casualties. Hamas has tried its hardest to maximize civilian casualties. Now the United Nations and the international community must try their hardest to become part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Alleged mastermind behind kidnapping of three Israeli teens arrested, Jerusalem Post,  Yonah Jeremy Bob, August 5, 2014

(According to the article, “Kawasme and Abu Aysha are still at large.” Presumably, the author intended to write that Quasma and Abu Aysha remain at large. — DM)

State prosecutors say Hussam Kawasme, a resident of Hebron, confessed not only to giving orders, but to collecting weapons, getting funding for attack from Hamas; two chief suspects behind attack still at large.

Wanted for kidnapping: (left to right) Marwan Quasma and Amar Abu Eisha Photo: Courtesy

Hussam Kawasme, the mastermind behind the kidnapping of three Israeli teens, was arrested on on July 11th, the state prosecution said on Tuesday.

Kawasma gave the mid-June order to Marwan Kawasme and Amir Abu Eisha to kidnap Eyal Yifrah, Naftali Fraenkel and Gil-Ad Shaer, according to the state.

The revelations arose in the state’s legal response to the High Court of Justice justifying its request to demolish the residences of the three suspected terrorists’ families.

Hussam confessed not only that he gave the orders, but also that he collected weapons and raised funding for the attack by the Hamas cell, the state said.

In addition, Hussam assisted Marwan in concealing the bodies by burying them on land he had bought in recent months.

Next, Hussam was attempting to flee the area and disappear across the Jordanian border with false documents subsequent to the bodies being found, when he was caught back in mid-July.

The state said that the evidence it had was at the level of near certainty, after interrogating Hussam.

That said, confessions to police can be withdrawn at trial, and to date, Hussam has not been indicted, and may not be for some time still.

Kawasme and Abu Aysha are still at large.

The High Court of Justice on Thursday had frozen three IDF demolition orders against those residences. The knocking down of the family homes were originally scheduled for late Thursday afternoon.

On July 1, the state dropped a self-imposed ban on house demolitions that had been in place since 2005.

Back in June, the Shin Bet revealed the identity of the two suspects involved in the kidnapping of the three youths, after a wide-scale search.

Marwan Kawasme and Amar Abu Aysha are from Hebron and longstanding Hamas members.

The Shin Bet added that both were wanted as soon as security forces learned of the kidnapping.

Eyal Yifrah, 19, and Naftali Fraenkel and Gil-Ad Shaer, both 16, went missing on the night of June 12 while hitchhiking outside a settlement in Gush Etzion, south of Jerusalem.

Truce means Hamas must disarm to govern Gaza, official says, Times of Israel, Raphael Ahren, August 5, 2014

(Apparently, Egypt has adhered to its position that the Rafah crossing will not be opened, please see Egypt to Hamas: Airport, seaport, and Rafah aren’t open for discussion. — DM)

Group hasn’t abandoned its ideology but swapped armed resistance against retaining control over Gaza, senior Strategic Affairs Ministry official says.

Yossi Kuperwasser at a recent Knesset hearing (Photo credit: Flash 90)

Clearly Egypt would have to play a major role regarding inspections at the Rafah crossing on its border with Gaza, he said. And the international community needs to ensure that cement and other materials entering the Strip designated for civilian projects are not used to construct terror tunnels, he said. “A totally different structure of supervision should be in place. We shall see how this can be done.”

By agreeing to the Egyptian ceasefire proposal, Hamas has temporarily renounced a part of its “terrorist identity” and relinquished its ability to carry out attacks against Israel, a senior Israeli official said Tuesday.

The group hasn’t abandoned its radical and violent anti-Israel ideology, but for practical reasons decided to swap armed resistance for retaining control over the Gaza Strip, said Brig.-Gen. (ret.) Yossi Kuperwasser, the director-general of the Strategic Affairs Ministry.

“By accepting the ceasefire, as proposed by Egypt, Hamas has actually made a strategic decision,” Kuperwasser said. “They realized that in order to keep Gaza under their control, they will have to give up — at least temporarily, but hopefully for a long time — their nature as a terrorist organization. They won’t carry out their attacks; they will continue to speak like a terrorist organization. But they will be forced to give up their ability to carry out their attacks.”

Israel and Hamas on Monday accepted a three-day truce, in which both sides commit to immediately halt any military actions and to meet in Cairo for talks intended to lead to a long-term ceasefire. Jerusalem is adamant that its key demand in these talks is the demilitarization of Gaza. “Israel will bring to these discussions our top priority, which is preventing Hamas from rearming,” a senior Israeli official told The Times of Israel on Monday morning, a few hours after the 8:00 a.m. ceasefire went into effect.

In return, Israel is ready to somewhat ease the blockade on Gaza. “These restrictions [on border crossings and imports of goods] are a function of the hostility and the violence. If the hostility and the violence were to cease it would give Israel room to move on the restrictions that are primarily there for security reasons,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity.

The creation of a reliable international mechanism to monitor imports and exports and oversee the demilitarization of Gaza is “what we’re worried about most,” Kuperwasser said. If Israel is satisfied with security guarantees and an arrangement to disarm terror groups in the Strip, it would be willing to “enable the reconstruction and [allow for] better economic conditions in Gaza,” he said.

Security arrangements and the “control of what’s coming in and out of Gaza would be strictly supervised,” Kuperwasser added. Especially in the beginning, Israel would have to be very cautious, lest Hamas gets its hands on material that could use to attack Israelis, he said.

How exactly Israel’s demand to link the rehabilitation of Gaza to its demilitarization could play out has yet to be determined, said Kuperwasser, a former head of the military intelligence’s analysis and production division. “What we are looking for is creativity and maybe a little bit new ideas because the old ideas didn’t work,” he said.

Clearly Egypt would have to play a major role regarding inspections at the Rafah crossing on its border with Gaza, he said. And the international community needs to ensure that cement and other materials entering the Strip designated for civilian projects are not used to construct terror tunnels, he said. “A totally different structure of supervision should be in place. We shall see how this can be done.”

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas can also play a limited role in the coastal enclave’s rehabilitation, Kuperwasser allowed. “But we can’t say that we can fully trust just [Abbas]. It has got to be something more robust than [Abbas’s security] forces.”

Israel is not in the position to determine who should rule Gaza, according to Kuperwasser. Many in the international community want the PA’s security forces to be stationed at the Rafah crossing, and this is indeed a possibility, he said. At the same time, it is unlikely that Abbas’s men will be deployed in Gaza itself, he surmised. “I don’t think this is in the cards right now. The strategic decision of Hamas was to give up some of its terrorist identity in return for keeping control of Gaza. That was the strategic decision Hamas has made, so I’d be quite surprised if in that context they will let [Abbas’s] forces to enter Gaza itself.”

Addressing reporters during a conference call organized by The Israel Project, Kuperwasser said he is confident that the current ceasefire will hold longer than previous such efforts. “Hamas has realized not only that they’re not gaining anything from the continuation of the fire, but that they’re losing a lot.”

Hamas started the current war because it hoped to force Egypt and Israel into easing the blockade on Gaza, he said. The group now understood that it cannot achieve this goal by firing at Israel but that it will have to also have to discuss Israel’s security concerns in the negotiation room.

After 28 days of fighting, Hamas assessing the situation and realized that it lost thousands of rockets, 32 tunnels and hundreds of fighters, Kuperwasser said. After 1,868 Palestinians were killed and 9,567 injured, after tens of thousands of buildings were destroyed, Hamas risked losing the ability to explain to Gazans why they should suffer so badly without getting anything out this war. “I guess that this lesson has been learned by Hamas,” he said, “and I hope that this will make the ceasefire last for a longer period than previous ones.”

‘Hand of God sent missile into sea’
by Joe Kovacs August 8, 2014

When everything seems a mess and there are no clear answers, we must turn to faith. Some may find this article hard to believe, but I choose to believe. It’s the only way.-LS

Iron Dome operator: ‘I witnessed this miracle with my own eyes’

More claims of divine intervention are being reported in the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, with an operator of Israel’s Iron Dome missile-defense system saying he personally witnessed “the hand of God” diverting an incoming rocket out of harm’s way.

Israel Today translated a report from a Hebrew-language news site, which noted the Iron Dome battery failed three times to intercept an incoming rocket headed toward Tel Aviv last week.

The commander recalled: “A missile was fired from Gaza. Iron Dome precisely calculated [its trajectory]. We know where these missiles are going to land down to a radius of 200 meters. This particular missile was going to hit either the Azrieli Towers, the Kirya (Israel’s equivalent of the Pentagon) or [a central Tel Aviv railway station]. Hundreds could have died.

“We fired the first [interceptor]. It missed. Second [interceptor]. It missed. This is very rare. I was in shock. At this point we had just four seconds until the missile lands. We had already notified emergency services to converge on the target location and had warned of a mass-casualty incident.

“Suddenly, Iron Dome (which calculates wind speeds, among other things) shows a major wind coming from the east, a strong wind that … sends the missile into the sea. We were all stunned. I stood up and shouted, ‘There is a God!’

“I witnessed this miracle with my own eyes. It was not told or reported to me. I saw the hand of God send that missile into the sea.”

The commander’s account is reminiscent of a recent newspaper headline which trumpeted the possibility of supernatural protection.

“Their God changes the path of our rockets in mid-air, said a terrorist,” was the headline in the July 18 edition of the Jewish Telegraph.

It was a partial quote from Barbara Ordman, who lives in Ma’ale Adumim on the West Bank.

Her exact quotation was: “As one of the terrorists from Gaza was reported to say when asked why they couldn’t aim their rockets more effectively: “We do aim them, but their God changes their path in mid-air.”

She opened her piece by noting: “In October 1956, [Israeli Prime Minister] David Ben Gurion was interviewed by CBS. He stated: ‘In Israel, in order to be a realist, you must believe in miracles.’”

Ordman also noted religious texts, specifically the Jerusalem Talmud, teaches Israelis not to depend on miracles for survival.

“It argues that we must not desist from our obligations and must not wait for miraculous intervention from the Supernatural,” she wrote.

Meanwhile, the Times of Israel reported a senior officer in Israel’s army said divine miracles protected his soldiers during fighting in the Gaza Strip.

Givati Brigade commander Col. Ofer Winter told the weekly publication Mishpacha that he “witnessed a miraculous occurrence, the likes of which he had never seen before during his military career.”

Winter indicated a predawn raid intended to use darkness as cover was delayed, forcing the soldiers to move toward their objective as sunrise was approaching.

With the troops in danger of being exposed at daybreak, Winter explained how heavy fog quickly descended to shroud their movements until their mission was accomplished.

“Suddenly a cloud protected us,” he said, referring to clouds the Bible says guided the ancient Israelites as they wandered in the desert. “Clouds of glory.”

Winter said only when the soldiers were in a secure position, the fog finally lifted.

“It really was a fulfillment of the verse ‘For the Lord your God is the one who goes with you to give you victory,’” he said, quoting Deuteronomy 20:4.

The Times of Israel notes Winter made headlines over an official letter he sent to battalion and company commanders July 9, telling his subordinates that “history has chosen us to spearhead the fighting (against) the terrorist ‘Gazan’ enemy which abuses, blasphemes and curses the God of Israel’s (defense) forces.”

The dispatch came under fire from some, since it portrayed the Operation Protective Edge as a religious war against non-Jews. The Israeli government’s stated aim is to stop rocket attacks at Israel and destroy a network of tunnels dug under the border from Gaza used to launch terror attacks inside Israeli territory.

In his interview with Mishpacha, Winter defended his message, saying everyone finds God when in combat.

“Anyone who attacked me for the letter apparently has only seen weapons in pictures, was never in combat, and doesn’t know what fighting spirit is,” he said, revealing that before going into action his custom was to recite the blessing with which the ancient Israelite priests would bless the army before it went to war.

“When a person is in a life-threatening situation he connects with his deepest internal truths, and when that happens, even the biggest atheist meets God,” he said, claiming soldiers see so many miracles, “it is hard not to believe [in God].”

Egypt to Hamas: Airport, seaport, and Rafah aren’t open for discussion, Ynet News, Roi Kais, August 5, 2014

(Egypt seems to have a consistent position. — DM)

Egyptian negotiators in Cairo working for a permanent ceasefire in the Gaza Strip told delegates from Hamas Tuesday that the issues of building an airport and sea port in Gaza, as well as opening the Rafah border crossing aren’t on the table for discussion.

Will captured Hamas manual on using human shields help Israel block war crimes trials? Jerusalem Post, By Yonah Jeremy Bob, August 5, 2014

According to the IDF (and confirmed independently in a CNN report), the posted pages of the manual focus on urban warfare, and discuss the benefits to Hamas when its own civilians’ homes are destroyed.

Hamas members are seen close up during a press conference in the Gaza Strip last week. Photo: REUTERS

To the extent Hamas would be the complainant before the ICC, the manual could be a powerful part of a general defense supporting Israel’s overall claim to following the laws of armed conflict, when a judge has to decide to believe Israel about whether Shejaia civilians were killed by mistake or deliberately.

The Tuesday meeting of Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister Riad al-Malki with the International Criminal Court Prosecutor’s Office is likely far less significant than it looks.

First, the Palestinians threaten over and over again to file complaints against Israelis in the ICC, but have consistently failed to pull the trigger.

Also, though “Palestine” can probably overcome the statehood obstacles which blocked the Palestinians from filing war crimes complaints against Israelis after the 2008-9 Gaza War there are myriad other obstacles which could block an investigation, let alone a conviction.

But in the unlikely worst case scenario where the PA somehow manages to overcome the many substantial obstacles, has the IDF just discovered a golden defense to war crimes allegations in a “captured” Hamas manual it posted Monday-Tuesday?

According to the IDF (and confirmed independently in a CNN report), the posted pages of the manual focus on urban warfare, and discuss the benefits to Hamas when its own civilians’ homes are destroyed.

It has two salient points relating to the war crimes issue.

The IDF said that the manual: 1) reveals that Hamas knows or recognizes the IDF is committed to minimizing harm to civilians 2) explains how the civilian population can be used against IDF forces and 2) Based on these two points, the IDF stated that Hamas’ callous and systematic use of the Gazan population as “human shields” was intentional and preplanned.

In a portion entitled “Limiting the Use of Weapons,” the IDF said the manual explains that: The soldiers and commanders (of the IDF) must limit their use of weapons and tactics that lead to the harm and unnecessary loss of people and [destruction of] civilian facilities. It is difficult for them to get the most use out of their firearms, especially of supporting fire [e.g. artillery].

The IDF concluded that Hamas knows the IDF will limit its use of greater firepower in support of infantry weapons in order to avoid harming civilians.

The manual goes on to explain that the presence of civilians among pockets of resistance causes three major problems for IDF forces: (1) Problems with opening fire (2) Problems in controlling the civilian population during operations and afterward (3) Assurance of supplying medical care to civilians who need it Lastly, the manual discusses the benefits for Hamas when civilian homes are destroyed: The destruction of civilian homes: This increases the hatred of the citizens towards the attackers [the IDF] and increases their gathering [support] around the city defenders (resistance forces[i.e. Hamas]).

The IDF concluded that this proves that Hamas actually desires the destruction of homes and civilian infrastructure, knowing it will increase hatred for the IDF and support their fighters.

Back to the worst case scenario where Israelis find themselves defending specific targeting decisions from war crimes allegations.

From one perspective, the manual, while a potential coup from a public relation standpoint, is not a concrete legal defense.

Just as Israel often points out that its soldiers cannot be accused of war crimes on the basis of a general civilian casualty total, but only on the specific circumstances of the targeting incident in question, any defense should be specific to a particular incident – and the manual is not.

However, the record of international war crimes tribunals is that specific cases are not decided in a vacuum.

Often a general factual picture is established about whether war crimes were or were not systematically taking place, which correctly or not, influences how the judges interpret borderline evidence in specific cases.

The manual does not allege a single specific incident where Hamas used human shields in a way that justified a specific IDF attack which otherwise would have been illegal.

But the manual, which the IDF said belonged to Hamas’ Shejaia Brigade, does support the IDF’s general narrative of Hamas using human shields (in a way which at least could convert certain civilian areas into military targets) throughout Shejaia – where the IDF has been broadly accused of a massacre.

It shows that Hamas is educating its fighters about the benefits of fighting among its own civilians and that Hamas tells its fighters to view destruction of its own civilian homes as increasing its support. The manual also shows that Hamas itself “knows” or believes that the IDF is trying to follow the rules of armed conflict to such an extent, such that it inculcates in its fighters tactically and concretely how to exploit this to gain certain military advantages.

To the extent Hamas would be the complainant before the ICC, the manual could be a powerful part of a general defense supporting Israel’s overall claim to following the laws of armed conflict, when a judge has to decide to believe Israel about whether Shejaia civilians were killed by mistake or deliberately.

Bibi and Barack After Gaza, Commentary Magazine, Seth Mandel, August 5, 2014

(Has Protective Edge ended or has it been suspended only temporarily? Please see my parenthetical comment at Sweet while it lasted.– DM)

Despite having the Arab world on their side in this fight, not to mention the U.S. Congress and the public they represent, the Obama administration is trying to rally international–European, presumably–opinion against Israel. It’s strategically foolish and diplomatically illogical. Perhaps the end of Operation Protective Edge, then–if indeed this is the end–will serve to protect the Obama administration from itself by preventing further self-inflicted wounds, or at least remove Gaza as their source.

As Operation Protective Edge wound down in Gaza, talk in the media turned to the U.S.-Israel relationship. It has been an unusually tense few months for Washington and Jerusalem.

What’s puzzling is not President Obama’s desire for peace. It is always admirable to want wars to go on for no longer than they must. But in this case, once Israel discovered the terror tunnels, the state had to act in its own defense. The New York Times has astory today on the administration’s frustration with its lack of control over another sovereign state’s actions, but the entire piece can be boiled down to the following paragraph, appearing early on in the story:

With public opinion in both Israel and the United States solidly behind the Israeli military’s campaign against Hamas, no outcry from Israel’s Arab neighbors, and unstinting support for Israel on Capitol Hill, President Obama has had few obvious levers to force Mr. Netanyahu to stop pounding targets in Gaza until he was ready to do it.

Well that pretty much explains it, doesn’t it? Not only did Israel have public support in the U.S., but its actions were backed by its Arab neighbors and the U.S. Congress. Obama was the odd man out–or one of the few, anyway. There was a rare consensus in Israel’s part of the Middle East that included Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. Everyone was on the same page both with Israel and the U.S. for once. It was an easy diplomatic call for Obama, but he still made the wrong one.

Additionally, the efficacy of American pressure on Israel depends to a large extent on the Israeli public. In this particular case, Hamas had constructed an underground city with tunnels that led into Israeli territory. Of course the Israeli public wanted those tunnels gone. And the threat from the rockets flying from Gaza, often derided by the world as glorified firecrackers, had increased as well. The rockets practically shut down Ben-Gurion Airport, Israel’s gateway to the outside world, which had the effect of temporarily isolating a Jewish polity that, for clear and rational reasons, is a bit sensitive to their enemies’ attempts to ghettoize them.

As Ruthie Blum writes today in Israel Hayom:

One could argue that the reason public support for Operation Protective Edge reached a ‎whopping 95 percent was the utter justice of its cause; that the incessant rocket-‎fire from Gaza, now hitting the center of country, was too much even for the peace ‎utopians to bear. ‎

One could assume that no matter what an Israeli’s personal political leanings, he would ‎see the virtue in defeating an enemy that glorifies death; uses children as canon fodder; ‎abuses women; tortures homosexuals and the disabled; and vows to annihilate the world’s ‎Jews while converting or slaughtering its Christians. ‎

Nevertheless, it is usually impossible to get even those Israelis with similar outlooks to ‎agree on anything, including where to hang a communal clothesline, for more than five ‎minutes. Hence the quip, “Two Jews, three opinions.”‎

Blum also mentions the surprising fact that this unity occurred under the premiership of Benjamin Netanyahu, whose essential pragmatism tends to leave Israelis wary of his intentions. Netanyahu doesn’t really have a political base in the traditional sense, since the right wing doesn’t trust him. Yet in this current conflict, virtually the entire country was his base.

Such unity of spirit and support for Israel in the Arab world should have been inspiring. To Obama, it was a source of aggravation. As the Times notes:

The blunt, unsparing language — among the toughest diplomats recall ever being aimed at Israel — lays bare a frustrating reality for the Obama administration: the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has largely dismissed diplomatic efforts by the United States to end the violence in Gaza, leaving American officials to seethe on the sidelines about what they regard as disrespectful treatment.

Obama has always been more receptive to the angst of the Democratic Party’s base than other elected Democrats who didn’t, after all, become the most powerful person in the world by riding a wave of feverish antiwar anger. And the Democratic Party’s base is the one sector of American politics whose open hostility to Israel is not only growing stronger by the day but also seeping into the rest of the party from the margins.

Obama has often left commentators perplexed by the battles he chooses and the fights he picks, since they’re so often with steadfast allies. And it should be noted that he hasn’t abandoned Israel in the military realm–far from it. But the diplomatic aggression toward Israel is far from meaningless. The Times explains that “a senior American official predicted that the tough State Department statement would ‘box [Israel] in internationally.’”

Despite having the Arab world on their side in this fight, not to mention the U.S. Congress and the public they represent, the Obama administration is trying to rally international–European, presumably–opinion against Israel. It’s strategically foolish and diplomatically illogical. Perhaps the end of Operation Protective Edge, then–if indeed this is the end–will serve to protect the Obama administration from itself by preventing further self-inflicted wounds, or at least remove Gaza as their source.