Israel Sends Reserves Into Gaza Amid Escalation Fears
By Larry Derfner, Mideast Watch
The war in Gaza has cost some 900 Palestinian and 13 Israeli lives so far. A U.N. Security Council resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire (passed 14 to 0, with the United States abstaining) was rejected by both Hamas and Israel. Israel's leadership "troika"—Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni—is divided on what to do next.
Olmert, backed by military leaders, favors a ground invasion of Gaza's urban centers and refugee camps to further cripple Hamas's fighting ability. Barak opposes such an invasion, preferring a cease-fire, while Livni favors an immediate, unilateral withdrawal that would leave Israel free to punish Hamas in the future. The mobilization of Israeli reserve soldiers in Gaza, along with the views of Army leaders and Olmert, seems to point to an invasion of Gaza City and the refugee camps. Al Jazeera reports on the reservists' entry into the fighting:
The move appeared to be in preparation for the so-called third stage of Israel's offensive: moving troops into the towns and cities of Gaza to fight door-to-door.
The deployment came amid some of the most intense fighting since the ground offensive began on January 3, with Palestinian fighters putting up stiff resistance to the Israeli advance into Gaza City.
Ron Ben-Yishai, an influential military affairs commentator for the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot, argues Israel must invade Gaza City and the refugee camps to pressure Hamas and world diplomats into forging a cease-fire more on Israel's terms. These include a Hamas pledge to cease rocket fire, a mechanism for stopping weapons smuggling from Sinai to Gaza, and the release of Gilad Shalit, a soldier captured in 2006. (Hamas's key unmet demand is for a lifting of Israel's 18-month siege on Gaza.) Ben-Yishai writes:
The current state of affairs requires Israel to adopt a military move that is not necessarily a takeover of the Strip, yet still terminates the dead-end on the ground and on the diplomatic front. The ministers will have to take a difficult decision, because expanding the military operation will involve paying a price on our part, in terms of casualties and in respect to international criticism and possibly isolation.
Meanwhile, the liberal daily Ha'aretz warns that the price of sending reserve soldiers into Gaza's refugee camps will be high:
Whoever introduces brigades of reservists into the operation will surely weigh the damage to morale that pictures of dead and wounded reservists would cause. And the monopolistic hold on information will shatter once the reservists start sending home reports of the damage caused by the conscript units before them.
Tags: Israel | Middle East | Gaza | Hamas
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (11) | Print
Reader Comments
Futile
Too bad logic and reality don't work in any left-wing nut organization.
To Mr. Marsh
You clearly know nothing about Gaza; though it is small and crowded, so is Singapore. If the Palestinian people had made a better choice in 2006, they might have elected a government that chose to build schools, hospitals, parks, and industry. Instead, they chose a radical Islamic terror organization that wishes to destroy its neighbor and institute a pan-Islamic caliphate throughout the middle east. Did you know Mr. Marsh that Hamas recently passed a law that not only legalized lashes, physical mutilations like cutting off hands, etc., but also crucifixion. Check it out. Finally, you write as if Gaza and the Palestinians are the poorest people in the world and have such a terrible quality of life. Did you know that the Palestinians are the largest per capita recepients of foreign aid worldwide. Based upon current prices, Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza have received $161 per person per year compared to $68 per person annually under the Marshall Plan. Moreover, Gaza's offshore gas deposits (confirmed by British Gas) are worth an estimated $2 billion. If the Palestinians would remove their radical jihadist government, which is only interested in imposing Sharia law and destroying Israel, and elect moderates concerned for their welfare, perhaps they could develop these resources. Mr. Marsh, I suggest that you stop repeating propaganda claims about the poor victims in Gaza and do a little investigating on your own. Did you know that life expectancy in Gaza is 72.34 years, higher than Russia (65.9), India (69.25), and Ukraine (68). Gaza has a much lower infant mortality rate than Iran, India, Egypt, and Brazil. Finally, literacy in Gaza stands at 92.4% - higher than India, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Get the facts, sir.
To Frederick H. Marsh
You ask what Israel has ever done for peace in the region. I must assume that you have (1) forgotten history (2) don't read history, or (3) choose to ignore history. Mr. Marsh, Israel returned the Sinai Pennisula to Egypt and signed a peace treaty with that Arab nation. The State of Israel has proved to the world what it is willing to do for peace. The Palestinians, on the other hand, have never been willing to acknowledge Israel's right to exist. Fatah's charter remains unchanged to this day, and the radical Jihadists in Hamas blatantly warn that they want to "obliterate" Israel.
War, sir, is hell, and international law allows Israel to defend itself. The Israeli military has complied with every law of armed combat. They have obeyed the rule of distinction, targeting only military targets and doing all that is possible to avoid civilian deaths; i.e leaflets, phone calls, text messages. Hamas has used human shields, refused to wear uniforms on the battlefield and launched missiles at civilians with the intent to kill as many as possible. There is no moral ambiguity in this war.
advertisement
