More Endgame in Gaza
Friedman and Horovitz on Netanyahu
This morning I read Thomas Friedman in the New York Times at the breakfast table and David Horowitz in Times of Israel from an email on my computer. They both wrote on the subject of Netanyahu. What am I to think? I have stated on Substack that Netanyahu is our best comparison in this century to Churchill in the last. Have my impressions and conclusions been shaken by these two men whose intellects I respect?
Horowitz, to his credit, merely stated his (and my) concerns of the present day. He is no supporter of Netanyahu but I recognize his integrity.
However, Friedman, in what has become emblematic of an emerging style, both pompous and hysterical, proceeded to not only state the question but answer it as well.
Friedman based the bulk of his column on open letters published in Haaretz from “two respected former Israeli Air Force pilots, Brig. Gen. Asaf Agmon and Col. Uri Arad… addressed to their colleagues still serving in the Air Force. Both men are members of Forum 555 Patriots, an impressive group of around 1,700 Israeli Air Force pilots, some retired and some still serving as reservists, which originally formed to resist Netanyahu’s efforts to undermine Israeli democracy with a judicial coup.”
They want the war to end and they are apparently willing to settle for Hamas remaining in Gaza, if that’s the price. They are a minority, but no one is suppressing their voice. Israel is a democracy.
The problem for me is that Friedman, in crafting his answer as to what the government should do, is utterly dishonest. He says, “the Netanyahu government should be telling the Trump administration and Arab mediators that it’s ready to withdraw from Gaza in a phased manner and be replaced by an international/Arab/Palestinian Authority peacekeeping force — provided that the Hamas leadership agrees to return all remaining living and dead hostages and leave the strip.” (My italics.)
However, (Friedman goes on), Israel rejects this solution, and “goes ahead with Netanyahu’s vow to perpetuate this war indefinitely.”
I believe this characterization is dishonest. I believe Netanyahu would be willing to do a deal on those broad terms. I believe Netanyahu would let Hamas declare victory, swear to continue the battle, pledge to steadfastly fight on until the Mahdi comes; and much like Beirut in 1982, let Hamas depart. Until Friedman gives me evidence that Hamas is *willing* to do that deal, that he claims Netanyahu is rejecting, I will persist in believing him dishonest with his claims and solutions.
Friedman closes with his reaction to the letters.
“First, Amen.” That’s a nice feel good response.
“Second, this is what being pro-Israel really sounds like.” You are rooting for an Israel that helps the needy and the suffering, an Israel for which you dropped coins in a can at Hebrew school; one that truly will be a light unto the world… tikkum olam.
“Third, it is time for a similar movement calling out Hamas’s vile excesses, led by those who support Palestinian statehood and a peaceful resolution in Gaza. No one should accept Hamas prolonging this war to keep itself in power. Nothing would do more to pressure Hamas to accept a cease-fire than to be denounced across the world, on college campuses and in high-profile demonstrations from those who have been giving this hate-driven organization a free pass. This is what being pro-Palestinian really sounds like.”
If Friedman really believes this can happen, then he must still believe in the tooth fairy.
Hamas (to my knowledge) has never come close to accepting the deal Friedman says Netanyahu rejects.
Furthermore, I contend that Hamas will never accept a deal like that, and I hope to be proven wrong. Hamas is intent on fighting to the death, taking as much as they can, of Gaza, the hostages and Israel (including the West) with them. This is a sick culture, animated by a wish for death that Friedman cannot recognize. They have Israel in a stranglehold animated by the dynamics of ‘Suicide by Cop’. Their inflexible ideology exhausts people like Friedman, peels them away until, in their frustration, their only outlet is to blame the man swinging the club, who struggles in the grip of a ferocious unrelenting wolf.