Losing the PR war and the Diaspora

[DogPoundPup]

Jeet Heer, National Post Published: Friday, January 09, 2009
Related Topics

*

Dana Goldstein
*

Jon Stewart
*

Israeli Politics
*

Politics
*

Hamas

Powered by Inform
Story Tools

*

-+ Change font size
*

Print this story
*

E-Mail this story

Share This Story

*

Facebook
*

Digg
*

Stumble Upon
*

More

Story tools presented by

Wars can be won on the battlefield while being lost in the realm of public opinion. In Vietnam, the United States army was victorious in every combat operation but the overall war was lost when the American public became convinced that the cost of fighting far outweighed any benefit. In the Middle East today, we see the same dichotomy between battlefield success and public relations failure.

Israel, one of the world's most militarized nations with every weapon at its disposal up to the nuclear bomb, is having no problem crushing Hamas, a raggedy half-staved guerrilla force whose homemade missiles are usually as dangerous as firecrackers. The casualty numbers speak for themselves: As of Wednesday Israel had lost about a dozen lives (mostly soldiers, often due to friendly fire) while more than 600 Palestinians, including scores of women and children, had been killed.

Yet for all its tactical skills in turning Gaza into a charnel house, Israel is facing a serious strategic loss on the battlefield of public perception. As it did in earlier wars where Israel killed large numbers of civilians, global public opinion is cooling toward the Jewish state, which runs the risk of becoming an international pariah.

This shift in public opinion is most striking when we look at young Jews in North America, who are much more critical of Israel than their parents and grandparents. Given the fact that Israel has always relied heavily on support, both financial and moral, from the Diaspora, the loss of loyalty of young Jews is a dangerous trend.

Evidence of the turn against Israel by large parts of the Diaspora can be seen everywhere, from protests to comedy shows. In Toronto, a group of Jewish women briefly occupied the Israeli consulate in protest against the war. In Los Angeles, young Jews wearing keffiyehs marched outside the Israeli consulate carrying signs reading "Difference Between Warsaw Ghetto&Gaza? 70 Years."
http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=1158883

[AdHocSolver]

1. The "new" Intifada.

The "old" Intifada was waged by getting young Palestinians to strap on bombs, go to a place with Israelis, and blow themselves up.

That killed many Israelis, but the horror of those tactics gained sympathy for Israel, and so was counterproductive to the Palestinian cause.

So Hmas came up with the "new" Intifada. Just as the old Intifada required Palestinians to sacrifice themselves, so does the new Intifada. The difference is that instead of strapping on bombs to blow themselves up, Hamas provokes Israel to bomb their population to "sacrifice" Palestinians. This works much better as now public opinion is turning against Israel.

The argument used against Israel is that Israel's response to hundreds of rocket attacks is out of proportion to those rocket attacks because more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis.

Hamas' goal is apparently to sacrifice Palestinians to sway public opinion against Israel. There is no other way to explain their firing hundreds of rockets against a heavily armed state, when the rockets they are using seemingly can't find their targets. Israel was placed in a no-win position. Let Hamas continue to lob rockets and hope they do little damage, or play Hamas game, take out the rocket sites, which, because Hamas placed them in populated areas, was sure to cause civilian casualties.

The argument that the Palestinians are so desperate that they have "nothing to lose" is a specious one. The rockets had to have been smuggled in to Gaza with considerable difficulty, and must have cost tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars. Hamas could have purchased and brought in a lot of food and medicine for that money and effort. They preferred rockets instead.

[DogPoundPup]

2. Israel is placed in a no win situation...wow, that's a whopper!

[DogPoundPup]

3. Israel gets Palestinians land, now they get all their natural resources

War and Natural Gas: The Israeli Invasion and Gaza's Offshore Gas Fields
http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=26383

[Shaktimaan]

4. Wow this article is BS.

Amazing BS. This is the most retarded thing I've seen yet, and that's saying something. They are literally just making stuff up... theorizing on how Israel could potentially screw over the Palestinians and reporting on it as though it's real.

Maybe they are going to outright STEAL the Palestinians gas! Oh no! Here's the plan:

The gas was discovered in 2000, when Israel actually had control over the strip. Then in 2005 they completely pulled out, transferring control to the PA. Israel did this as part of a grand scheme to get Hamas elected, provoke them into raining thousands of rockets down on Israel, entering into a ceasefire to confuse the international community knowing that Hamas would eventually refuse to renew it, then use that as an excuse to invade and precision bomb Hamas installations, so they can finally set up a complex military occupation similar to the one that they originally had. All so that they can steal ONE BILLION DOLLARS from the Palestinians! Ingenious! Sure this plan will cost more than the billion dollars that Israel would be getting in the end but that's only because this plan is really a decoy to hide a much more complex and nefarious plan from... informationliberation.com, their mortal enemies!

Here, look at this awesome logic...

The election of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2001 was a major turning point. Palestine's sovereignty over the offshore gas fields was challenged in the Israeli Supreme Court. Sharon stated unequivocally that "Israel would never buy gas from Palestine" intimating that Gaza's offshore gas reserves belong to Israel.

So, this makes sense to you? You really believe this? Hahahahaha!

[DogPoundPup]

5. BS? Not at all............

BG Group at centre of $4bn deal to supply Gaza gas to Israel
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article1826739.ece


JPost.com » Business » Business News » Article
Updated Jul 6, 2007 9:38

Israel and the British natural gas company BG Group Plc will move ahead with controversial plans to drill for natural gas in the Gaza Marine field, despite Hamas's takeover of the Gaza Strip last month, The Jerusalem Post learned on Thursday.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1183459207651&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[Shaktimaan]

9. Aaaaaand?

You believe that this is proof of the truly batshit insane conspiracy theories arrived at in this article?

I don't even want to make fun of you if you believe this. It would be mean.

[azurnoir]

6. Puleez Shakti again with the they pulled out crap

what you completely fail to mention for some reason is that Israel maintained a blockade of the waters were the gas deposit is located and I have read that Sharon stated that the Palestinians would never be allowed to develop the gas because they could not be trusted with the amount of money that would be brought in by such a venture

[Shaktimaan]

8. oh really? OK dude, if you say so...

Let me get this straight... you agree with this article that the Gaza operation is really so that Israel can move in troops to seize control of the coastline and confiscate the Palestinians' natural gas reserves? And that the negotiations that Israel's Finance and Infrastructure Ministers were engaged in with BG were timed to coincide with a pre-planned military operation to achieve these ends?

Hahahahahahaha!

Do you also agree with this "reporter" that the 2006 Lebanon War was waged so that Israel can build an overland oil pipeline?

Edit: I'm sorry, but I don't believe that you actually think that Israel planned this Gaza operation so that they could steal the Palestinians' natural gas. There's just no way that you actually believe that.

[coruscate]

14. I saw the same reaction from Freepers...

...about Iraq's oil and Bush's plans for it.

And what happened?

EXACTLY.

"Conspiracy theory" my buttox!!

[coruscate]

13. I strongly disagree, Israel broke the ceasefire

Both by never ending the blockade and on Nov 4th by attacking.

The rockets are the best attack they have, that's simply it.

They're starving to death in the world's largest (as one DUer put it) "open air prison."

If you were stuck there, regardless of your race and nationality, you'd be spoiling to do SOMETHING to get your enemy to release his strangling hold of your neck.

Reading this as an intentional strategy is ridiculous; there's an election coming up and these warhawks are no different than George W. Bush's team, this is their Iraq, their chance to prove their manlihood to the voting populace.

[azurnoir]

7. Despite some inaccuracies

in the first part of the article kassams are more dangerous than firecrackers, the author misses a point perhaps some of the problem with younger Jews is that they are tired of being referred to as Diaspora Jews the implication being that if they do not live in Israel they are in exile they are not and no other people are refereed to like that such as Norwegians or Americans of Norwegian ancestry are not referred to by Norwegians in Norway in such a manner

[Shaktimaan]

10. I've never heard of that.

Diaspora isn't a negative word.

Have you heard something about young Jews rejecting the Diaspora term? Have you even ever heard of any young Jews expressing strong opinions on the politics of the term "diaspora Jews?"

Incidentally I think that this article misses entirely. Jews across the board tend to support Israel. If a percentage of the youngest generation does not, it is probably due to the fact that they are the first generation who has not witnessed any clear need for a Jewish state to safeguard the Jews of the Diaspora, IMO. At this point there are only two countries with a significant number of Jews anyway... Israel and America. The problems that spawned Zionism as a solution seem to have been solved.

But I still don't think that significant numbers of young Jews are rejecting Israel.

[azurnoir]

11. What is the defination of Diaspora?

no I have never heard of that and I am sure "some" young Jews especially those extremely loyal to and supportive of Israel no matter what do not mind one bit presenting themselves as eternal victims but that is not by any means all young or old Jews.
And yes Zionism certainly is solving the problem in the OPT in Gaza.........

[Shaktimaan]

12. Diaspora means "eternal victim" to you?

A diaspora is when a group of people are displaced from their homeland. The reason you never hear about Americans of Norwegian descent mentioning a diaspora is because there never was a Norwegian diaspora. The people of Norway were never displaced en-masse. However you probably have heard of other Diasporas such as the Black/African Diaspora or the Palestinian Diaspora, otherwise known as the Naqba.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that Jewish people consider the term Diaspora to be in any way negative, much less connotative of being an "eternal victim?" (Is this the point when you link to an article written by a single nutjob as evidence of your position's universal acceptance?)

Honestly, I'm quite shocked at your position here. The idea that Diaspora Jews are looked down upon by Sabras or that Jewish people consider the term "diaspora" insulting at all demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of Jewish culture. And you really think that people are basing their decisions as to whether or not to support Israel based on a perceived slight against them? You truly do live in your own little world.

And yes Zionism certainly is solving the problem in the OPT in Gaza.........

I'm not even sure what that statement is supposed to imply. But in terms of Zionism's main purpose the Gaza campaign illustrates its success quite well. Zionism's goal was not to eliminate all forms of violence against Jews. It was to ensure that through self-determination we would have the ability to defend ourselves from threats against us. Were Morocco's, Egypt's or Poland's Jews ever able to defend themselves from threats the way that Israel has? Were the Jews of Palestine ever able to, before Zionism?

[azurnoir]

15. No not eternal victim it means in exile

or with out a home and I thought Zionisms purpose was to make a Jewish homeland but I guess that has expanded so to speak and Shakti I live in my and you live in yours as do we all but do make all the BS you want you seem so good at it

And Shakti is living in NYC living in diaspora to you?