With news story after news story covering all of the violence in the Middle East and North Africa, it is too easy to accept the notions that democracy and consensus governance cannot exist in the Muslim world due to culture. Where failures in national security interests drive violence in places like Egypt and Libya, most other Arab Spring countries have successfully suppressed populous uprisings while Turkey, as a democratic success, is tainted by a massive corruption scandal. While Iraq and Syria represent the most pressing threat to regional stability, the war between Hamas and Israel has garnered the attention of the world, because it puts the US, which is the UN’s most influential player, in an awkward position as we attempt to deal with the Ukrainian Crisis, among many crises.
Israel’s inability and/or unwillingness to engage Hamas without bombing and firing on numerous civilians targets means the International Community’s growing distaste for the actions of Israel’s could translate into punitive measures like economic sanctions. Choosing between global credibility and political pressure from those who view Israel to be inculpable, it is dubious that the Obama Administration would even allow sanctions to have a serious effect on Israel’s economy, i.e. he might use US dollars to prop up Israel’s economy, let alone allow the UN to act on consensus. That said, the election of national newcomer Jakarta Governor Joko Widodo to the Indonesian Presidency is quite an encouraging sign, especially given that the nation is home to over 240 million people of whom most are Muslim. Certainly, the tendency for power elites to oppose outcomes unfavorable to their traditional rule and offer resistance to policy shifts for the public good that potentially threaten their ability to maintain their privilege is quite evident with candidate General Prabowo Subianto’s seemingly baseless charges of election fraud, but the election of a People’s candidate with 53% of the vote may well be exactly what Indonesian democracy needs to thrive. While advisors can fill in for Mr. Widodo’s resume gaps, he brings both the support of the People and an innate understanding of the People’s interests in a broader sense than what the traditional power elites could. Although all societies rely on the ability of their governments to successfully balance the many competing interests of their People, democracies rely on the ability of the People to be heard and to feel as though their government is listening. At the same time, this election shows civil discourse in the Muslim world can win over mass violence when a conflict arises.
Comments
Unfortunately, the world is currently fixating on two international crises at the expense of many, many other crises going on around the world, including many where the death toll outpaces these events by a factor of 10 or more. On the one hand, the International Community is thoroughly vested in Russia’s total disregard for Ukrainian sovereignty and destabilizing violence surrounding the Ukrainian Crisis. On the other hand, the world is once again thoroughly engrossed by the latest war between Israel and Hamas. Regrettably, the Ukrainian situation is being weakly addressed by ratcheting up pressure on the Putin government with little more to do aside from watching new tragedies unfold as we wait until the violent insurgents can be subdued. In the case of renewed violence between Israel and Hamas, it is clear leaders of both sides will do as they please until they can no longer fight. Consequently, what the rest of the world must focus on is how these conflicts affect the interests of the International Community.
Tragically, the Palestinian and Israeli Peoples are both caught between a rock and a hard place. For the Israelis, Hamas is a deadly threat while the Israeli government is the only institution capable of guaranteeing their safety, even if the vast majority of the Israeli People would disapprove of the military’s tactics. For the Palestinians, Hamas may well be an unsavory group, but it is seen as their only means of defending themselves from the Israeli government’s overbearing abuse of the Palestinian People. Both Peoples voted for these groups of People to be in charge, because they were given seemingly ineffective alternatives. What is most regrettable is that Hamas could have become more of a constructive political organization and Israel could have learned to use better tactics to address militant attacks, i.e. more intelligence-guided, strategic strikes of well-defined targets as a well-planned campaign and far less brute force used as part of a chaotic reaction. The United States could have carpet-bombed Iraq and Afghanistan into ground in order to crush the insurgencies, but we engaged in strategic counterinsurgency and counterterrorism campaigns at the expense of American lives and American dollars in order to prevent rising numbers of civilian causalities. We did this, because the ripple effects of simply destroying our enemies, no matter the collateral damage, would have presented a far greater threat to American security, i.e. we would have encouraged terrorism and thoroughly lost the support of our allies if we were continually improving our efforts avoid civilian deaths. With all that is going on in the world, Israel is approaching a scenario where they will face even greater security threats due to their own actions, which Hamas is intentionally provoking. Strategically speaking, Israel and the Gaza Strip are just two small pieces of land in the Middle East and Africa were civilians are being slaughtered due to militant strive. Unlike Iraq, Syria, Libya, Nigeria, and Sudan, Israel and the Palestinians have some control over how events play out. In terms of the bigger picture, Iraq and Syria are probably the greatest destabilizing threats to the broader stability of the region. This means these crises represent a greater strategic interest to most other nations, thus the world should be focused on events unfolding in Syria and Iraq while nuclear talks and efforts to normalize relations with Iraq are once again being thoroughly neglected. In addition to viewing and addressing the Gaza Strip crisis in terms of a regional strategy, the behavior of Russia must also be understood in terms of a broader lens. During the Cold War, the world was essentially divided into two camps, even though many countries dealt with both the US and the USSR to varying degrees. In many respects, we are seeing this division return as superpowers Russia and China seek to carve out their own network of allegiances in their attempts to counterbalance US power. In China’s case, the communist nation is partnering with likeminded countries such as Venezuela, North Korea, Syria, and so on to form economic ties that reduce its dependency on the US economy. Russia, on the other hand, is engaging in a more aggressive, more coercive strategy to redevelopment circumvent the US economy. The unfortunate reality is that this means the United States is entering an era when sanctions will do just as much, if not more, to isolate our own country and, potentially, strengthen Russia and China. At the moment, economic sanctions are a means of hurting Russia, especially when allies support US efforts and the measures taken are crippling, but sanctions cannot be relied upon to contain other rogue states over time. As such, Russia’s involvement in the Ukrainian Crisis is of interest to other nations, because its rogue behavior, which defies international norms and expectations, threatens the International Community’s ability to punish countries that violate the will of the International Community and threats the sustainability of the global efforts to address global issues. That said, the death of those people caught in the Ukrainian Crisis, the Israeli-Hamas conflict, and all other examples of strive around the world are tragedies that demonstrate the failings of our modern International Community and remind us that we replace violence with greater efforts to address the interests of the world’s Peoples through more civil means. With all the ongoing violence and unrest seen around the world, resources are limited while those involved seem ever more determined to force their will onto others. Consequently, the sad readily is that the world must address ongoing, emerging, and reemerging crises in terms of national, regional, and international interests. If not, the world cannot hope to, eventually, put out all the fires burning around the world. Normally, the focal point of a story on an airline’s second plane crash in four months would be the competency of those managing that company. The decision to route Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 only 1,000 feet above Ukraine’s no-fly zone was clearly a foolish choice that warrants a full investigation of the decision makers at Malaysia Airline, particularly those top executives who may be pressing for cost cutting measures at the expense of safety, yet the fact the plane was shot down over territory controlled by pro-Russian separatists turns the incident into an selling point for those looking to punish Russia for its involved in the Ukraine Crisis. That said, this tragedy does serve as a shocking example of why the International Community needs to deal with the conflict between Ukraine and Russia.
Our modern, globalizing world hinges upon the ability of people to freely travel around the world and engage in international dealings. Armed conflicts impede this ability while they also destroy opportunity and success. At the same time, the International Community functions, because government cannot do as they please. Russia’s blatant breech of Ukrainian territory and muddied support of insurgents threatens the stability of our modern International Community. What the downing of the Malaysia aircraft did was show the world unexpected ways a rogue nation can undermine our global community and demonstrates the need to intervene in situations where a world power is bullying a weaker country. America and our allies once believed we have to “make the world safe for democracy.” Where the thinking behind this motto pushed the United States to act as a global leader to safeguard our way of life, we need that same thinking turned into action in order to safeguard our current way of life. We need to make the world safe for a world order that thrives on constructive engagement and cooperation. Given Russia’s size, influence, demonstrated unwillingness to end its involved in the Ukrainian Crisis, and ongoing attempts to wait out the response of the International Community, Russian President Vladimir Putin is clearly going to do whatever it takes to fulfill his mission, sooner or later. As such, the world needs to thoroughly derail Putin’s ambitions by ratcheting up economic sanctions as strong and as quick as possible in the hopes of awakening the Russian People to the folly of Putin’s way. With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu deciding to launch and rapidly expand a ground assault into the Gaza Strip, international condemnation of Israel’s response to Hamas rocket attacks is only building. Although Israel is not deaf to the voices of protesters as officials do feel the need to rationalize Israel’s fairly indiscriminate attacks on suspected Hamas targets, it is clear outside pressure has little affect on the Israel government’s decisions. As such, the limited operation supported by the Obama Administration is likely more lip service than reality.
Netanyahu and other Israel leaders understand they cannot simply reengage Hamas every time the militant group opens fire, especially given waning international support for the Israeli government’s heavy-handed responses, their behavior in 2008-09 when they saw shifting support in Washington, and the size of their invading force, thus they likely see the need to root out the Hamas problem once and for all. Where Hamas is throwing everything it has at Israel, Israel is doing the same and the end game will be the annihilation of Hamas. That said, Israel will still have to make peace for the Palestinian People and how it conducts itself over the next few days to weeks will determine whether or not Israel will face an even greater threat from the Palestinians as well as the rest of the Arab World. Israeli military leaders have said the deployment of ground forces can translate into many different things, including the use of Special Forces, no-go zones, hit-and-run attacks on key installations. If these tactics will prevent the number of Palestinian causalities from increasing, Israel would be wise to use them whenever and wherever possible. It is good that Israel is making efforts to contact nearby Palestinians before bombing Hamas targets in order to avoid civilian deaths, but doing so means lives are destroyed instead of simply ended, i.e. they are still creating a humanitarian crisis. Losing your home, your means of feeding your family, and all of your material possessions, even if you can eventually return home, is devastating, especially when you are live in poverty as a huge number of Palestinians do. Although Israel absolutely has the right to defend its People from threats and Hamas is intentionally provoking an Israel military response, all the Palestinian People see is a growing list of dead Palestinians at the hands of the Israeli military and a largely unscathed Israel protected by its Iron Dome.
Truth be told, the Palestinians should be blaming Hamas for those who have been killed and injured in this latest exchange of force, yet they see Hamas as their protectors, even as Hamas uses civilian populations as shields. This is very unfortunate, because Hamas as a militant, extremist group is an agent of destruction while peace between the Israelis and Palestinians is only possible when they no longer see each other as hated enemies. That said, the Palestinian People do have a long list of grievances against the state of Israel, which is rooted in Israel’s treatment of the Palestinian People as unequal and undeserving of the same rights as the Israeli People. Not only does the blockade of the Gaza Strip, among other measures including Israel’s settlements in Palestinian territory, deny the Palestinians access to basic necessities, it makes them helpless prisoners in their own land. The Peoples of the world engage in civilized activities like politics and diplomacy in order to avoid the use of violence in addressing grievances. Support for non-state actors like terrorist groups, therefore, exists, because political and diplomatic entities have failed to serve the interests of People and failed to address their grievances. In reality, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is more of a manager than an actual leader capable of addressing his People interest, because the Palestinians are at the mercy of Israel, with little tangible support from the rest of the world. Thanks largely to Israeli influence, the major power brokers of the world do not even recognize the Palestinian People have a country of their own. Certainly, there are good reasons for this, but it also means the Palestinian People cannot come together under a single national identity or properly voice their grievances as a People against nations like Israel. In turn, the Palestinians can never feel as though their interests are being addressed or even know the world is listening, thus supporting violence over diplomacy becomes the only viable means of ensuring Palestinians interests will be met, i.e. Israel is the enemy and Hamas is the savior. If the Palestinians could believe politics and diplomacy would work for them, Israel would its best defense against Hamas: the Palestinian People would no longer support the violence of Hamas. In the words of Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri, Hamas feels "alone in the field" due to a lack of support from the Arab World. While Hamas is likely looking for support in terms of financial backing, jihadists willing to die for their cause, and a general acceptance from the Peoples of the Middle East, the Arab world does need to provide greater support for the Palestinian People. What the Palestinians need is support in terms of building their society and resolving daily grievances against Israel instead of the big picture items peace talks tend to focus on. This means affording the Palestinians enough leverage to address their grievances with Israel on near-equal footing, instead of at a complete disadvantage. It also means providing for long neglected material needs, so this disenfranchised People can feel somewhat empowered and experience the tangible benefits than come from supporting a far more healthy relationship with Israel. Otherwise, the Palestinian People will continue to suffer while Israel will continue to be vulnerable to extremist attacks and become a destabilizing force in a globalizing Arab world. |
Read old posts
April 2020
|