The war within the war: the witch-hunt against Netanyahu, Part 3

"It is incredible what political simpletons Jews are. They shut their eyes to one of the most elementary rules of life, that you must not 'meet halfway' those who do not want to meet you." — Ze'ev Jabotinsky

The war within the war: the witch-hunt against Netanyahu, Part 3
The Philadelphi Corridor and Israel's Kurukshetra moment

It is not that common to see an Israeli military spokesperson going beyond one-dimensional combat-speak, but Lt. Col. (Ret.) Jonathan Conricus also does not see the range of factors that have to be taken into account. The consequences of Conricus's gloss over ideology came out clearly from an interview with Michael Dickson, Executive Director of Stand With Us Israel, during which Conricus warned:

This [IDF] operation [in Judea and Samaria] is the first and definitely not the last attempt to undermine the infrastructure of these organisations, but here, just like with Philadelphi in Gaza, we have to address the root cause. [What] allows Palestinian terrorist organisations to keep killing and threatening to kill Israelis is the fact that we don't have good control over the Israeli-Jordanian border. It's an open, porous border. The Iranians are smuggling weapons from Syria into Jordan and then into Judea and Samaria, specifically Samaria, and that is really the fuel behind these attacks. Once we cut that line, then terrorist organisations that might be very ideologically strong against Israel, won't have weapons. They won't be able to execute significant attacks. (My emphasis)

Are the vehicle bombs also smuggled in from Jordan? Are the 5-shekel knives smuggled in from Jordan? If the Palestinians are ideologically strong, then everything is a weapon, not least their own bodies, and still the IDF top brass is forcing villages and towns in Judea and Samaria to take Palestinians into their midst! Tell me I am crazy. Tell me I am insane. But what happened around Gaza involving thousands of Gazans just before 7 October? Whether they "don't have good control over the Israeli-Jordanian border"—what a stunning admission—or they force vulnerable Jewish communities whose menfolk are fighting in Gaza to surround themselves with Palestinians, it all points towards one clear thing: the Jews' most difficult fight for survival is not going to be against Palestinians.

Many Israelis criticise the conceptzia of the political and security establishment as having failed, and it certainly deserves such criticism. But why has it failed? Well, look at what happened on 7 October, they say. Withdrawing from Gaza was supposed to bring peace, but it has not. While this is true, it is not saying anything about why the conceptzia failed, only that it failed. The narrow, technocratic thinking behind the conceptzia and the hubris that propelled its implementation are critiqued here.

Of course Hamas will never make a deal unless they have a boot on their throat. Even Jabotinsky was crystal-clear that:

This does not mean that there cannot be any agreement with the Palestine Arabs. What is impossible is a voluntary agreement. ...But the only way to obtain such an agreement, is the iron wall, which is to say, a strong power in Palestine that is not amenable to any Arab pressure. In other words, the only way to reach an agreement in the future is to abandon all idea of seeking an agreement at present. (My emphasis)

Jabotinsky's maxim that maintaining an iron wall is spoilt by talk of discussion is profoundly significant in the context of the hugely unfair demands being made on Netanyahu, including public demonstrations and treason on the part of the security establishment, as if he, personally, is responsible for Hamas's actions. These pressures on Netanyahu also assume a quid pro quo that does not exist: give Hamas what they want and the hostages will be set free. It is like Jews in the Yishuv paying their Muslim attackers to stop kicking them. Netanyahu, unfortunately, has been a politician in this crisis when he should be a soldier.

We set, as far as Gaza is concerned, three war goals: the first war goal was to destroy Hamas's military and governing capabilities; the second was to free our hostages; and the third was to ensure that Gaza never again poses a threat to Israel.

Yishai Fleischer immediately saw the problem with this, and the trap that Netanyahu had set for himself:

I'm not exactly sure what the difference between number one and number three is. Netanyahu says: destroy Hamas; and also, never allow any force like Hamas to take over. And then nestled in there is the issue of the hostages. To me the hostages are not on the same level, because the hostages may very well be dead. Also, if you're fighting as though you're trying to rescue hostages, you may be trying too hard to make sure that they don't get hurt. And you may be making deals with the Devil. I'm not sure that that's a good fighting technique.

Holding the Philadelphi Corridor could offer a way out of the hostage noose that Netanyahu has tied around his own neck when including freeing the hostages as one of his war aims, for Philadelphi is a boot on Hamas's neck, provided he absolutely chokes it off, as Jonathan Conricus stresses. The demands that Netanyahu "must do more to free the hostages" are not only the fault of Netanyahu, it is also, fundamentally, a problem of Israeli society failing to realise that their country is not at peace, and never was. Israel is permanently at war, regardless of whether she acts accordingly or in denial. The war against Israel, from before her rebirth, is jihad from the outside and insurrection from the inside.

The taking of captives is central to jihad. It should be expected and the population be prepared for it. But in order for a country to be so prepared, her people must first recognise that a jihad is being waged against them. If they refuse to recognise this, then they are susceptible to easy manipulation and things will fall apart, as they now do.

Referring to one of his maps, Netanyahu pointed out: "...this is Gaza after the Disengagement [2005], and Hamas now has a weapons-smuggling operation nurtured by Iran, financed by Iran, supplied by Iran, delivered by Iran." Notably, the Prime Minister made no mention of Egypt's culpability.

Egypt under Nasser: in the 1950s nurtured the fedayeen, financed the fedayeen, supplied the fedayeen, even delivered the fedyaeen; Egypt closed the Straights of Tiran, precipitating the Six-Day War in 1967; Egypt launched the three-year War of Attrition in 1967; Egypt launched the Yom Kippur War in 1973 with its Battle of Badr.

Did no Israeli security advisor appreciate the significance of this consistent behaviour and especially of that choice of name? Badr invokes the wars of their prophet Muhammad. Of course Egypt was never going to honour any Peace Treaty. Agreements between Muslims and non-Muslims are not binding on Muslims. The Egyptians entered into the only kind of treaty that Islam permits Muslims to enter into with non-Muslims: a Hudaybiyyah treaty. Muslims may enter into a peace treaty only when they are weak, and then for no longer than ten years, after which either the fighting resumes or the treaty is renewed. In other words, the most that can be expected is a truce, irrespective of who shakes hands with whom on which lawn. Egypt would henceforth simply be smarter about violating its Peace Treaty with Israel.

Regardless of what its ruling elites might do, Egypt is Muslim enough to have put the Muslim Brotherhood in power. A coup might topple a regime, but it does not remove the Qur’an from the hearts of Muslims. The abandonment of Gaza to Hamas in 2005 gave Egypt’s officials, soldiers, border guards and the Sinai population the opportunity to redeem their country in the eyes of the Muslims for its shameful Peace Treaty with the Jewish State. 2007 is when the Peace Treaty ended. Some years ago, Egypt supposedly flooded the tunnels, and now, shock horror, we discover 200 tunnels under the Philadelphi Corridor between Gaza and Sinai. Yes, the same Sinai that Israel gave up for peace! And after all this, Netanyahu could still insist, "We also agree to begin discussions about a permanent ceasefire," one hundred years after Ze’ev Jabotinsky warned:

We all demand that there should be an iron wall. Yet we keep spoiling our own case, by talking about "agreement" which means telling [our adversaries] that the important thing is not the iron wall, but discussions. (My emphasis)

Netanyahu, just by being Netanyahu, is telling Hamas the important thing is not the Philadelphi Corridor, but a deal. One Arutz7 reader pleaded, "Bibi, listen to Ben Gvir and Smotrich. They are always correct." It is a plea that will fall on deaf ears, because this is where Bibi stands squarely in the way of Bibi.

Finally, many in Israel, especially the Prime Minister, make a point of stressing that Israel abides by the rules of war, and then immediately tells the world how Israel goes well beyond the rules of war:

We've taken precautions to avoid civilian deaths that no army on earth in urban warfare has taken. We've issued millions of text messages, millions of flyers, hundreds of thousands of phone calls. We actually phone people and say get out. We lose the element of surprise. As a result of that, in the most densely-packed urban warfare theatre in history, where you have 35,000 Hamas terrorists 50 metres above ground, 50 metres below ground in the most intricate and complex underground terror tunnel network on earth, we've been able to achieve the lowest ratio of civilians to combatant deaths in the history of modern urban warfare. It's 1:1. Now report honestly, because you accused us of something that is outrageous [genocide].

At the start of the war, Joe Biden, like an old padrone, wagged his finger at Israel, demanding the IDF complies with the rules of war. The rules of war imposes restrictions on armies, but it also affords rights. The rules of war do not require any of the actions Netanyahu demands recognition of, but Israel, obsessed with proving that Jews are good people, forswore the rights afforded an army in war, such as the right to attack military targets even if there are civilians present, and in effect ended up imposing on her own soldiers the rules of peace, thereby reducing them to quasi-policemen. Even had Israel strictly observed the rules of war, her detractors would likewise have accused her of genocide, because the accusation has nothing to do with the facts. Bending over backwards in the way Israel does gains her less than nothing, since she freely moved the goalposts in favour of those who wish her harm, without there having been any need whatsoever to do so. This is how hasbara kills Jews.

No one commends Israel for not bombing hospitals and clinics housing weapons and command centres, something the rules of war allow, rather, everyone condemns her for sneaking into a hospital and killing the terrorists inside without harming anyone else. Ze'ev Jabotinsky again:

It is incredible what political simpletons Jews are. They shut their eyes to one of the most elementary rules of life, that you must not "meet halfway" those who do not want to meet you.

The alternative justification for pussy-footing through Gaza is the need to avoid harm to the Israeli captives held there. It is worth keeping in mind that to date, three times more soldiers and police officers have died in Gaza during the current war than the number of captives Hamas originally seized. There is something wrong with this calculus, and it was just a matter of time before something like The General's Plan would emerge from the Reserve Commanders Forum, that actually does comply with the rules of war, yet will trigger the world and the Israeli Left to lose their minds, because Israel's voluntary halfway is now the new zero. The General's Plan sets out, amongst other things:

The suggested strategy: A siege

...We must focus on debilitating at least one of the four pillars upon which Hamas' rule is contingent: funding, recruitment, supply control and ideological motivation, while adhering to international law.

Presently, cutting off supplies is by far the fastest, most cost effective, safest for non-combatants, readily available tactic. We've outlined a strategy designed to sever the supply chains and isolate terrorist cells, making it easier for the IDF to deal with their regrouping and safer for local population to move to non-combat zones, beginning with smart utilisation of the Netzarim Corridor. (With special thanks to the Reserve Commanders Forum for kindly providing an English translation, AP)

The plan attempts to claw back Israel's self-forfeited military rights:

Siege of the besieged enemy is legitimate and permissible under the strictest international law. The condition required to realise the blockade is to allow civilian residents to leave the area through safe corridors before imposing them. Siege is the most effective way to end wars quickly while reducing the number of fatalities on both our side and the citizens of the side.

The U.S. Department of Defense's War Guide and a conference on siege at Harvard University in 2022 unequivocally state that a siege is a legitimate and permissible war tactic, including the enemy's starvation to death as long as the necessary steps are taken to assist the uninvolved, prioritising them from the besieged territory.

It was none other than Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant who announced on 9 October 2023, “We are putting a complete siege on Gaza: no electricity, no food, no water, no gas – it’s all closed.” Within three months, in scenes reminiscent of Gush Katif, enraged Israelis found themselves physically trying to block convoys of supply trucks from entering Gaza and rewarding Hamas for 7 October, while their loved ones were still held captive.

Nine months ago, in the first hostage deal, Israel received ten live hostages a day, in return for three prisoners of insignificant status. ...The deal in November was reached because until this point in time Israel only allowed two trucks of provisions to enter Gaza daily. Hamas begged, as part of the deal, to increase the amount to 200. The day Israel folded and this number was agreed upon, Hamas immediately ceased fulfilling its end of the bargain, and doubled down on the stringent attitude we see from it until today.

But instead of going right back to two trucks a day, and in spite of Hamas' blatant disregard of its own commitment, 200 trucks a day continue to enter the war zone, replenishing Hamas with all it needs to keep on fighting, and refuse any hostage deal put on the table.

In this context, the Prime Minister's impressive list at the end of his first press conference, of Hamas refusals to agree a deal, makes him look absurd, as it is he who insists that "humanitarian aid" must continue to flow. Has Netanyahu forgotten who elected him? The same Yoav Gallant now demands a retreat from the Philadelphi Corridor, expecting the overturning of an 8:1 Security Cabinet decision. As to whether holding the Philadelphi Corridor implies stopping the trucks, Netanyahu remains strategically ambiguous. Most thought Gallant meant it when he called for a siege of Gaza on 9 October. Most think Netanyahu means to choke off Hamas at the Philadelphi Corridor. Capitulators make up a significant Israeli cadre, they sit in the Cabinet, at the top of the Armed Forces and the Judiciary, and enjoy the Biden administration's encouragement. The elephant in the room is becoming increasingly restive. For some unfathomable reason, Benjamin Netanyahu insists on riding that elephant.

Jewish capitulators have never been put off by Jewish deaths, the most recent examples being the Oslo-inspired intifadas, the 2005 ethnic-cleansing of Jews from Gaza, and the recently-exposed treason of Israeli judges and the Attorney-General preventing the Israeli Air Force from intervening to stop the mass-slaughter of Jews on 7 October. It has been those Jews who understand the need for war who have shunned war when there was a risk of harming Jews. It is possible that these very Jews do not realise that Israel today faces her Kurukshetra moment: standing on the brink of a war she absolutely does not want to fight, but absolutely must, because this war is a fight to the finish in which Jews will have no choice but to spill Jewish blood. Israel needs an Arjuna and Netanyahu comes nowhere close.


Picture credits:

Israel Defense Forces

Unknown author - http://www.sothebys.com/en/auctions/ecatalogue/2012/indian-southeast-asian-works-of-art/lot.235.html, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=22686436

Anonymous - Smithsonian Freer Sackler Gallery [1], Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=4134654

Screenshot from "We Went to GAZA", The Israel Guys, YouTube, 4 Sept 2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3fUyYEveXw