Second Thoughts

How much does Richard Goldstone's Gaza retraction matter?

BY JAMES TRAUB | APRIL 22, 2011

Richard Goldstone has changed his mind about the Gaza war. Should we? Goldstone is the South African judge who served as head of a panel appointed by the U.N. Human Rights Council to look into allegations of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during Israel's 2008-2009 invasion of Gaza. The report reached the damning conclusion that "disproportionate destruction and violence against civilians were part of a deliberate policy" on Israel's part. On this score, Goldstone has recanted. Writing in the Washington Post on April 1, he now says that Israel's own investigations "indicate that civilians were not intentionally targeted as a matter of policy."

Human rights groups and others who embraced the Goldstone report were unfazed. Writing in the Huffington Post, Media Matters' M. J. Rosenberg dismissed the change of heart as an "edit." In the Guardian, Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, argued that his organization had never accepted the claim of intentional targeting, and pointed out -- as others have -- that Goldstone did not retract many serious allegations against Israel, including "the indiscriminate use of heavy artillery and white phosphorous in densely populated areas."

That's true. It's also true that Israel has been dilatory  -- and Hamas contemptuously indifferent -- about investigating its own behavior in Operation Cast Lead, as the Gaza invasion was called. But the difference between "deliberate policy" and unintended outcome is no mere edit. Goldstone does not state whether he now thinks that Israel was recklessly indifferent to that outcome or, as the Israelis themselves say, had little choice but to respond to Hamas's tactics in ways that caused civilian deaths and the massive destruction of property and livelihoods. This is no small difference. If it's the latter, the war in Gaza was an unavoidable tragedy. If it's the former, the war was an avoidable tragedy, and many of the alleged acts constitute war crimes.

This is not the place to re-litigate an endlessly litigated report. My own view, which I expressed in an essay in World Affairs Journal a year ago, is that the report made a strong case that "Israel pursued a policy of disproportionate destruction" of property, but not of "wanton killing." But the deeper question the report raised, I wrote, was, "Can Israel fight Hamas -- or can any state fight such an adversary -- without the means that the Goldstone Report insists that international humanitarian law prohibits?" Gabriela Shalev, Israel's former U.N. ambassador, has said that Goldstone's change of heart proves that "there is no way to deal with this terror other than the same way we did in Cast Lead."

I doubt that Goldstone would endorse that view; and even some Israeli supporters of Cast Lead have conceded that Israeli soldiers may have committed terrible acts, including "cold-blooded murders" of civilians. And Israel's destruction of Gaza's meager economic capacity, as documented in the Goldstone Report, is of a piece with its longstanding policy of depriving the area of basic economic goods in the hopes of discrediting Hamas in the eyes of the Gazan people (a policy that hasn't succeeded so far, and isn't likely to).

But if Israel didn't set out to kill civilians, then critics have to show that it could have ended the threat of further attacks from Gaza without using means, such as the shelling of urban areas, that were bound to cause significant civilian deaths -- without exposing Israeli soldiers to dangers that no responsible commander would permit. That's not an easy case to make. Even if you remove the reckless acts and the isolated crimes, Israel might still have killed many hundreds of civilians in the course of ending the threat from Gaza.

MOHAMMED ABED/AFP/Getty Images

 

James Traub is a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine and author of, most recently, The Freedom Agenda. "Terms of Engagement," his column for ForeignPolicy.com, runs weekly.

JLEVYELLOW

5:50 PM ET

April 22, 2011

Traub tripe

Allowing more material into Gaza was not a solution given Hamas' status as a terrorist organization. It acquired that characterization because it insisted then, as it does now, upon the destruction of the Jewish State. In short, Hamas insisted upon victory at all costs to the Jews and to themselves. They bought their own fate. As an 'erudite' Mr. Traub is aware that Israel suffered attacks for eight years before responding with Cast Lead. I have little doubt that he would not have permitted that circumstance to go on had his own family been at risk for half that time.

Mr. Traub, addressing you directly, you must have some insight into the circumstances among the Arabs as to why they cannot 'split the difference' and get on with their lives. I ask you to direct your deep thoughts and comments towards the machinations of the Arabs, rather than the Jews. I suspect that as most people seeking change, you push on the soft spots and leave the rigidities to take care of themselves. It turns out to be an intellectual weakness, though the method seems to be practical at the moment. As an empathic intelligent being, you might begin to improve your approach by visualizing yourself and your loved ones in the circumstances imposed by each side in the dispute.

Mr. Traub wrote, "Even if you remove the reckless acts and the isolated crimes, Israel might still have killed many hundreds of civilians in the course of ending the threat from Gaza."

This is not the sentence of a man interested in the truth at any level. It is a condemnation of Israel with a backhand tennis stroke. You know of no reckless acts or isolated crimes engaged in by Israeli troops. The death of civilians occurred because the civilians of Gaza were not in control of their own territory and lives. Would any population knowingly vote themselves into their own graves? I recall a video snippet in which a Hamas "fighter" dragged a child with him as he ran for cover and then threw him to the ground when he reached safety. That is the old view of children as tools, as sacrifices to angry gods to obtain a particular benefit. That snippet is available for your viewing on the internet. Would it make a difference to the contents of your writings?

 

SCOTTGOOSE

8:20 PM ET

April 22, 2011

Traub's most balanced piece vis-a-vis Arab-Israeli conflict

JLevyYellow raises a number of piquing concerns regarding Traub's piece which, for what it's worth, I found to nevertheless be surprisingly balanced, given his pension for not being especially pro-Israeli. Indeed, Israel had been bombarded with qassam rockets for roughly eight years prior to Operation Cast Lead; no small oversight. I concur that Traub, in painting the onset of the incursion as entirely of Israel's choosing, accomplishes what was likely his goal: to focus the piece on Israeli decision to go to war, and in so doing, places so much emphasis on the former that it could lead a casual reader to sub-consciously overlook just how vile Hamas' tactics had been during the incursion. Conjecture aside, statements such as the one you pointed out do place a preponderant focus on the IDF's actions, rather than Hamas'.

That notwithstanding, Traub also made a more general argument that gave me pause, insofar as he makes a fairly persuasive case based on (largely customary and symbolic) international humanitarian law. In judging the strategic decision to intervene in general as an illegal preventative war--stating illegal is redundant, because preemptive attacks are illegal under int'l law (Article 51, UN Charter)--against a long-term threat that did not propose an "imminent threat." As a strong supporter of Israel, even my tenuous grasp on international law makes me cringe when I think about how the IDF -- and Western forces in general, for that matter -- must wage its battles nowadays. From Israeli accounts of how the war was conducted, Traub's equation of IDF tactics with those of Sri Lankan or Russian forces is not as far off as I'd hope.

That said, international law must be revised as to apply to combating an insurgency via guerrilla warfare in this asymmetric age we live in. But until that day the laws are modified to adjust with the times, arguments such as Traubs -- as hard as it is for me to admit -- do have some merit. However, I wish he was a tad more even handed.

 

BROWNADAMGF

7:30 AM ET

April 23, 2011

nike shoes , fashion clothes ; brand handbags , wallet ...

Click on our website

(= = = = = http://www.styleown.com = = = = = )

Will bring you different surprise.

Dear friends, do you want to have some different things? Whether you want to give your relatives and friends,

take a few different exotic gifts? Whether you want to buy some cheap benefits of thing? So please, let us

begin now!

 

SABABA03

7:46 PM ET

April 22, 2011

The Psychological impact of Massive force is used.

Some people are whom not familiar with the Muslim Fundamentalist mind set and mentality is that, they are driven by fanatic religious fervor, with little or no regard for human lives – even of their won.

People like Nassrallah of Hizbollah, Haniyah of Hamas, and the Akmed in Tehran, they have been taught from early childhood that, Jews considered sub-humans (apes and pigs), and must submit to their “Muslim superiors”, and if needs be, use of violence to put the Jews back in their hole.
No rational person can reason with these people.

Yes indeed, Israel does use massive force, as it had done it in the past against Hamas & Hizbollah. The real reason behind it, is more psychological then military one. The Israelis believe that, in addition to the usual deterrence, by use of such massive and uncompromising force, they will cause deep and profound psychological lobotomy needed to alter these Islamists mind set of blind hatred of Jews.

That objective was demonstrated in an TV interview in August 2006, when Hassan Nasslara, that hero who has been hiding in his 100m (330ft) deep rat-hole since then, he had openly admitted that “had he realized Israel would have retaliate with such massive force against his forces in S. Lebanon, he would have certainty NOT ordered the attack and kidnapping of the Israeli solders, which causes the second Lebanese War in June 1006.

 

SABABA03

7:48 PM ET

April 22, 2011

Tactics used by Islamist against Jews

Phase I: THE DENIAL & DE-LEGITIMAZATION.
1) Islamists and their supporters label the Israelis with names, later to be used to defeat the very reason of their existence. “Zionists” is one convenient label, .
2) They deny the Holocaust, to remove the very reason for which Israel was created. (re: the Akmed in Tehran).
3) Their leaders question Jewish history, or their continued presence in and around Jerusalem (Arafat: in 2000 Camp David).
4) They use their majority count in UN either: a) Pass Anti-Israeli resolutions. b) Use this body's one sided investigative reports (I.e. the Goldstone Report) to set the grounds for accusation of its leaders with war crimes. Notwithstanding the fact, after careful study of the events, the Judge himself had second thoughts about the report.

Phase II – “ZIONISM” AND THE “APARTHEID” EFFECT.
1) They do not wish to sound anti-semitic. (which the Islamists certainly are). Then euphemistically they call Jews “Zionists”.
2) They Know that Zionism was a political movement, created in 1899 to empower the Jews to live in their own homeland, safe from further persecutions.
3) They emphasis only the role of the European Jews, - while never mention the 1.2M Jewish refugees, whom they pushed out from their own countries.
4. They attempt to wrap the “South Africa” noose and its infamous “Apartheid” system around the Israelis neck. A sure way to de-legitimize the state altogether.
5) They Still try to convince the world community (through UN Resolutions) that Zionism is a system of Apartheid – which they did succeed of doing for a period of time.
6) They know that, If they call the Israelis “Jews”, they just have affirmed Israel's right to exist as homeland for Jews, which so far they have refused to do.
7) They follow the late Nazi, Joseph Goebbels's gospel. “A lie, if repeated loud, and repeated often enough, soon people will believe it as the absolute truth.
8) They never admit in public (certainly not in English), that subjugation of Jews, is the ultimate objective - prescribed in Islam's holy book.

Phase III: THE PROVOCATION & THE VICTIMIZED.
1). Coupled with Phase II, they keep low intensity provocations (such as rockets from Gaza), and hope for IDF response (which most certainly does follow). Then,
2) They show the gory pictures of dead children to TV viewers world wide, to generate revolt & sympathy for them, and anger against the Israelis.
3) They repeat it often enough such that, the picture of “the ugly Israeli solder shooting innocent civilians” is kept fresh in people's mind and heart. Render Israel as “racist”, “brutal”, and “ugly” element living among the “peaceful” Arabs.

Phase IV: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE
1) Recognizing the power of words. When speaking for the Palestinians, they use keywords like, “Justice”, “fairness”, “Indigenous people”, “legal owners”, and “victims”, “Right of Return” etc. - to conjure up positive imagery of the Pals in people's minds.
2) When however, it comes to Israel, they use words like “Stolen land”, “illegal”, “occupation”, “discriminations”, “Apartheid”, “Racists”, “massacre”, and sometimes the word “Genocide” is brought up.
3) They keep their people in those refugees camps, throughout the Arab & Islamic states since 1948” to:
a) Continue to play on peoples emotion and sympathy – keep the flame of anti-Israeli alive.
b) Keep them as “reserve solders” to be used to flood Israel – all under the pretense of “right of Return”. Then use its democracy to destroy, not only its democracy, but itself as the homeland for Jews.
4) “The good Guy / Bad Guy” scenario. While PLO in WB, depicts the image of the “civilized” “peace loving Palestinians” who is ready to compromise. Hamas in Gaza, plays the opposite role. To force the Israelis for more and more concession, until nothing is left for them to concede.
5) Use homicide bombing to create psychological fear among the Israelis, with hope they will flee. (“Jews love life, we love death”).

Now here you have it. The script by which Islamists plan of action to put the Jews back into their hole, under Islamic Sharia for eternity.

 

DIANA RELKE

8:40 PM ET

April 22, 2011

Cast Lead as a criminal act

I have never been able to understand all this handwringing. The entire war on Gaza flies in the face of international law:

". . . the Goldstone Commission failed to point out the true depths of the Israeli war crimes: the underlying purpose of Cast Lead was not "self-defense" but the destruction of all resistance to Israel's continued occupation of the West Bank and its external control over Gaza by means of economic and military warfare, warfare that repeatedly provoked Palestinian resistance and retaliation.
For that reason, then, even if its methods had been pristine, Israel had committed the crime of international aggression. Indeed, in those circumstances it is not even necessary, in a sense, to examine Israel's methods: if you don't have a just cause, you are not morally or legally permitted to attack even the other side's soldiers, let alone its people." Jerome Slater, at:

http://www.jeromeslater.com/2011/04/goldstone-retraction.html

 

ARIEL

5:39 PM ET

April 23, 2011

Goldstone = No Israeli war Crimes

You are building your theory around the fact that Goldstone mentioned in his report. He said then that according to the Palestinian testimonies the Israelis had committed war crimes.

And now he is dropping that conclusion. He actually stains that he had no prove to his conclusions, and he made a mistake.

Everyone who is at war has always some ways to justify it. I have participated in war, and I can tell you it is no fun.

Home Green Screen Studio Expert

 

JOHNSON.1966

8:09 AM ET

April 23, 2011

force never lasts

The use of massive force will never not work. if it wasn't effective, we wouldn't see it any more as a means of problem solving. Unfortunately, it works as effectively today as it has for centuries.

barista training

 

JBROCKLE

8:38 AM ET

April 24, 2011

Hmm

A fascinating new type of spam.

 

BUDAHH

11:01 AM ET

April 24, 2011

Goldstone just gives terrorists more motivation and legitemacy

This report is a bias piece from the get go, and the U.N is proving to be a useless institution when it targets one country that faces terror on a daily basis and is under harsh circumstances unlike any other country in the world.

The U.N avoids other african, middle eastern, western countries who commit serious war crimes, Chechnia, Sri Lanka, saudi Arabia fighting huttis, yemen, Turkey and the Kurds, there are many more examples , but they choose the only country that makes the biggest effort to not hurt civilians,
It was a blood liable, , no one cares, how many civilians are killed by the U.S and nato in their wars?
It is impossible to fight terror when the enemy hides behind civilians, and hold up to the goldstone standard which no one would hold up to, show me one country that has a better record of fighting terror in urban areas, I bet you Israel has a far better record of keeping human rights and harming civilians.

 

EVOX777

3:26 PM ET

April 24, 2011

Fact check

"But now the attacks have resumed, including a horrendous missile attack earlier this month on a bus full of schoolchildren."

There were only 2 people on the bus, including the driver.

 

FIFTH HORSEMAN

8:03 PM ET

April 24, 2011

Double, triple, quadruple "standards"

"Insurgents now understand that they can lose a war to a more powerful adversary but still win by fighting from inside the ranks of civilians, thus forcing the other side to kill many innocent people."

For laughs maybe you can do some pretzel logic now on why that logic doesn't apply in Misurata,

 

CARRY RUDEN

9:41 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Is it worth it?

I ask you to direct your deep thoughts and comments towards the machinations of the Arabs, rather than the Jews. I suspect that as most people seeking change, you push on the soft spots and leave the rigidities to take care of themselves. It turns out to be an intellectual weakness, though the method seems to be practical at the moment. As an empathic intelligent being, you might begin to improve your approach by visualizing yourself and your loved ones in the circumstances imposed by each side in the dispute. pest control That objective was demonstrated in an TV interview in August 2006, when Hassan Nasslara, that hero who has been hiding in his 100m (330ft) deep rat-hole since then, he had openly admitted that “had he realized Israel would have retaliate with such massive force against his forces in S. Lebanon, he would have certainty NOT ordered the attack and kidnapping of the Israeli solders.

 

BYLNELMS

10:01 AM ET

May 21, 2011

Second Thoughts

You know of no reckless acts or isolated crimes engaged in by Israeli troops. The death of civilians occurred because the civilians of Gaza were not in control of their own territory and lives. Would any population knowingly vote themselves into their own graves? I recall a video snippet in which a Hamas "fighter" dragged a child with him as he ran for cover and then threw him to the ground when he reached safety. augmentations That is the old view of children as tools, as sacrifices to angry gods to obtain a particular benefit. It is impossible to fight terror when the enemy hides behind civilians, and hold up to the goldstone standard which no one would hold up to, show me one country that has a better record of fighting terror in urban areas, I bet you Israel has a far better record of keeping human rights and harming civilians.