I want to alert readers of History is Happening Now to an outrageously biased Islamo-fascio-leftist propaganda rag making outrageously anti-Semitic claims that Israel is committing egregious war crimes in Gaza against Palestinian civilians.
The notorious rag in question? Why, the Wall Street Journal:
The United Nations charter preserved the customary right of a state to retaliate against an “armed attack” from another state. The right has evolved to cover nonstate actors operating beyond the borders of the state claiming self-defense, and arguably would apply to Hamas. However, an armed attack involves serious violations of the peace. Minor border skirmishes are common, and if all were considered armed attacks, states could easily exploit them — as surrounding facts are often murky and unverifiable — to launch wars of aggression. That is exactly what Israel seems to be currently attempting.
And:
Israel has also failed to adequately discriminate between military and nonmilitary targets. Israel’s American-made F-16s and Apache helicopters have destroyed mosques, the education and justice ministries, a university, prisons, courts and police stations. These institutions were part of Gaza’s civilian infrastructure. And when nonmilitary institutions are targeted, civilians die. Many killed in the last week were young police recruits with no military roles. Civilian employees in the Hamas-led government deserve the protections of international law like all others. Hamas’s ideology — which employees may or may not share — is abhorrent, but civilized nations do not kill people merely for what they think.
I recommend reading the whole piece. I have not blogged about the current conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza — grad school has been a bit demanding of late — but what’s noteworthy about this latest crisis is how completely unwilling mainstream Democrats have been to be even slightly critical of what seems to me to be a terrible moral, strategic, and (since we’re counting) legal error for Israel (not to mention the horrible suffering of the Palestinians). It seems as if liberal support of Israel is completely independent of its actions or the facts on the ground; as Matt Yglesias has pointed out:
I think that if people want to be honest, they need to ask themselves how many of them were sitting around the day before Israel started this action not only feeling that it would be smart for Israel to start a massive military action in Gaza but feeling so strongly about it that one would question the Jewish credentials and basic intelligence of anyone who didn’t agree. Frankly, I didn’t hear a lot of Americans taking that position. Then the Israeli government changed its policy, and a lot of Americans decided to agree with the new Israeli policy. Which is fine as far as it goes. But people who didn’t regard the previous policy as unconscionable at the time have no business suddenly deciding that it’s unconscionable to disagree with the new policy.
Indeed, the suggestion that Hamas’s horrible (albeit largely nonlethal) rocket attacks on Israel’s civilian populations didn’t simply come out of the blue — but were quite directly the result of Israel’s destructive blockade of the Gaza Strip, and its marginalization of a democratically elected government, not to speak of the forty years of occupation — hasn’t even been floated as an idea among mainstream political commentators, let alone our political elites.
To the liberal establishment, to stalwart left-leaning periodicals like the New Republic and Dissent, the recent rocket attacks just came out of the blue for no apparent reason. Even if this decontextualized account were true — it’s not, obviously — the WSJ piece points out correctly that Israel’s actions would still not be necessarily justified. Proportionality is a concept, in international law at least, that is independent of the actions of your enemy.
Whether or not you agree with the argument of this op-ed, please do give credit to the WSJ for being more open to unorthodox opinion than the Democratic party. I ask this question in all seriousness: has a single Democratic Senator — to say nothing of a certain Senator who will soon become our forty-fourth Present — said anything even slightly critical of Israel after this recent round of attacks?