Canadian Foreign Policy & Affairs II

[logan5]

Not sure what the Palestinians have to complain about. Israel hasn't stolen all their land. And it's true that Israel has plans to annex more of the West Bank, but only 22%, so not really much to get in a big huff about. Hell, if some big guy with a gun came into my house and told me to leave, heck, I don't want any trouble, take my house guy. Fighting back would only get me hurt.

The annexation of the Jordan Valley would mean Israel completely surrounds the West Bank. Like a warm Israeli hug.

[1overcosc]

The Jordan Valley annexation plan has been abandoned.

It also should be noted that:
a) this area is a nearly uninhabited desert. The total population is less than 100,000; around 50,000 Palestinians and 20,000 Israeli settlers.. or about 2% of the total West Bank Palestinian population of approximately 2.5 million despite being 22% of land area
b) the plan included the granting of automatic eligibility for Israeli citizenship to the resident Palestinians in the area (similar to the Golan).

[Justanothermember]

I'm getting the distinct feeling that quite a few people here believe that Israel should have never been allowed to exist in the first place, despite the fact that history tells us that it was always their original homeland. The word 'colonizer' in this context is laughable.

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The Israelis under Netanyahu never gave money to Hamas. What actually happened, is they didn't block the Qataris from giving them money (even though they could have). It should be noted that while Qatari money didn't just fund Hamas it funded a lot of aid as well and the humanitarian situation in late 2010s Gaza would have been pretty bad without it; back in 2019 folks like you would likely have been screaming from the rooftops about how evil Israel is if they tried, back then, to cut off the Qatari money.

Now there is definitely some elements of this approach that were nationalistic in nature. The Israelis probably could have used soft power/sanctions to drive Hamas from power in that period if they really wanted to, but Bibi didn't want to, for precisely the reason you said. A decision that I'm sure he's regretting now and probably means the end of his political career in light of all that has happened.

But to say that "Netanyahu was funding Hamas" is not true.

The situation was embarrassing enough for former Minister of Defence Avigdor Liberman to resign in disgust and former education Minister (and brief PM) Naftali Bennett to quit

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/net...amas-1.7010035

[someone123]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The Israelis probably could have used soft power/sanctions to drive Hamas from power in that period if they really wanted to, but Bibi didn't want to, for precisely the reason you said. A decision that I'm sure he's regretting now and probably means the end of his political career in light of all that has happened.

Many people seem to think he is finished based on general polling around Israeli views of the security failure and longer-term poorly performing strategy, but there isn't much talk of alternatives. Does this mean that Netanyahu-style politics are bankrupt and radioactive now or could it be a Kang and Kodos situation?

There's both calendar time and the pace of events that need to play out, and Israel has had "weeks when decades happen". A lot of the two-state solution talk to me seems like it's about some far-off world where a bunch of unforeseeable stuff has already played out. Hopefully recent events have shown various audiences that Hamas-like entities are intolerable and can't really figure into any workable long-term politics for the region (neither a good part of Netanyahu-like plans nor tolerable in their own right for Gaza).

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by Wigs

The situation was embarrassing enough for former Minister of Defence Avigdor Liberman to resign in disgust and former education Minister (and brief PM) Naftali Bennett to quit
...
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/net...amas-1.7010035

FWIW, from the link you provided, the reasoning for Netanyahu doing so ...

With Israel’s approval, Qatar since 2018 has periodically provided millions of dollars in cash to Hamas to pay for fuel for the Strip’s power plant, allow the group to pay its civil servants and provide aid to tens of thousands of impoverished families.

Israel has reportedly done so in exchange for Hamas ensuring calm in the south and as part of efforts to reach a long-term ceasefire with the terror group.

Also from the same link, it appears that those two individuals quit as they were political "opponents" of Netanyahu and didn't want to provide any aid money to Palestine if it flowed through Hamas at all. Basically, they'd rather starve Palestinians than take the chance that Hamas would skim some off the top.

[Hybrid247]

Originally Posted by someone123

You have a list of grievances but you aren't talking about any sort of framework to put those grievances into such that they have some material impact, and then there's no sense of what could be done about it. Israel isn't dependent on Canada.

Not sure what point you're trying to make here. I was responding to your comment in which you claimed another country in Israel's position would have done the same thing in Gaza and insinuating that I wouldn't be so "magnanimous" if my relatives were Hamas victims. Putting aside that twisted and flawed logic, as though any of those perspectives would somehow justify and excuse Israeli war crimes against innocent Gazans, my response simply outlined the examples of IDF actions that were questionable from a strategic value and international law standpoint, as well as downright reprehensible from a moral standpoint. And your take away from that is my supposed failure to outline a legal approach to address those issues in material way? Seriously? I suppose you ask the same of anyone discussing Russian war crimes in Ukraine? This reeks of a bad faith argument.

Originally Posted by someone123

There's both calendar time and the pace of events that need to play out, and Israel has had "weeks when decades happen". A lot of the two-state solution talk to me seems like it's about some far-off world where a bunch of unforeseeable stuff has already played out. Hopefully recent events have shown various audiences that Hamas-like entities are intolerable and can't really figure into any workable long-term politics for the region (neither a good part of Netanyahu-like plans nor tolerable in their own right for Gaza).

The bottom line is, Hamas and Likud, as well as any similar-minded entities, are completely incompatible with a viable long term solution in the region. Many in this thread, including yourself, focus on Hamas as though they are solely responsible for the decades-long violence and lack of a viable 2-state solution. If that were the case, Palestinians in the West Bank would be well on their way to statehood by now, but the opposite is true. Likud and Hamas need to go. As TN and others put it, they are 2 sides of the same coin.

[Truenorth00]

Canada is committing to a US led naval task force in the the Red Sea. Godspeed to the crew.

I hope they stay safe. The Halifax Class is a bit lacking in air defence for this fight.

[1overcosc]

Originally Posted by someone123

Many people seem to think he is finished based on general polling around Israeli views of the security failure and longer-term poorly performing strategy, but there isn't much talk of alternatives. Does this mean that Netanyahu-style politics are bankrupt and radioactive now or could it be a Kang and Kodos situation?

There's both calendar time and the pace of events that need to play out, and Israel has had "weeks when decades happen". A lot of the two-state solution talk to me seems like it's about some far-off world where a bunch of unforeseeable stuff has already played out. Hopefully recent events have shown various audiences that Hamas-like entities are intolerable and can't really figure into any workable long-term politics for the region (neither a good part of Netanyahu-like plans nor tolerable in their own right for Gaza).

There is plenty of talk of alternatives in Israeli media. Benny Gantz is widely seen by the public as the next PM, with Bennett another commonly discussed option.

A coalition government headed by Gantz or Bennett with Lapid, Lieberman, and Michaeli as coalition partners would be a very viable mostly centrist coalition and would easily have a majority according to current polling. Alternatively if Netanyahu resigns and someone like Barkat takes over Likud, a new moderate government made up of the saner half of Likud along with Lapid and Gantz could cobble a majority together without even having to hold another election.

[1overcosc]

What's important from the Western POV is creating a new arrangement in Gaza that ensures Israeli security. Literally all of the support the hardcore nationalists have from the mainstream Israeli voters is related to the concern that Palestinian statehood is an enormous security risk. Your average middle class voter in Bat Yam or Beersheba doesn't give a flying crap about nationalistic claims to the West Bank. Create a new arrangement where Palestinian independence is a clear benefit to Israeli security rather than a giant risk, and watch support for Likud tumble.

The German proposal for a truce that involves the disarmament of Hamas, the creation of an international authority to govern the city with a focus on reconstruction and economic development for Gazans, and the end of the Israeli blockade over external trade in exchange, all add up to a reasonable medium term situation for the city that will massively help towards this objective.

[O-tacular]

About time!

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/cana...bank-1.6692310

[someone123]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

Create a new arrangement where Palestinian independence is a clear benefit to Israeli security rather than a giant risk, and watch support for Likud tumble.

If you assume Israelis will prioritize security above everything else, this ends up implying a bunch of constraints on Palestinian sovereignty. There would need to be a veto over the government or some kind of constitutional oversight and, while there wouldn't need to be a blockade, there would need to be import controls and inspections. This is somewhat separate from the debate over who should get which territories although that has some security impact.

The German proposal for a truce that involves the disarmament of Hamas, the creation of an international authority to govern the city with a focus on reconstruction and economic development for Gazans, and the end of the Israeli blockade over external trade in exchange, all add up to a reasonable medium term situation for the city that will massively help towards this objective.

Does Hamas accept this? Would they have accepted it without military action from Israel (i.e. right after a successful attack on Israel)? It seems likely they have to be weakened to some unknown point where they'll accept terms that basically end them. Would there be amnesty for Hamas leadership?

[someone123]

Originally Posted by Hybrid247

I suppose you ask the same of anyone discussing Russian war crimes in Ukraine?

I don't deny Russian war crimes but I ask similar questions like "who's going to send Putin to The Hague?". It's okay for Ukrainians to dream about that but when it goes beyond a dream it likely involves magical thinking (if not then explain the mechanism) and getting mad at people for not going along with that hallucination is just bizarre.

[savevp]

Originally Posted by someone123

It seems likely they have to be weakened to some unknown point where they'll accept terms that basically end them.

Spot on, unfortunately.

The other thing the ceasefire-callers ignore or fail to grasp is the deterrence aspect of Israel's military aims. Any scenario where Hamas exists as a coherent political/military entity after this is a win for them. It would prove to Hezbollah, and all the other Iranian proxies, that you can attack Israel and survive the consequences if you can just hold out long enough for public opinion to shift in the West. It encourages the Hamas approach of using your own people as shields to guarantee maximum devastation. Every time you post photos of an injured Palestinian child to justify a ceasefire, you're playing Hamas' game.

It's possible to take pity on Palestinians, advocate for statehood, and oppose Netanyahu, whilst understanding the necessity of Israel achieving their war aims. Anything less than the total eradication of Hamas invites future attacks from Israel's many enemies, including a reconstituted Hamas (who will remain in power if a ceasefire is called).

This is why I question the motives or intelligence of anyone seriously calling for a ceasefire; if you agree that Israel should never again endure a 7 Oct type attack, you can't advocate for a solution that involves a Hamas victory. Unless you can figure out a way to dismantle Hamas without decimating Gaza (spoiler alert, you can't).

[Truenorth00]

Whatever one thinks of the conflict, if this is how Israelis perceive the conflict, peace is going to be difficult until they actually feel secure. No amount of screaming about genocide will stop them if they feel their neighbours are hell bent on attempting to wipe them out, something that has happened in living memory.

Left: Nazi executing a Jewish woman with her child in Ivanhorod, 1942.

Right: Hamas executing a Jewish woman in Kibbutz Alumim, 2023.

“Never Again” is now.

https://twitter.com/DrEliDavid/statu...DJSEqmGwA&s=19

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by 1overcosc

The German proposal for a truce that involves the disarmament of Hamas, the creation of an international authority to govern the city with a focus on reconstruction and economic development for Gazans, and the end of the Israeli blockade over external trade in exchange, all add up to a reasonable medium term situation for the city that will massively help towards this objective.

Are the Germans willing to disarm Hamas? Pretty easy to propose an idea. Not so easy to fight a counterinsurgency to actually achieve those goals. There's a reason no Arab or power (who would be the most credible) has ever offered to step in physically. They just keep cutting cheques so they look like they are doing something. Unfortunately, there's only one entity that would ever try to disarm Hamas. And that's the one currently engaged.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by savevp

Spot on, unfortunately.

The other thing the ceasefire-callers ignore or fail to grasp is the deterrence aspect of Israel's military aims. Any scenario where Hamas exists as a coherent political/military entity after this is a win for them. It would prove to Hezbollah, and all the other Iranian proxies, that you can attack Israel and survive the consequences if you can just hold out long enough for public opinion to shift in the West. It encourages the Hamas approach of using your own people as shields to guarantee maximum devastation. Every time you post photos of an injured Palestinian child to justify a ceasefire, you're playing Hamas' game.

It's possible to take pity on Palestinians, advocate for statehood, and oppose Netanyahu, whilst understanding the necessity of Israel achieving their war aims. Anything less than the total eradication of Hamas invites future attacks from Israel's many enemies, including a reconstituted Hamas (who will remain in power if a ceasefire is called).

This is why I question the motives or intelligence of anyone seriously calling for a ceasefire; if you agree that Israel should never again endure a 7 Oct type attack, you can't advocate for a solution that involves a Hamas victory. Unless you can figure out a way to dismantle Hamas without decimating Gaza (spoiler alert, you can't).

Perfectly sensible.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by savevp

Spot on, unfortunately.

The other thing the ceasefire-callers ignore or fail to grasp is the deterrence aspect of Israel's military aims. Any scenario where Hamas exists as a coherent political/military entity after this is a win for them. It would prove to Hezbollah, and all the other Iranian proxies, that you can attack Israel and survive the consequences if you can just hold out long enough for public opinion to shift in the West. It encourages the Hamas approach of using your own people as shields to guarantee maximum devastation. Every time you post photos of an injured Palestinian child to justify a ceasefire, you're playing Hamas' game.

It's possible to take pity on Palestinians, advocate for statehood, and oppose Netanyahu, whilst understanding the necessity of Israel achieving their war aims. Anything less than the total eradication of Hamas invites future attacks from Israel's many enemies, including a reconstituted Hamas (who will remain in power if a ceasefire is called).

This is why I question the motives or intelligence of anyone seriously calling for a ceasefire; if you agree that Israel should never again endure a 7 Oct type attack, you can't advocate for a solution that involves a Hamas victory. Unless you can figure out a way to dismantle Hamas without decimating Gaza (spoiler alert, you can't).

Does that justify war crimes? Collective punishment? Mass starvation? Israel is going about this like a medieval siege. There’s no effort being made at all to avoid civilian casualties. When you bomb a refugee camp to kill one guy and destroy a hospital to seize some rusty old Ak’s, then shoot anything that moves (including Israeli hostages) it’s no wonder even the US is stating they are killing far too many innocent civilians.

Saying that posting photos of Palestinian women and children is doing Hamas’ work for them sounds an awful lot like you just don’t want to see their humanity. It also reminds me of Netanyahu calling any investigation into war crimes anti semitic.

[MonctonRad]

U.S., Canada to join multi-national operation to counter attacks on commercial ships in Red Sea
Missiles, drone attacks by Yemen's Houthi rebels have disrupted naval trade in region
The Associated Press · Posted: Dec 18, 2023 9:07 AM AST | Last Updated: December 18
https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/red-se...ikes-1.7062343

Canada won't deploy any ships but will send "a handful of personnel to the international task force," a government source told CBC News.

I imagine none of our naval assets are of any use to the task force because of technical obsolescence and this is why our contribution will consist of only a few computer operators and surveillance specialists.

Oh, how far we have fallen..................

[Hecate]

Thank you to everyone who has been supporting Israel’s right to defend itself and understanding the truth of the situation. Very powerful images from truenorth00 that speak volumes. Ive been trying to avoid this page as it’s frustrating watching educated people trying to deny my peoples right to existence, educated people who think we’re colonizing our own homeland and committing genocide, so I have been avoiding it, but this past Sunday sitting in the manitoba theatre centre watching giant Nazi banners unfurl and SS guardsman fill the theatre for the sound of music, I won’t stay quiet any longer. NEVER AGAIN. On october 7th they tried to silence us again, when will it stop?