|
It seems that there should be nothing worth the faces of injured, dying or dead children. The Israeli Defense Force strike against Salah Shehadeh, the military wing of Hamas, leveled an apartment building, killing Shehadeh as well as fourteen civilians - nine of whom were children. Over 140 people were injured, many critically. Even the normally pro-Israeli Bush administration felt compelled to condemn the attack, saying that the United States would not countenance such an attack when so many civilian lives were at stake.
As the condemnations rolled off the screen at the Haaretz website, two thoughts struck me. First, the dead or now "shaheed" - martyrs in the cause against Israel and the United States. Are Palestinians outraged about their deaths because no Israelis died with them? Secondly, since when did we give up on the Total War Doctrine?
The Total War Doctrine provides that all means should be used against one's enemy. While attacks against pure civilian targets are still not allowed under this doctrine, civilian casualties are to be expected when civilians are near a military target. Notice how the Doctrine differs from homicide bombings, since the target of those attacks are the civilians themselves. Also note how this makes the military bases and industrial complexes of Hiroshima and Nagasaki important to justify the atomic bombings in 1945 - since without them the attack would be considered a war crime by the standards of the time (since the Total War Doctrine is often misunderstood or completely ignored, Truman is often found guilty alongside Hitler and Goebbels in mock war crimes trials conducted on liberal college campuses).
According to one of Shehadeh's neighbors, he moved into the neighborhood only two weeks ago. Although several attempts had been made on his life since his release from an Israeli prison in 1999 (as a condition of the Oslo Peace Accords), Israel felt compelled to turn to the Total War Doctrine to justify their attack. Shehadeh has been responsible for the deaths of hundreds of Israelis and was a valid enemy target. His neighbors would have known that Shehadeh was Enemy Number 1 for Israel, and that Israel would strike eventually. Israel did - with a two thousand pound warhead dropped by an Israeli F-16. While Israel has apologized and regretted the loss of civilian life, it is pleased with the overall result.
As well it should be. Contrary to what Ari Fleischer stated in the White House press briefing given the morning after the attack, the Total War Doctrine does not put one at the same level as one's enemies. Israeli has not randomly detonated explosives in Gaza or the West Bank. It has not programmed its children to hate Palestinians or named streets after Baruch Goldstein - the Israeli who killed 24 Palestinians in an attack on a mosque in the early 1990s. By killing Shehadeh, Israel has made a statement that there is no place to hide for those accused of killing Israelis. Human shields will not work: the Israelis will not allow their conscience to be used by their enemies as cover.
The Total War Doctrine strips away such cover from one's enemy, leaving him bare and unprotected - able to be conquered quickly. By removing this cover, war tends to be brutal yet short - since one's enemies have nowhere to go to "fight another day". It also short-circuits the supposed "cycle of violence" since all-out-war is just that - an all out effort. One survives or doesn't - and either way, peace becomes more appealing.
One of the problems is that there was never really any peace between Israel and Palestinians. The Oslo Peace Process became extremely sensitive to a gradually rising escalation in the conflict, making peace look unappealing by both sides. Total War makes it look desirable, and in the end Total War ushers it in.
It isn't easy seeing the faces and the names of the dead children, but it never should be. At the same time we must recognize that Total War is the fastest way forward to peace.
|