Yourish.com

Joe Klein says that Israel’s problem is that it relies on ABCD.

Jeffrey Goldberg, in his excellent memoir Prisoners, tells how he got pummeled by Irish kids, then read the famous novel of Israel’s liberation, Exodus, by Leon Uris, and wound up a soldier in the Israeli army, guarding a Palestinian prisoner whom he befriended. Indeed, this need to flash tough is so prevalent among Jews of a certain age (my age) that I’ve come to see it as a syndrome, which I’ve named after the macho hero of the Uris novel: Ari Ben Canaan Disorder, or ABCD.

Israel is a nation suffering from ABCD — and also surviving because of it. Charm is not a major part of the Israeli national character; a brusque, stubborn toughness, a fierce refusal to retreat against great odds, ensured that Israel would continue to exist when massed Arab armies tried to destroy it in 1948, 1967 — when Israel struck pre-emptively — and 1973. But over time, ABCD has distorted and limited Israel’s view of itself and the world.

Specifically Klein writes:

The most recent display of ABCD is not so much a matter of the Israeli commando attack on the not-so-peaceful “peace flotilla,” which inspired Helen Thomas’ odious remarks — although that operation was seriously seichel-deprived. It’s more the blockade of Hamas-controlled Gaza that the flotilla was trying to break. There is reason to treat Hamas as an enemy of Israel; thousands of rockets fired at Israeli civilians attest to that. Israel has every right to prevent arms shipments from reaching Gaza. But the blockade isn’t really about arms. It’s an ABCD attempt to make life so unpleasant for average Gazans that they turn against Hamas. Of course, the exact opposite is happening: Hamas has turned the blockade against Israel. A non-ABCD response would be to turn the blockade on its head, to allow everything but arms to pass through. That would be the sort of wise, restrained response that Israel made the night it chose not to retaliate against Saddam Hussein’s Scuds and which doesn’t happen so much anymore.

So ABCD then, is to defend oneself. What’s astonishing is that Klein never bothers to consider what happens when Israel doesn’t practice ABCD.

There do happen to be a number of instances of Israel doing just the opposite.

In 2000 Israel withdrew all of its troops from southern Lebanon. In reaction, Hezbollah, instead of laying down its arms, took advantage of the opportunity to build up its presence in southern Lebanon and continue attacking Israel until 2006, when the situation became intolerable and Israel attacked. In 2005, Israel withdrew every last resident and soldier from Gaza. In reaction, Hezbollah, instead of laying down its arms, took advantage of the opportunity to build up its presence in Gaza and continue attacking Israel until late 2008, when the situation became intolerable and Israel launched operation Cast Lead.

So Klein faults Israel for fighting back, but he fails to consider the lesson of history: that if Israel doesn’t fight back it’s enemies will take the initiative and attack. Right now the blockade of Gaza isn’t so much an aggressive posture undertaken at the first sign of trouble, but a last resort undertaken when Israel lost its ability to defend itself under the existing conditions. In fact Israeli passivity in the face of aggression only invites more aggression. It’s not as Klein suggests that Israel spoils for a fight for the heck of it.

Klein also demonstates his ignorance when he takes on Michael Rubin. (via memeorandum)

Yesterday Rubin wrote about President Obama’s pledge to provide $400 million of aid to the PA:

Some back-of-the-napkin calculations:

1. There have been eight terrorist attacks against Israel since Obama’s inauguration, so Obama is paying President Abbas a modest sum of $50 million per attack.

2. The were 2,048 rockets and mortars fired from Gaza into Israel in 2008, but let’s not hold that against President Obama since, obviously, to channel our commander-in-chief, that was President Bush’s fault. And during Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli incursion into Gaza from January 1–18, 406 rockets were fired into Israel. Again, let’s not count these against Obama; he hadn’t taken his oath of office yet. Since Hamas’s third ceasefire, however, there have been 370 missiles fired from Gaza into Israel. So, if we want to discount terrorist attacks and just count missile attacks, then President Obama is rewarding Hamas to the tune of $1,080,000 for every rocket or mortar launched.

To paraphrase a slogan I learned in Quaker school: “It will be a great day when our schools get all the money they need and the Air Force Hamas has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber.”

In response Klein wrote:

What Rubin doesn’t mention, of course, is that the Palestinian Authority is, in effect, at war with Hamas–and that Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has been doing unprecedented work in creating a stable, secure environment on the West Bank, where there has been 8.5% GDP growth in the past year according to the World Bank…and where this $400 million will be spent. The Israeli government, minus its more extreme life forms, acknowledges that this is true–and has been helping the process by eliminating check points and other unnecessary accoutrements of occupation on the West Bank. The creation of a prosperous, well-educated Palestinian middle class is precisely what is needed to counter the terrorist excesses of Hamas–but Rubin, who seems a rather rabid puppy, is one of those people who looks at Palestinians and sees only terrorists. Very ugly stuff, this–especially the Muslim-tainted splashback on the President, who is clearly doing the right thing here.

Not that Rubin needs me to defend him, but even granted everything that Klein writes is true, there’s a lot that he doesn’t acknowledge. For example, it’s PM Netanyahu who’s making some of the concessions that allow the Palestinian government to expand that middle class. But still there are problems. Neither Abbas nor Fayyad – and though their moderation is overstated – has much of a constituency. Any relaxing of Israeli security concerns could be disastrous. But Rubin does get to the bottom of it here:

As for the West Bank, can Mr. Klein respond to studies which find correlation between aid to the Palestinian Authority and terror? Or address the incitement which still reigns supreme in the West Bank and official Palestinian media?

Frankly, even now, nothing is certain. Giving money to the PA is not certain to do good as Klein wants to believe. Experience, in fact, shows the opposite. But don’t expect Klein to apologize, he enjoys his ignorance. It allows him pretend that he knows what he’s talking about.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.