Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel — a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilian territory. Yet having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, Hamas claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent Hamas from arming itself.
In World War II, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. During the October 1962 missile crisis, we blockaded (“quarantined”) Cuba. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from acquiring lethal weaponry.
Oh, but weren’t the Gaza-bound ships on a mission of humanitarian relief? No. Otherwise they would have accepted Israel’s offer to bring their supplies to an Israeli port, be inspected for military materiel and have the rest trucked by Israel into Gaza — as every week 10,000 tons of humanitarian supplies are sent to Gaza.
Why was the offer refused? Because, as organizer Greta Berlin admitted, the flotilla was not about humanitarian relief, but about breaking the blockade, which would mean unlimited shipping into Gaza and thus the unlimited arming of Hamas.
But why did Israel have to resort to blockade? Because, blockade is Israel’s fallback as the world systematically delegitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself — forward and active defense.
(1) Forward defense: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israe adopted forward defense — fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai and Golan Heights) rather than its own.
Where possible (Sinai, for example) Israel has traded territory for peace. But where peace offers were refused, Israel retained the territory as a protective buffer zone. Thus Israel retained a small strip of southern Lebanon to protect the villages of northern Israel. And it took many losses in Gaza, rather than expose Israeli border towns to Palestinian terror attacks.
But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. The Israelis were told the occupations were at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies and withdrawal would bring peace.
Land for peace. Remember? Well, during the past decade, Israel gave the land — evacuating South Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. What did it get? An intensification of belligerency, heavy militarization of the enemy side, multiple kidnappings, cross-border attacks and, from Gaza, years of unrelenting rocket attack.
(2) Active defense: Israel then had to switch to active defense — military action to disrupt, dismantle and defeat the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza.
The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the U.N. Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel’s operation in Gaza, effectively delegitimized any active Israeli defense against its terror enemies.
(3) Passive defense. Without forward or active defense, Israel is left with the most passive of all defenses — a blockade to prevent enemy rearmament. But this, too, is headed for international delegitimation.
But, if none of these is permissible, what’s left? Nothing. The whole point of this international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate self-defense.
The world is tired of these troublesome Jews refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as committed anti-Zionists such as Iran openly prepare a more final solution.
Charles Krauthammer is a syndicated columnist. E-mail: letters@charleskrauthammer.com.