It's been requested that I write a post on the Israel/Gaza situation, and I'm giving in to the pressure to do so, despite the fact that I find the issue a little bit boring.
Why boring, you ask? Because the question of "Does Country A have a right to make war on Country B" is always a little bit boring, because there's no right answer to that question. The so-called "Westphalian System," in which countries have sovereignty within their own borders and have the right to make war on other sovereign countries, does little to protect human rights or enforce "international law." But it does seem to have some big advantages in terms of promoting geopolitical stability, and there really don't seem to be many alternative international systems out there, so I propose we keep using it.
Gaza is an independent nation. The Hamas party, which seized power in Gaza by a combination of persuasion and force, is, in the Westphalian sense, the legitimate ruling government of Gaza. Hamas has not set up the full architecture of a nation-state, nor have other countries recognized Gaza as an independent country. No matter. Israel does not rule Gaza. Yes, Israel maintains a naval blockade on Gaza, but Britain's blockade of Germany in World War 2 did not mean that Britain ruled Germany, etc. And yes, Israel provides power to Gaza, and can turn it off whenever it wants, but the same is true of Russia and Europe, and Russia does not rule Europe.
So Gaza, being an independent nation, has a Westphalian "right" to make war on Israel, which it does via a bunch of crappy homemade rockets. Doesn't seem like the most effective method of warmaking, but then again, neither does Israel's reprisal. Nevertheless, Israel seems to have a perfect "right" to respond to Gaza's warmaking with its own warmaking. Yawn.
And then there's the question of whether Israel's efforts are "disproportional" or represent a "human rights abuse." This is similar to discussions about the "laws of war." News flash: there is no law without enforcement, and war is the ultimate determinant of what can be enforced. In other words, war is not a sport, and it doesn't have rules. If we think a country's warmaking efforts represent an atrocity, we can certainly punish or sanction that country. If we think random bombing of populated is an atrocity, then both Israel's and Gaza's war efforts have consisted of nothing but atrocities...not to mention the entire Allied effort in World War 2.
So Gaza randomly bombs Israel and kills dozens of people, and Israel randomly bombs Gaza and kills hundreds of people. Just another day in the Westphalian world, if you ask me. Not fun, but if you have an idea for a better international system, I'd love to hear it.
Now I think it's worth mentioning that if this were the West Bank, the situation would be different. By continuing to build settlements in the West Bank, and to control the lives of the people who live there, Israel has forfeited its Westphalian "right" to make war on the West Bank. If bombs were falling there instead of in Gaza, it would be a massacre instead of a war.
So there you have it: why the Israel/Gaza situation bores me. I understand that a lot of Arabs get angry when this sort of thing happens, because they have crappy jobs and don't get laid as much as they feel they ought to (to be fair, this is why any young men in any nation get pissed about anything). And when Arabs get angry it probably to some degree hurts the United States' long-term strategic interests. I doubt the effect is large, but if we're really concerned, we could drop a few bombs on Tel Aviv to show our solidarity with the Arab Street. Why not? To be honest, if we did that, I'd probably yawn.
0 comments:
Post a Comment