Our support of Israel, at least for the last 20 years or so, has been equivocal at best. Gratitude mixed with admiration but aiways publicly balanced with criticism. Ad nauseum and a very western cop out. To ask Israel once again to save not just itself, but the rest of a cowardly west, by risking everything to defeat Hezbollah, without support!, is to ask for its suicide. How dare we? This mess, thanks to Obama's pro anti-west regime, is an existential attack on our entire concept of civilization. Either we defend America's future, or we surrender to unaccountable regimes, which include international institutions. If we don't lead, we must follow. That's a fact of human's being.
But Israel could not calmly reorganize and wait to attack while hostages were/are being held by the terrorists. Israel’s families would never have allowed it and Hamas would never have bargained a release of any hostages without all out war. Hold the line; you have the moral ground and your survival is at stake.
As a Jew and an American who has worked at the Pentagon, I don't disagree with Ambassador Oren's basic analysis, nor with the perspectives of Israelis who experiences existential dread every day. So do I, albeit from a position of safety. What I have always disagreed with, from the beginning, is goals and strategies. And especially the automatic resort to massive bombardment of a type certain to lose the moral high ground in international opinion. My original recommendation was, 1. Secure Israeli territory. Kill all invaders. Secure the borders with extensive weaponry. 2. Do nothing else yet, based on the principle of war that says: never do exactly what the enemy expects you to do. Hamas expected Israel to react with a massive response. Instead, Israel could have retrieved its dead and wounded, grieved, and enjoyed international sympathy. It could have thereafter mounted a very targeted campaign to take out Hamas' rocket launchers, while negotiating to release the hostages. World opinion would have remained on Israel's side... Exactly what Hamas would NOT have wanted.
The IDF has been doing a fairly decent job of finding tunnels. Regarding rocket launchers, the key seems to be to identify them and get civilians away from such areas without the use of huge bombs hitting civilian targets. Hamas is not going anywhere. The goal should be to provide more aid to innocent civilians and make either targeted raids when the intelligence dictates or very limited bombing, using the smallest effective bombs.
Thank you, Ambassador Oren, for another insightful article. Another part of the Obama administration's Israel policy worth mentioning is the ten year $38B arms deal (AKA bear hug) that has resulted in the IDF's dependence on munitions made in the USA. Does the IDF have an adequate munitions stockpile to go it alone and if so for how long?
Absolutely correct...this American Jew wants Isreal to do whatever it needs to do to feel safe and allow its citizens to live in peace...f**k what the Biden Administration says it should do
Israel needs to do what it’s right for Israel. Let’s recall how well American interventions ended in Iraq and Afghanistan as of late. So, forget the American war wisdom approach, and do what is necessary for your survival in the long run!!!
I’m reading The Arc of a Covenant by Walter Russell Mead, which traces in detail the history of US-Israel relations. Curious whether @michaeloren agrees with Mead’s analysis.
The American administrations' objectives in deterring Israel always attempts to minimize their global and regional risks and exposures that could threaten their national interests. No mutual defense pact such as NORAD nor NATO in play here!
Israel's objective in deterring their hostile regional adversaries is to avoid annihilation.
Seems to be clearly divergent goals. Michael Oren's "clarity" is evident.
Israel position on the “Day After” in Gaza should be simple: a credible Palestinian leader who steps forward and publicly endorses the “two states for two people” formulation - NOT the “two states” solution which we know the Palestinians interpret as a Jew-free Palestine and an Israel that will be flooded with returning Muslims ready to turn it into another Muslim majority state (that would quickly be renamed anything but Israel). Israel should also lay out its vision of Gaza as a Singapore on the Med and invite the Abraham Accord states to assist in its reconstruction as a model for what “Palestine” could be. The reality is that the initial condition will not materialize. If Arafat couldn’t pull it off, it’s hard to see who would step forward. Any “government of technocrats” should be rejected absent the acceptance of TSfTP, as we know that such a government would be beholden to bad actors. At least Israel will have carved out a policy and vision that it would be difficult to quibble with publicly.
And that’s precisely the point: who is the real peace partner on the Palestinian side?
The elephant in the room, as has often been explained to little avail, is that “peace” as we understand it, is a Judeo-Christian concept whereas in Islam it’s a “hudna”, a temporary end of hostilities that will resume once you see a chance for victory.
Once again, thank you for your excellent analysis, Ambassador Oren. I only take exception with one small point, "Despite Israel’s extraordinary efforts to avoid causing civilian casualties..." Clearly, Israel is playing by Hama Rules--referring to Hafez al Assad's handling of the Moslem Brotherhood rebellion in 1982--which sends the message throughout the region, "This is what happens if you f** with us." Everyone in the Middle East understands this; not so much in the west.
I am a supporter of the state of Israel, but must disagree with your premise about America’s motive in regard to the current debacle that Netenyau has largely created.
Had he and his government practiced any strategic foresight, the Hamas attack could have been averted. Please don’t misunderstand my point of view on this.The Hamas attack is an unforgivable outrage, and Israel’ response was to be expected. My point is that it is what you do before the attack that matters, not what you do after the attack. Israel has stopped being proactive to the threats it faces and has now become only reactive. America’s interests have always been to keep Israel “out of war” for Israel’s sake. America’s true interests and Israels interests are truly much closer aligned than your article would suggest. Israel needs to step back and start playing the long game in their relationships with its’ neighbors. Yes, I understand the global hostility of Israel’s terrorist enemies. But Israel needs to be playing the game for a sustainable peace. Its current approaches are taking the nation in the direction of continuous war that is ultimately lose-lose for all.
I am responding because your view demonstrates a wildly inaccurate perception of the circumstances, which I hope you might reconsider. You are right that Israel made mistakes before Oct. 7th. In its desperation for peace, back in the 1990s, it embarked on a fantasy that peace could be negotiated with the world’s most unapologetic terrorist, Yasser Arafat. Any rational government would have abandoned that project after Arafat launched the Second Intifada, but too many in Israel were not thinking rationally, and so Israel plunged further into the Oslo morass. Today, it is the U.S., not Israel, that is engaged in a two-state fantasy that is dangerous not only to Israel but to the U.S. and the rest of the West.
Peace is not sustainable unless the powers behind Hamas and Hezbollah—the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran, respectively—are named and confronted, not just by Israel but by the U.S. and our allies. Israel is fighting to banish Hamas from Gaza, but eventually must deal with Hezbollah in the North. No one talks about the 200k Israelis now displaced from their homes in the North because of Hezbollah’s attacks and 100k missiles poised to launch into Israel. As Ambassador Oren points out, the Obama-Biden fantasy of productive engagement with Iran has only succeeded in dragging the U.S. into confrontation with an emboldened and hostile Iran, not a friendlier Iran.
The continuous war rages on, not because of what Israel does, but because of what it is: the sovereign democratic state of the Jewish people. The Muslim supremacists of the Middle East can’t abide the thought of such a thing. Shia Iran and the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood have a common goal of conquering Western power through a revived caliphate. Conquest of Israel is merely the first milestone they hope to accomplish on the road to establishing their expansive government and subjugating all Western-allied nations under its rule. Americans and all Westerners must finally understand Israel is the frontline of a fight not only for themselves, but for all Westerners. Israelis have died to contain this totalitarian force and keep it from spreading. Instead of expecting Israel to restrain itself, we should be doing all we can to ensure Israel’s success. Unfortunately, because the U.S. has tried to play both sides, the forces Israel has been fighting for decades have grown strong enough to challenge us and pull us in. Oren is right. Israel must say, “Thank you, but…” and then the anti-totalitarian West must get over itself and finally admit, unequivocal support for Israel is the right way to go.
There can be no peace there. I was born in British Palestine and my family was there from the esrly 1930’s. Funny how you never heard about the Palestinians in those days, nor until the 1967 war.
In fact, Arabs were committing pogroms—atrocities against Jews—even earlier. There was no Israel, no Palestinians, just plain Jew hatred. My mother rest her soul, always said there would never be peace there. How can you have peace with people who’s sole purpose is your elimination? To think otherwise is delusional. Many Israelis fall into that category because when I was there four years ago they were oblivious to the possibility that they could be attacked. Coincidentally I was there just prior to the 1973 war and the same attitude prevailed.
How? Every time Israel moved against Hamas the US insisted on the end before Hamas was eliminated. They are doing it even now after the events of 10/7.
Our support of Israel, at least for the last 20 years or so, has been equivocal at best. Gratitude mixed with admiration but aiways publicly balanced with criticism. Ad nauseum and a very western cop out. To ask Israel once again to save not just itself, but the rest of a cowardly west, by risking everything to defeat Hezbollah, without support!, is to ask for its suicide. How dare we? This mess, thanks to Obama's pro anti-west regime, is an existential attack on our entire concept of civilization. Either we defend America's future, or we surrender to unaccountable regimes, which include international institutions. If we don't lead, we must follow. That's a fact of human's being.
But Israel could not calmly reorganize and wait to attack while hostages were/are being held by the terrorists. Israel’s families would never have allowed it and Hamas would never have bargained a release of any hostages without all out war. Hold the line; you have the moral ground and your survival is at stake.
As a Jew and an American who has worked at the Pentagon, I don't disagree with Ambassador Oren's basic analysis, nor with the perspectives of Israelis who experiences existential dread every day. So do I, albeit from a position of safety. What I have always disagreed with, from the beginning, is goals and strategies. And especially the automatic resort to massive bombardment of a type certain to lose the moral high ground in international opinion. My original recommendation was, 1. Secure Israeli territory. Kill all invaders. Secure the borders with extensive weaponry. 2. Do nothing else yet, based on the principle of war that says: never do exactly what the enemy expects you to do. Hamas expected Israel to react with a massive response. Instead, Israel could have retrieved its dead and wounded, grieved, and enjoyed international sympathy. It could have thereafter mounted a very targeted campaign to take out Hamas' rocket launchers, while negotiating to release the hostages. World opinion would have remained on Israel's side... Exactly what Hamas would NOT have wanted.
How do you take out rocket launchers next to day cares? Schools? What about the tunnels? How do you handle that?
The IDF has been doing a fairly decent job of finding tunnels. Regarding rocket launchers, the key seems to be to identify them and get civilians away from such areas without the use of huge bombs hitting civilian targets. Hamas is not going anywhere. The goal should be to provide more aid to innocent civilians and make either targeted raids when the intelligence dictates or very limited bombing, using the smallest effective bombs.
Thank you, Ambassador Oren, for another insightful article. Another part of the Obama administration's Israel policy worth mentioning is the ten year $38B arms deal (AKA bear hug) that has resulted in the IDF's dependence on munitions made in the USA. Does the IDF have an adequate munitions stockpile to go it alone and if so for how long?
Amb Oren, your
Commentary and insight has been clearheaded and probably the most valuable out there regarding Israel’s survival
Absolutely correct...this American Jew wants Isreal to do whatever it needs to do to feel safe and allow its citizens to live in peace...f**k what the Biden Administration says it should do
Israel needs to do what it’s right for Israel. Let’s recall how well American interventions ended in Iraq and Afghanistan as of late. So, forget the American war wisdom approach, and do what is necessary for your survival in the long run!!!
I’m reading The Arc of a Covenant by Walter Russell Mead, which traces in detail the history of US-Israel relations. Curious whether @michaeloren agrees with Mead’s analysis.
The American administrations' objectives in deterring Israel always attempts to minimize their global and regional risks and exposures that could threaten their national interests. No mutual defense pact such as NORAD nor NATO in play here!
Israel's objective in deterring their hostile regional adversaries is to avoid annihilation.
Seems to be clearly divergent goals. Michael Oren's "clarity" is evident.
Israel position on the “Day After” in Gaza should be simple: a credible Palestinian leader who steps forward and publicly endorses the “two states for two people” formulation - NOT the “two states” solution which we know the Palestinians interpret as a Jew-free Palestine and an Israel that will be flooded with returning Muslims ready to turn it into another Muslim majority state (that would quickly be renamed anything but Israel). Israel should also lay out its vision of Gaza as a Singapore on the Med and invite the Abraham Accord states to assist in its reconstruction as a model for what “Palestine” could be. The reality is that the initial condition will not materialize. If Arafat couldn’t pull it off, it’s hard to see who would step forward. Any “government of technocrats” should be rejected absent the acceptance of TSfTP, as we know that such a government would be beholden to bad actors. At least Israel will have carved out a policy and vision that it would be difficult to quibble with publicly.
I dont believe there is such a person. Nor would he survive long.
And that’s precisely the point: who is the real peace partner on the Palestinian side?
The elephant in the room, as has often been explained to little avail, is that “peace” as we understand it, is a Judeo-Christian concept whereas in Islam it’s a “hudna”, a temporary end of hostilities that will resume once you see a chance for victory.
Once again, thank you for your excellent analysis, Ambassador Oren. I only take exception with one small point, "Despite Israel’s extraordinary efforts to avoid causing civilian casualties..." Clearly, Israel is playing by Hama Rules--referring to Hafez al Assad's handling of the Moslem Brotherhood rebellion in 1982--which sends the message throughout the region, "This is what happens if you f** with us." Everyone in the Middle East understands this; not so much in the west.
Right on.
Great read. Maybe we just keep putting bandaids on a leaky wound. Ultimately for peace maybe George Bush said it best. Kill them all.
I am a supporter of the state of Israel, but must disagree with your premise about America’s motive in regard to the current debacle that Netenyau has largely created.
Had he and his government practiced any strategic foresight, the Hamas attack could have been averted. Please don’t misunderstand my point of view on this.The Hamas attack is an unforgivable outrage, and Israel’ response was to be expected. My point is that it is what you do before the attack that matters, not what you do after the attack. Israel has stopped being proactive to the threats it faces and has now become only reactive. America’s interests have always been to keep Israel “out of war” for Israel’s sake. America’s true interests and Israels interests are truly much closer aligned than your article would suggest. Israel needs to step back and start playing the long game in their relationships with its’ neighbors. Yes, I understand the global hostility of Israel’s terrorist enemies. But Israel needs to be playing the game for a sustainable peace. Its current approaches are taking the nation in the direction of continuous war that is ultimately lose-lose for all.
I am responding because your view demonstrates a wildly inaccurate perception of the circumstances, which I hope you might reconsider. You are right that Israel made mistakes before Oct. 7th. In its desperation for peace, back in the 1990s, it embarked on a fantasy that peace could be negotiated with the world’s most unapologetic terrorist, Yasser Arafat. Any rational government would have abandoned that project after Arafat launched the Second Intifada, but too many in Israel were not thinking rationally, and so Israel plunged further into the Oslo morass. Today, it is the U.S., not Israel, that is engaged in a two-state fantasy that is dangerous not only to Israel but to the U.S. and the rest of the West.
Peace is not sustainable unless the powers behind Hamas and Hezbollah—the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran, respectively—are named and confronted, not just by Israel but by the U.S. and our allies. Israel is fighting to banish Hamas from Gaza, but eventually must deal with Hezbollah in the North. No one talks about the 200k Israelis now displaced from their homes in the North because of Hezbollah’s attacks and 100k missiles poised to launch into Israel. As Ambassador Oren points out, the Obama-Biden fantasy of productive engagement with Iran has only succeeded in dragging the U.S. into confrontation with an emboldened and hostile Iran, not a friendlier Iran.
The continuous war rages on, not because of what Israel does, but because of what it is: the sovereign democratic state of the Jewish people. The Muslim supremacists of the Middle East can’t abide the thought of such a thing. Shia Iran and the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood have a common goal of conquering Western power through a revived caliphate. Conquest of Israel is merely the first milestone they hope to accomplish on the road to establishing their expansive government and subjugating all Western-allied nations under its rule. Americans and all Westerners must finally understand Israel is the frontline of a fight not only for themselves, but for all Westerners. Israelis have died to contain this totalitarian force and keep it from spreading. Instead of expecting Israel to restrain itself, we should be doing all we can to ensure Israel’s success. Unfortunately, because the U.S. has tried to play both sides, the forces Israel has been fighting for decades have grown strong enough to challenge us and pull us in. Oren is right. Israel must say, “Thank you, but…” and then the anti-totalitarian West must get over itself and finally admit, unequivocal support for Israel is the right way to go.
There can be no peace there. I was born in British Palestine and my family was there from the esrly 1930’s. Funny how you never heard about the Palestinians in those days, nor until the 1967 war.
In fact, Arabs were committing pogroms—atrocities against Jews—even earlier. There was no Israel, no Palestinians, just plain Jew hatred. My mother rest her soul, always said there would never be peace there. How can you have peace with people who’s sole purpose is your elimination? To think otherwise is delusional. Many Israelis fall into that category because when I was there four years ago they were oblivious to the possibility that they could be attacked. Coincidentally I was there just prior to the 1973 war and the same attitude prevailed.
How? Every time Israel moved against Hamas the US insisted on the end before Hamas was eliminated. They are doing it even now after the events of 10/7.
TY!!! Neal Hugh Hurwitz CC'66
Well said, Mr. Oren.