May Israel defend itself at all?

A disturbing column by Charles Krauthhammer on the global response to Israel’s blockade of Gaza:

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 food, medicine and other humanitarian supplies are sent by Israel 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, i.e., ending Israel’s inspection regime, which would mean unlimited shipping into Gaza and thus the unlimited arming of Hamas.

Israel has already twice intercepted ships laden with Iranian arms destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that?

But even more important, why did Israel even have to resort to blockade? Because, blockade is Israel’s fallback as the world systematically de-legitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself — forward and active defense.

(1) Forward defense: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, 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. It is for the same reason America wages a grinding war in Afghanistan: You fight them there, so you don’t have to fight them here.

But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. The Israelis were told the occupations were not just illegal but at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies — and therefore withdrawal, by removing the cause, 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 (to borrow President Obama’s description of our campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.

The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the U.N. Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel’s defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli — the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war — effectively de-legitimized any active Israeli defense against its self-declared terror enemies.

(3) Passive defense: Without forward or active defense, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defenses — a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international de-legitimation. Even the United States is now moving toward having it abolished.

But, if none of these is permissible, what’s left?

Ah, but that’s the point. It’s the point understood by the blockade-busting flotilla of useful idiots and terror sympathizers, by the Turkish front organization that funded it, by the automatic anti-Israel Third World chorus at the United Nations, and by the supine Europeans who’ve had quite enough of the Jewish problem.

What’s left? Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defense. Why, just last week, the Obama administration joined the jackals, and reversed four decades of U.S. practice, by signing onto a consensus document that singles out Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons — thus de-legitimizing Israel’s very last line of defense: deterrence.

The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, 6 million — that number again — hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists — Iranian in particular — openly prepare a more final solution.

via Krauthammer: Those troublesome Jews.

Helping Haiti

The Lutheran Church Missouri-Synod is doing good work in Haiti that is attracting attention.  This from WORLD MAGAZINE:

The LCMS has been in Haiti since the quake, providing for the immediate needs of the survivors: food, water, medical supplies and temporary shelter. They realize, however, that they were not doing enough to help with the sense of hopelessness in the people. After speaking with the Rev. Marky Kessa, president of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Haiti, the organization leaders realized that the best way to help rebuild the survivors’ lives was to build permanent houses.

So with the help of the local church, the LCMS initiated its “Building Homes and Hope in Haiti” project by acquiring enough land to build three villages. Because of the confusion within the Haitian government, the group was unable to receive land grants, so the LCMS instead bought the land from its previous owners. The organization plans on building 300 houses, an orphanage, a school, a chapel, and a medical clinic in each of these villages.

In early April, a group of volunteers from Ohio and Missouri went to Haiti to build three model homes—one with a single room, a one-bedroom and a two-bedroom—to give the people in Haiti a chance to see what the houses will look like and to encourage donors at home to support the project.

The building process, which began this week, will take a three-pronged approach. First, local professional contractors will be hired to plan and direct the building, which will also help create jobs for local Haitians. Then there will be a call for volunteers from within the community. Finally, volunteers from the United States will be brought in to help build.

“The local people are really involved in their country and their lives,” Merritt said. “They don’t want mercy organizations coming in and taking over everything, they want a say in what happens, and are more than willing to volunteer and assist.”

via WORLD Magazine | Homes and hope | Angela Lu | May 20, 10.

This is the work of LCMS World Relief and Human Care.  The leader of this effort and the designer of this kind of effective ministry is not mentioned in the article, but it’s Rev. Matt Harrison.

HT: Mollie Hemingway

Will the Korean War break out again?

The Korean War of the 1950s has never officially ended.  Now South Korea, after decades of restraint, is getting tough with its Stalinist neighbor to the North, responding to a deadly torpedo attack on one of its ships that killed 46 South Koreans:

South Korean President Lee Myung-bak said Monday that his country is stopping all trade and most investment with North Korea and closing its sea lanes to North Korean ships after the nation's deadly attack on a South Korean warship.

Lee also called for a change in the North’s Stalinist regime.

The tough measures, announced in an address to his nation, were bound to ratchet up pressure on the isolated Pyongyang government and add a new flash point in U.S. relations with China.

“Fellow citizens, we have always tolerated North Korea’s brutality, time and again. We did so because we have always had a genuine longing for peace on the Korean Peninsula,” he said. “But now things are different. North Korea will pay a price corresponding to its provocative acts.”

Lee then said that “no North Korean ship will be allowed to make passage through any of the shipping lanes in the waters under our control” and that “any inter-Korean trade or other cooperative activity is meaningless.”

via South Korea to halt all trade with North Korea over sinking of Cheonan warship.

In the meantime, American forces have announced a joint military exercise to put on a show of force designed to “deter North Korean aggression.” The big question is what China will do. The even bigger question, of course, is what North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il will do. He has threatened war over lesser confrontations and is utterly unstable and unpredictable. And he may have nuclear weapons.

How China will bury us

China is thinking way beyond making money by trade and overseas investment.  James McGregor tells about still-Communist China’s latest economic plans:

How do we overcome the fundamental disconnect between our system of scattered bureaucratic responsibilities and almost no national economic planning vs. China’s top-down, disciplined and aggressive national economic development planning machine?

At issue is an array of Chinese policies and initiatives aimed at building “national champion” companies through subsidies and preferential policies while using China’s market power to appropriate foreign technology, tweak it and create Chinese “indigenous innovations” that will come back at us globally.

China has long been a “pay-to-play” market for foreigners, with mandated joint ventures in key industries, local manufacturing requirements and forced technology transfers as the price of market admission. Its entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001 was supposed to do away with the bulk of those barriers — and many were eliminated on paper.

But long gone are the days of China acting as a supplicant to gain access to foreign markets or obtain foreign investment. China now funds the U.S. budget deficit. Its rapidly developing domestic markets are expected to lead global growth for decades. The quarterly earnings of the world’s biggest multinational companies increasingly depend on their China business.

Chinese leaders — shrewd students of political and economic leverage — are shifting their focus from global trade and investment principles to the creation of their own rules and a “China model” of economic development that is difficult to challenge in international courts. Chinese policymakers are masters of creative initiatives that slide through the loopholes of WTO and other international trade rules. Facing off against this are 30 lawyers in the U.S. trade representative’s office of general counsel — only one of whom can read Chinese. This small cadre handles all WTO cases and supports all our trade negotiations globally. Only a half-dozen people in the office focus on China.

As part of their “China model,” that country’s leaders have decided that key sectors of the economy will remain “state dominated,” including automotive, chemical, construction, electronic information, equipment manufacturing, iron and steel, non-ferrous metals, and science and technology. Others will stay “largely in state hands,” including aviation, coal, defense, electric power and grid, oil and petrochemicals, shipping and telecommunications. State-owned companies in these industries are thriving in their protected home market. They have buckets of cash and easy access to state bank loans to carry out government directives to pursue overseas acquisitions and “go global.”

Most worrisome is the Chinese government mandate to replace core foreign technology in critical infrastructure — such as chips, software and communications hardware — with Chinese technology within a decade. The tools to accomplish this include a foreign-focused anti-monopoly law, mandatory technology transfers, compulsory technology licensing, rigged Chinese standards and testing rules, local content requirements, mandates to reveal encryption codes, excessive disclosure for scientific permits and technology patents, discriminatory government procurement policies, and the continued failure to adequately protect intellectual property rights. The poster child is the evolving “indigenous innovation” policy, which appears aimed at using China’s market power to coerce foreign companies to transfer and license their latest technology for “co-innovation” and “re-innovation” by Chinese companies.

via James McGregor – Time to rethink U.S.-China trade relations.

Notice that this is NOT free market economics but state-run and state-directed economics that takes advantage of capitalist economies by means of state monopolies, coercive government power, and economic clout.

Beware of Greeks receiving gifts

More from George Will on the debacle in Greece:

Greece, whose gross domestic product is below that of the Dallas-Fort Worth metropolitan area, is “too big to fail,” meaning too inconveniently connected to too many big banks. Bailing out Greece really rescues European banks that improvidently bought Greek bonds. Visit http://tinyurl.com/2dzaul2 for a useful New York Times graphic illustrating how European nations borrow from one another. For example, Italy owes France French banks $511 billion, a sum nearly equal to 20 percent of France’s GDP. About one-third of Portugal's debt is held by Spain, which has $238 billion of its debt held by Germany and $220 billion by France. Russell Roberts of George Mason University notes that this “discourages prudence and wariness” because when “everyone has financed everyone else, you can justify bailing everyone out.”

At the Parthenon last week, the Greek Communist Party, which got 8 percent of the vote in the last national election, draped banners emblazoned with the hammer and sickle: “Peoples of Europe Rise Up.” Of course. “Arise ye prisoners of starvation” exhorts “The Internationale,” the left’s ancient anthem. But who is to arise against whom?

Time was, the European left said it spoke for horny-handed sons of toil oppressed in dark Satanic mills. But Athens’ “anti-government mobs” have been composed mostly of government employees going berserk about threats to their entitlements. Even Greek air force pilots went on strike. The government, unable to say how many employees it has, promises to count them. It cannot fire many of them because Article 103, Paragraph 4 of the Greek constitution says: “Civil servants holding posts provided by law shall be permanent so long as these posts exist.”

America’s projected $9.7 trillion in budget deficits in this decade will drive the nation’s debt to 90 percent of GDP Greece’s is 124 percent. So some people say that to avoid a Greek-style crisis, America should adopt a value-added tax VAT. But Europe’s most troubled nations — the PIIGS: Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain — have VATs of 20 percent, 21 percent, 20 percent, 21 percent and 16 percent, respectively. As part of its austerity penance, the Greek government is going to give itself more money by raising its VAT to 23 percent. . . .

Greece now knows the terrific strength of weakness. Beware of Greeks — or any other people — receiving gifts.

via George F. Will – Greece and GM: Too weak to fail.

Bailing out Europe

The American share of the bailout of Europe, due to our involvement in the International Monetary Fund, may be as much as $54 billion.  This will be in the form of loans that might get paid back, but still. . . .

See US Exposure to EU Bailout Is Big But Risk Is Limited – CNBC.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X