The fog of war

Beyond the usual 'fog of war' the confusion and lack of real time and accurate information about is actually occurring in the battles, the Israel-Palestinian/Arab conflict seems to add an additional sheet of fog.

People view the conflict through a specific ideological lens (=fog). Few, if any, seem able or willing to approach the issue 'objectively' evaluating the situation without preconditions or assumptions. All too often, there are knee jerk reactions especially as it relates to Israel's actions. People's "minds are already made up, they don't want to become confused with the 'facts'".

Protests seem de rigour in the Arab countries. Sponsored (encouraged at minimum) by the government to publicly demonstrate their support of the Palestinian cause (without having to do anything concrete like financially support their [the Palestinian] economy and social needs). I get the sense that Israel seems a convenient whipping post to deflect criticism of the regime and a way to promote their call (not generally considered politically correct) for the destruction of the State of Israel.

Israel--post 1967--no longer is seen as a victim of Arab/Palestinian aggression. That Israelis suffer under constant bombings or terrorist attacks (like suicide bombings) with minimal (less than 100's of deaths) seems unworthy of comment. On the contrary, it's the result of their [Israel] "occupation" of Gaza (which it officially--de jure and de facto--disengaged its presence) and the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) and the building of settlements. For me, the left (including some in Israel), the non-aligned countries and the Islamic world have joined forces to protest each and every Israeli action.

That Egypt has 'failed' to fall into lock step with the other Arab countries, has made it a target for tremendous criticism -- betraying the Arab cause and engaging in "treason". There's no such thing as an honest broker, it's either "us" or "them" (a la the George W Bush world view).

How to cut through the fog?

First, we must recognized its complexity and lack of a simple solution. Benny Morris' op-ed piece in the New York Times on 30 Dec 2008 is a start.

Next, biases must be disclosed (if that's actually possible).

Equity without moral equivalences must be the rule. Both sides need to have their feet put to the fire. The comments of the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon yesterday (29.Dec.2008) is a start.

“While recognizing Israel’s security concerns regarding the continued firing of rockets from Gaza, he firmly reiterates Israel’s obligation to uphold international humanitarian and human rights law and condemns excessive use of force leading to the killing and injuring of civilians, ... condemns the ongoing rocket attacks by Palestinian militants and is deeply distressed that repeated calls on Hamas for these attacks to end have gone unheeded"

As was his statement of 24.Dec.2006 calling on Hamas to cease its rocket attacks on Israel.

“The Secretary-General is gravely concerned about the situation in Gaza and southern Israel and the potential for further violence and civilian suffering if calm is not restored,” a statement issued by his spokesperson said. “He condemns today's rocket attacks on southern Israel.”

What influence this will have on UN deliberations--in the General Assembly and especially within the Security Council--is anyone's guess.

In the meantime, some fog lights are being shined on the issue. Hopefully, it'll start to cut through the ideological fog too.

Return Fire

This morning Israel launched a military response to the years of Hamas (Palestinian) rocket attacks which were recently intensified upon the residents of southern Israel (cross to the Gaza border). It was a long time in coming and hopefully will be short lived in duration.

I do have several questions about this military operation:

1. What's the goal -- destroy the Hamas infrastructure and its governance of Gaza, (forcing the) returning Gilad Shalit, creating a demilitarized zone in Gaza, securing a period of quiet for previously shelled southern Israeli communities ...?
2. Is this a one time event or the start of a regular/occasional pattern of incursions in Gaza to quiet down the terrorist activities/rocket attacks?
3. How will international reaction (condemnation) be addressed?
4. How will the international PR/"propaganda" campaign be implemented, particularly in counteracting the Hamas/Arab propaganda campaign, especially when Israel bombs a heavily populated civilian site.
5. How will civilian casualties ("collateral damage") be minimized?

How much of this situation is attributable to the withdrawal from Gaza Ariel Sharon pushed through three summers ago? While the idea was a good one--Israel/Jews were settled in a massive Arab/Palestinian area (that not even the Egypt wanted to have despite its 'occupation' from 1948 - 1967)--it was poorly executed. Rather than being a planful event, ensure that the displaced residents had a place to go to easily start its life over, negotiate a real understanding with the Palestinian Authority that the vacated structures would be used for good instead of being thoughtlessly and wantonly vandalized/destroyed and that the border with southern Israel would remain quiet.

• Three years on, the evacuees remain destitute and there is no quiet or comfort along the southern border with Gaza.
• Gilad Shalit remains a prisoner of Hamas (though not necessarily the same faction that's governing Gaza).
• The people of Sderot and the surrounding kibbutzim and other communities including those further north can expect more rocket attacks in the coming days in response to Israel's incursion/operation against Hamas.

Will the cycle of violence end or is this yet another nail in the coffin?

Primary Colors -- II

With last night's Kadima party's primary, the primary season I think is now over. The rest of the parties will announce their lists shortly.

According to recent poll published in Haaretz, the gap between Kadima and Likud is narrowing. Not explained is if this is due to the finalizing of the lists, the loss of the elan of Likud/Netanyahu, the positive impression of Tzippi Livni from a joint appearance of all three leaders at a business forum earlier this week, or if it's really significant. My own sense is that people are dissatisfied with the entire political system [see the feedback] and especially with the leaders of the major parties. I expect a low turnout (<40%) on election day and those who actually come to the polls will either be die hard party people or those who feel an obligation to vote as a civic duty (mostly Western people) and will hold their nose to vote for the least worst option -- which one is less of a crook/incompetent fool--and will do the least damage to Israel.

Lost in most of the bickering and cross incrimination's is a real discussion of what kind of country people want, were we want to be and how we can best get there. This morning on Reshet B, on Karen Noybach's "Daily Agenda" program, sought to have a discussion about party advertising campaign and the need to modernize it, only to have it degenerate into a partisan bickering match about how only their party will "'rescue" Israel. It wasn't time that some politician hijacked a discussion to make a partisan point at the expense of thoughtful informative discussion.

Ponzi returns

The effects of the Bernard L Madoff "ponzi scheme" continues to ripple through the financial and especially the Jewish (philanthropic) world. At last count, two family philanthropic foundations (Chais and the RL Lappin) have closed their doors due to extensive losses. Others are hurting and will feel forced to cut back on their grants. Then there are the numerous investment firms who lost their investments. According to Madoff's own estimates, losses total $50 billion. It seems that closer you were to him, the harder you were hurt. Exposure to him and his investment services [sic] was radioactive and poisonous.

While I trust a lot of people are currently hurting--the loss of retirement nest eggs, loss of personal value--my sympathies are tempered by (a) how people continue to believe in "something too good to be true" (e.g. 10% return when the market is either lower or in decline) and the (b) innocent people who are going to suffer in the future because the brazen greediness of investors (e.g. potential recipients of philanthropic funds, individuals who 'parked' their savings with a trusted financial advisor who in turn turned over the funds to Madoff).

There are no winners in this situation. The $50 billion is mostly unrecoverable since it was used to pay off earlier investors. Whatever good may have arisen from the money is gone forever. Madoff will receive some kind of prison sentence, but I doubt it will assuage anyone's anger and sense of being violated. The sense of underlying sense of trust between friends and between business partners is also gone. It'll take a little while for a healthy equilibrium to return.

Israeli nismanagement

NIS is for New Israeli Shekel.

Four news items caught my attention today:

1. Israel approved transferring 100,000 NIS to Gaza (Hamas leadership) due to its cash flow problems.
2. Holocaust restitution fund spends NIS 30m of survivors' money on itself.
3. Diplomats ordered to cut costs by flying coach class.
4. The Israeli economy has stopped growing.

While it was thought that Israel would escape the effects of the global economic downturn, in large part the result of an earlier bank and financial overhaul, it's clear that all economies connected to the global economic community and especially the American economy will suffer. The credit crunch has come to Israel.

The idea that Israel would be willing to transfer funds to pay the salaries of the Hamas bureaucracy especially in light of its diplomatic and economic embargo/closure is mind boggling. I thought the goal was to pressure Hamas and the Gaza people to end its existence and return political authority to the Palestinian Authority (Abbas). While withholding humanitarian aid--food, fuel and medical supplies--is verboten, how can Israel justify supporting a government that it deems illegitimate. A political entity that (a) continues to hold Gilad Shalit (nearly 900 days!) without allowing anyone to see him and verify his life status and (b) continues to bomb southern Israel (from Sedrot to the Ashkelon/Kiryat Gat area). What was Ehud Barak (Minister of Defence and Chair of the Labour Party) thinking? Both issues require resolution before even one agura is sent to Hamas. Gilat Shalit must be returned to Israel immediately and if Hamas is genuinely interested in peace the bombing must stop. If not, Israel should (a) withhold all funds and (b) plan for a quick military strike against Hamas strongholds and its leadership.

Government at its worst is at play with the other two issues. That diplomats (vice deputy directors right now) have the right to fly business or first class is beyond me. The time has come for all government employees to fly the least expensive way possible. They're flying on my (income tax + other taxes) tab. Unless everyone is entitled to fly business class, then let's save the section for those who are paying their own way.

The Israeli government in general and specifically the Holocaust restitution fund has dragged its feet for too long. The status of the remaining survivors is dire, they need to live their final years in dignity and not in dire poverty and shame. It seems that official bodies are waiting for them to die and then pocketing the money for themselves. Israeli history seems full of discrimination and insensitivity towards the scars and concerns of the holocaust survivors. The time is long overdue to reverse the trend and give them their dignity.

Primary colours

With the Israeli elections two months away--February 10, 2009--it's party primary season. The three larger (secular) parties, Kadima, Labour, Likud and Mertez scheduled their primaries for early December. The other parties, the religious ones -- Shas, UTJ -- have their Rabbis pick them (for ritual purity perhaps?) and a number of right-wing parties have their central committee (Bayit Hayehudi) pick their list or the Chair like Yisrael Beytenu picks his list (trusted followers?).

According to recent polls as reported in The Jerusalem Post and Haaretz, Likud is leading with between 31-36 seats (depending on the poll you rely upon), Kadima 24-27 and Labour around 12 seats.

Every party will put the best face on their primary/internal election results. Labour which held their delayed -- the computers crushed so they pushed the elections off a couple of days -- last Thursday (4 November) expressed their satisfaction that their list is a winner, even if others view as it as an acceptance of being an opposition party.

Likud also had computer problems which forced it to keep its polls open another three hours, until 1:00 Wednesday the 9th. Once its results were published, the debate began on the "Feiglin Effect" as Moshe Feiglin the "Jewish Leadership" faction chair received the 20th place and his followers also received other 'realistic' places on the list. On one hand, he's viewed as a right wing reactionary who seeks to dispose the (Palestinian) Arab population in Israel and destroy the Palestinian Authority/Gaza, a fascist. Likud Chairman Benjamin Netanyahu seeks to push him off the list by having the regional representatives fill the 21-37 slots and women fill the 10 and 20 slots. If his advisers convince the party's election council to accept its appeal, Feiglin will mus likely not receive a seat in the next Knesset. Personally, it's all politics, which could back fire on Likud and Netanyahu. Currently, despite Netanyahu's best efforts (which only gave Feiglin great attention and success/legitimacy) and Feiglin's place on the list, Likud has increased its popularity.

Next up, on Sunday the 14th is Meretz followed on the 17th with Kadima primaries. They will be having a paper ballot.

Reading the riot act

The events of the last several days in Hevron surrounding the evacuation of the "House of Peace/Contention" (pick your name) when settlers--those directly associated with the settlement and their supporters--many of them religiously observant attacked not only government officials (the border police and the army) but also the local Palestinian population was a hilul hashem [a desecration of god's name]. The riot that ensued gives Israel a bad name among the world and religious Judaism a bad name among secular Israelis and other Jews.

Such behavior cannot be condoned, either by the government and especially by the religious leadership. The Prime Minister and the Israeli Defence establishment were explicit in his condemnation of the act. The Rabbinic leadership less so, if at all.

As much as it may be true that youth have a propensity to act out and disregard the advise of their elders (and Rabbis), I'm not sure that the violence is unavoidable as suggested by Rabbi Avinoam Horowitz of the Yeshiva High School of Kiryat Arba (YATKA).

Someone, an (irresponsible) adult, was assiting them. Focus has been placed upon Daniella Weiss, who Ephriam Sneh have called for her arrest and Dani Golan the head of the Council of Jewish Communities of Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip has demanded that she be removed from the area.

No matter the excuses offered for the underlying causes of the the rampage that ensued -- the residual effects of the evacuation of Gush Katif, general government policy, etc. -- it's clear to me that the social mores and the national religious religious educational frameworks are at the core. The lack of respect for the State of Israel and its democratic institutions seems to have been ingrained in the national religious/settler educational system. From parents, teachers and especially Rabbis, the messianism and xenophobia (aka anti-Arab and Palestinian prejudices) have become de rigueur. Respect for the other--Jew included--is no longer valued. Extremism has become the norm rather than the exception.

As much as I want to believe it, I can't share the words of an anonymous Rabbi:

Daniella Weiss and her extremist methods turned out to be a complete failure, ... The evacuation of Beit Hashalom was quicker than even one house in Gush Katif, which proves the futility of violence. Hopefully now people will be more willing to listen to a more moderate voice.

The voice of moderation will only be heard once "The Riot Act" is read and enforced by the those who claim leadership, and those who either encourage or publicly condone such extremist behavior are called on it and forced to answer, preferably in court, for their behavior.

Last Week

I have good news (if only for me) and bad news.

First the good news. Nir Barkat is ready to be mayor of Jerusalem as of this Thursday (4.Dec). Ha'artez reported on Thursday that his coalition is in place. For the first time in nearly four decades (!), there isn't a haredi party in the coalition.

The bad news is the events in Mumbai. The senseless deaths of everyone especially those at the Habad House--the Rabbi and his wife--grieves me endlessly. For three days the world waited on the edge of their seats to see how the terrorist standoff would end and who would survive. Only later was it discovered that everyone (who died) at Habad House was murdered Wednesday evening. Their child is now an orphan.

Baruch Dayan Emet.

Sink or bail them out?

The current economic situation has governments reeling to figure out how to "calm the rough waters" of the economic upheavals. Financial institutions--banks, insurance companies and pension funds--are failing, major corporations--including the "Big 3 car makers" (Chrysler, Ford and GM)--are also searching for a way out of their financial morass. And, then, there's the country of Iceland which was on the brink of bankruptcy due to the failure of its larger banks until the international community and the IMF came to its rescue. Some have suggested parallels to The Great Depression.

To extend the nautical metaphor, what's to be done with the "sinking ship"? Do we save those on board (everyone, only the passengers, the crew, the captain, or some combination?), bail out the water (so it continues to float and continue on its journey as before?) or, let it sink (writing off the 'asset' and starting fresh)?

Somehow, the fact that the people most responsible for the current state of affairs, the government officials who pushed for massive deregulation, money mangers (CEO's and other industry leaders) who engaged in risky behavior--lending to the truly credit unworthy, sub-prime lenders, and decision-makers (and those with influence) who refused to engage in prudent thinking and behavior that the "housing bubble" was just that a bubble and an infinite trend -- should profit from their irresponsible behavior irks me. Yes, the companies in trouble are frequently large and their failure could snowball, however, everyone needs to be held accountable for their behavior. Executive pay should reflect actual results (as opposed to stock prices and short-term profits), not just small companies,who frequently lack the lobbying power of the large and multinational corporations, should be 'allowed' (forced) to declare bankruptcy.

It's truly ironic that the free enterprise, "objectivism" (a la Ayn Rand) of the George W Bush administration has become the lead voice for bailing out the large financial institutions -- pure socialism at its finest. Then, of course, GWB needs to continue protecting and promoting the interests of his friends (or those of Dick Cheney).

Let's protect the interests of the more innocent--since no one is completely innocent or without blame/responsibility--segments of the affected population. The investors, especially those too old to wait around to recoup their "losses", the workers being laid off due to the needed staff cuts retrenchments. Let the CEO's and their ilk face the proverbial drummer.

Let the boats sink while rescuing the passengers and lowly crew.

Gold dust in my eyes ...

Nir Barkat won the Jerusalem mayoral race handily, garnering 51% of the vote to Meir Porush's 41%. While it wasn't the revolution as portrayed by the press, it was a welcome sign that the rule -- or at least the mayor's chair -- has returned to secular (non-haredi) hands. What was truly amazing is the voter turnout -- almost all Jews(the Arabs boycotted the election) -- was 42%. The Barkat campaign workd hard to bring out the secular vote and the haredi communities were split leaving some to not vote (their Rabbis told them nothing) and others like the Ger Hasidim to actually vote for Barkat!


Several days later (though not yet appearing on the City of Jerusalem website), the results of the council elections appeared: UTJ (Ashkenazi Haredi) garnered 8 seats, Barkat's group 6, Shas (Sfardi Haredi) 5, NRP and Meretz each 3, Hitarut Yerushalayim 2 and Likud, Israel Beitaynu, Piskat Ze'ev and L'mayan Yerushalayim all received one seat.

What does all this mean?

1. A non-haredi government/coalition is possible. Excluding UTJ and Shas the coalition would still have 18 seats (out of 31).
2. Should the NRP + another party refuse to join, Barkat will not have a ruling majority. Creating a majority will require enticing a religious party to join at the cost of 'paying their price'.

In the case of 2, I fear a repetition of the governance of the last 20 years (the tail-end of Kolleck until present). Any and all attempts by Barkat to revitalize the city--principally by making Jerusalem a more modern and open city--culturally, commercially will fail. The city will continue its free fall and remain an economically distressed area and the non-haredi populations will continue to flee the city.

He will also need to devise a way to make an end run around the council to achieve his goals.

While it was wonderful that Barkat was able to get out the vote for the election, I'm not sure people are willing to be actively involved as "change agents" for the entire (or even part) of the five year term of office.

Unless Barkat establishes a truly supportive city council coalition, it'll be SOS (same old s*****). It won't even be a reformation, never mind, a revolution.

Jerusalem Goes to the Polls

Today (Tues 11.11.08) is local election day in Israel, a time for people to complain how poorly the city is run and then stay away from the polls because the choices are so poor and besides, it doesn't really matter who wins.


For me, at least in Jerusalem, it does matter to me who becomes mayor and controls the city council. The status quo can't continue. The haredi control of council has strangled and stifled the growth of Jerusalem for decades--since the reign of Teddy Kolleck. Having a mayor whose eye is not on Kikar Safra (the location of City Hall) but somewhere else--the Knesset (Olmert) or Kikar Shabbat (the centre of Mea Sharim/Haredi Judaism) has turned Jerusalem into one of the poorest city in Israel.


This time around, four people are running for mayor. Two front runners, Meir Porush (Haredi and currently Member of Knesset) and Nir Barkat ('secular', former high tech entrepreneur and head of the opposition in the Jerusalem city council), and two also-rans, Arcardi Gaydamak and Dan Biron. The latter two, as far as I'm concerned, serve as protest votes and a way to split the non-haredi vote thus, assuring a Porush victory. Whereas, the non-haredi population seems to be concerned by personality, the haredi population tends to vote as a bloc--as dictated by their Rabbi (or "supreme leader"). Thus, haredi candidates (=those supported by the community) are assured of a guaranteed number of votes. (Should the haredi communal leadership refuse to endorse anyone, the haredi vote is negligible. I don't think that'll happen now, the powerful allure of money and power is too strong for all involved to ignore the haredi population.)


While I certainly understand that nether of front runners is "perfect", elections rarely are. They're more often a choice between worse and slightly less bad. If true, then it's a matter of holding your nose and voting for the least offensive choice. To either refuse to vote at all or cast a protest vote only serves to dilute the opportunity to create real change. A number of "leftists" I know are offended by Barkat's pronouncements (anti-Palestinian) and refuse to vote for Porush. Their refusal to 'hold their nose' means that the next five years will stink in Jerusalem.


Whatever political maneuvering Nir Brakat has engaged in, to better assure his election, at least he has his eye on Kikar Safra. He seems genuinely concerned about the welfare of all of Jerusalem and not just a selected few. After losing the last municipal election five years ago, he stuck it out sitting in the opposition of city council (when he could have just said "forget about it the hassle and frustration isn't worth the effort"). I respect that.

Up until a week ago, I had no idea idea who to vote for in the council portion of the election. My worst case scenario was Nir Barkat as mayor with a haredi council as what happened during the reign of Teddy Kolleck (and Ehud Olmert). Both found it necessary to achieve some of their goals--mostly in the cultural area--by organizing a (new) Jerusalem Foundation.

After attending a parlor meeting, I decided to stop worrying based on the assumption that if Barkat wins the mayoral race will also mean a non-haredi council.

The question then became which 'party' to vote for. Since a vote for a group that doesn't pass the vote threshold is considered a "spoiled ballot" and doesn't count a a vote (as does a blank ballot/ piece of paper).

At the meeting were two parties -- Hit'toarut Yerushalyim and Barkat. After listening to both, I realize my best option was to vote for Barkat and not split the non-haredi vote among the smaller parties.

STOP.

According to the telephone poll of Channel 1, Barkat will be the next mayor. YAY and we'll see.

The End is Near...2008 US Elections

After two years, the 2008 US Presidential elections are over. Voting is today. The only sure thing is this election represents the end of the Bush-Clinton-Bush presidency. Whether it represents a new beginning (Obama) or more of the same (McCain) remains to be seen.

While my preference is an Obama win and he is leading in the polls by a significant margin, stranger things have happened. McCain has run a terrible campaign, but that has not stopped him and his (Rove-trained) team from running a personally negative campaign. I'm also not sure if America is really ready for an African-American (a term invented for Barack Obama whose father was African and his mother a white American) President and if the GOP is willing to let ALL voters determine the victor instead of relying on "dirty tricks" (all the while claiming to be concerned about voter fraud.)

As well as Obama has run his campaign; kept his cool throughout a tough Primary campaign against especially Hilliary Clinton and the actual presidential campaign, stayed on message including raising many of the important issues confronting America (and the world) -- health care, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan (and the wider war against terror), the collapsing economy, education ... -- and choosing his team including the VP (Joe Biden) carefully, McCain has appeared tired (and his high energy), impulsive and angry.

The decision to (a) choose Sarah Palin as his VP, (b) temporarily suspend his campaign when the financial crisis broke open, (c) go personally negative where just some of actions that made his campaign poorly run. Despite cultivating the image of being a "maverick" , McCain showed himself to be a Bush want-to-be. His recent voting record, 90% pro-Bush, the number of GW Bush alumni on his staff has shown him to be a closet Bushie.

After eight disastrous years of a GW Bush administration, America is ready for real change. Will they vote for Obama or fall for McCain?

Despite the lack of government experience, Obama has shown himself to be "presidential". His ability to appear (and I believe actually) thoughtful and intelligent will be a vast improvement on the politically manipulative and sloppy management style of the Bush White House. McCain, despite his rhetoric, will be a continuation of the Bush mismanagement -- appointing cronies to sensitive positions (e.g. FEMA), irresponsible government deregulation (which I believe greatly contributed to the economic/financial meltdown), staying in Iraq while ignoring Afghanistan, alienating old-time allies and further aggravating the international standing of America throughout the globe and poor stewardship of the global environment. The only change during the McCain administration would be cosmetic.

Then, there's Sarah Palin. Where the hell did he find her and why if he had four months to vet all his potential VP candidates, did he mess up with her; her pregnant 17 year old daughter (who epitomizes the adage "Abstinence makes the heart go fonder"), the allegations of overstepping her powers as govenor (tryig to fire her ex brother-in-law), her hiring practices as mayor and governor (friends > competence, a la GW Bush) ... Despite seeking to cultivate her image as a simple "hockey mom" the RNC went out and spent $150K on outfitting her (why did they wait until the Republican National Convention to buy clothes). Despite calling for "common values" and cleaning up Washington, she refused to release her financial statement (which shown her income to be far above the average) and health statement until the last minute, in the face of mounting public displeasure.

America doesn't need an average person to lead, -- it tried that with GWB-- it needs someone willing and able to lead with intelligence and forethought. Someone willing and able to excite and motivate others to stretch and make America great. Obama by getting previously apathic and alienated voters to come to the polls and vote, says a great deal about his ability to lead America to even greater things over the next four years.

Hopefully, the rest of America will agree and welcome him as the next President of the United States of America.

DOA - Thoughts on the Prisoner Exchange

Eldad Regev and Ehud "Udi" Goldwasser returned to Israel yesterday--in a coffin. It appears that they were killed upon their capture by Hezbollah two years ago at the start of the 2nd Lebanon War. They were dead on arrival in Lebanon and DOA upon their return to Israel. During the intervening two years, their families and by extension the entire Israeli society were cynically left in netherland about their condition by Hassan Nasrallah (Hezbollah) with the complicit approval of the (however weak) Government of Lebanon. (The Lebanese leadership--its (new)President and Prime Minister as well as other government members attended and blessed the returning released prisoners from Israel as "heroes".) While Lebanon --and the rest of the militant Islamic world (especially the Palestinians and Hamas as well as Iran) hailed the event as a celebration of victory, in Israel the entire day was a somber and emotional difficult one. The agreement may have provided, finally, closure to the 2nd Lebanon War, it came at a tremendous cost.

With the bodies back, the "armchair quarterbacking" and second guessing has begun in earnest. Just see today's Haaretz newspaper.

While criticizing Israel's behavior, Amos Harel writes:

citizens in the street were up in arms over the last dirty trick that Hezbollah tried to play, when a senior member of the organization, Wafiq Safa, kept the suspense alive until the very last moment by refusing to reveal -- a look of smug self-satisfaction on his face -- whether the soldiers were alive or dead. ... We released a child killer [Samir Kuntar] and got coffins in return.

Israel Harel critiques Israel for paying an exorbitant price and compromising its values. Shlomo Averini criticizes the Israel government/leadership for not setting its policy straight and allowing outsiders -- the media, the families and public opinion, a commitment to doing EVERYTHING to bring soldiers back --to direct its actions which cold affect future situations.

The one suggestion that needs to be implemented immediately is:

Israel must announce that it will not begin negotiations without knowing whether the captives or abductees are dead or alive. At the same time, Israel must insist that representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross be permitted to see the captives and submit an official report on their condition. This principle can be adopted now in the case of Gilad Shalit: It is not acceptable for the kidnappers to give his family a letter, as an act of kindness, without a transparent report on his condition. Both demands are backed up by international law.

From everything I read and heard in the media, it was pretty clear that Udi and Eldad died during (or immediately following) their abduction. Why wasn't it made common knowledge so negotiations and family expectations concerning their release be taken into account? Would we have really released Kuntar for bodies or would it have been better to keep him as a "bargaining chip" for either REAL information on Ron Arad or a live soldier? The way it was, and now is, it appears that Israel was blind to the reality (of the situation and the "rules of the game"/ realpolitik) and played for a fool. This is not a way for a strong sovereign nation to behave if it wishes to maintain its dignity and ongoing survival.