Gaza Update (8 p.m. Israel; 6 p.m. Britain)

Urgent Update: Israeli Ground Forces Reportedly Entering Gaza

Israel diversified its attacks on Day 7 of the Gaza conflict. An Israeli airstrike on a mosque in northern Gaza killed 9 and wounded 60, and the American school in Gaza, a college building in El-Atatra, and Gaza's airport were also hit. A targeted assassination by missile killed Hamas commander Azkariah al-Jamal. Air and naval attacks were supplemented by Israeli artillery, which began shelling across the border.

Amidst speculation that Israel ground forces, massed on the border, may enter Gaza, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said "several operations" are possible if rocket fire continues.



The Palestinian death toll has reached 450. In addition to the latest casualties from attacks, wounded in hospital are dying because of a lack of medicine and equipment and overstretched medical personnel. Fifteen patients, including several children, died from wounds on Friday. The food crisis is getting worse, as Chris Gunness of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency noted:

Even when people want to get food for their hungry family, they are very aware of the dangers they are facing in going out....But, as things stand now, we have only a few days supply left.

Orwell and Gaza: Turning Psychological Warfare into "Moral Clarity"

Update: An Israeli bomb has killed nine and wounded at least 60 in a mosque in the northern Gaza town of Beit Lahiya. According to CNN, "leaflets signed by the commander of the Israeli military were dropped over northern Gaza on Saturday morning, warning residents to 'leave the area immediately' to ensure their safety".

Charles Krauthammer in The Washington Post:

[The Israel-Gaza conflict] possesses a moral clarity not only rare but excruciating.

Israel is so scrupulous about civilian life that, risking the element of surprise, it contacts enemy noncombatants in advance to warn them of approaching danger.

A reader from Birmingham replies, "This issue of pre-warning Arab 'targets' was an impressive act of propaganda by the Israelis- not actually expected or intended to save lives it has been supplied as effective ammunition for pro-Israeli writers in America."



Let's see. Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas in the world and since movement of Gazans is restricted --- they are in effect trapped in a small strip of land. So as Ayman Moyheldin of Al Jazeera, the only broadcast correspondent inside Gaza, just put it cogently, "Where can they go?" Hamdi Shakura, a human rights lawyer, adds, "Who can tell where the next hit will be? Who can advise people not to take the threats seriously? It's psychological warfare but it's real."

A typical leaflet reads:

To the residents of the Gaza Strip, be responsible for your fate. The rockets launched by terrorists are putting you and your families at risk. For your safety, please keep your call secret. The Israeli army will respond if the rocket fire continues.

If you want to help your families and friends and brothers in the Gaza Strip please call.

But here's a twist. The phone number "appears to be a Jerusalem or Ramallah number", cities which to my knowledge are not in the Gaza Strip.

And

Independence Days in Iraq: "Violent Semi-Peace"

On Friday a suicide bomb, targeting "a reconciliation meeting" held by a tribal leader in a town south of Baghdad killed up to 32 people and wounded up to 70.

Maybe it's because the timing was a bit off, given the dominance of the news by the Israel-Gaza conflict, but the nominal handover of power by the US and Britain to Iraqi forces on New Year's Day didn't get the celebration you might have expected. There were news stories to mark the occasion, with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki greeting the Iraqi security forces now in charge of Baghdad's "Green Zone" and Britain ceremonially confirming --- since British forces had been limited to Basra airport for months --- that Iraqis ran the show in the south.



Anthony Shadid's article in The Washington Post, as he moves through a Baghdad divided by walls, offers an excellent account of why the celebrations were muted:

Not to say that there is peace in Iraq. As many people are killed today as on any day in 2003 and 2004. Nor is there victory. For any Iraqi, the word, translated into Arabic, draws a dumbfounded look. Victory for whom? Certainly not the tens of thousands of civilians -- perhaps many more -- killed in the frenzied clashes of those once inchoate forces.

Rather, it is the day after.

This Mission-Far-From-Accomplished was highlighted, albeit inadvertently, by Michael O'Hanlon --- a fervent supporter of the US military surge --- and co-writers last week. Doggedly proclaiming "the population-protection strategy initiated by Gen. David Petraeus has been a remarkable success on balance", O'Hanlon and Co. have to settle for a year-end assessment that "Iraq has settled into a kind of violent semi-peace":

While Iraqi security forces have shown huge improvement, other government institutions still flounder. Inflation is in check and the economy is growing, but quality of life for most Iraqis has improved only modestly.

Shadid, unburdened by the need to keep proclaiming US success, cuts to the chase:

2009 feels much like that April day in 2003. Then, as now, one war's end was the preamble for another, far greater struggle. Much was ambiguous and indistinct. Consequences were unintended.

Update (3 December): Muslim Family Booted from AirTran Plane

AirTran, after initially refusing any responsibility, apologised Friday afternoon to the nine Muslims removed from its Washington to Orlando flight:

We regret that the issue escalated to the heightened security level it did. But we trust everyone understands that the security and the safety of our passengers is paramount.

Members and friends of the Irfan family were reportedly divided over whether to accept the apology. One of them, Khalif Irfan, said he was "very appreciative and surprised....It's a very generous gesture." However, Irfan added, "We have not ruled out the possibility of legal action.”

Meanwhile, the Council on Islamic American Relations has filed a complaint with the U.S. Department of Transportation over the incident: "We believe this disturbing incident would never have occurred had the Muslim passengers removed from the plane not been perceived by other travelers and airline personnel as members of the Islamic faith."

Gaza Update (3 January): Getting Fatah Back In

Update: An Israeli bomb has killed nine and wounded at least 60 in a mosque in the northern Gaza town of Beit Lahiya. According to CNN, "leaflets signed by the commander of the Israeli military were dropped over northern Gaza on Saturday morning, warning residents to 'leave the area immediately' to ensure their safety".

So, a week into the Israeli attack on Gaza, we finally get the political gameplan, courtesy of President Bush: "I urge all parties...to support legitimate Palestinian leaders working for peace."

"Legitimate Palestinian leaders" means the Fatah Party, which is the dominant Palestinian leadership in the West Bank. But how do you get Fatah back in, when they were rejected --- both politically and militarily --- from Gaza over the last years? Amidst a lull in most media coverage, the answer comes from McClatchy News Services:

Israel, Arab countries and the United States are discussing how to create an international force that would safeguard an eventual cease-fire, diplomats said Friday. A key part of the arrangement is that the main Palestinian rival to the ruling Hamas party would be asked to take charge of border crossings.

Thus the other key sentence in Bush's statement, to be broadcast on Saturday, "There must be monitoring mechanisms in place to help ensure that smuggling of weapons to terrorist groups in Gaza comes to an end."

In fact, that's been part of the American and possibly the Israeli strategy from the start of operations: topple Hamas, with whom you won't negotiate, and install Fatah/the Palestinian Authority, with whom you will. CNN television's carefully-orchestrated interviews with experts such as Jon Alterman, of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, were playing this out last weekend.

On the surface, putting Fatah/PA in would satisfy not only Washington and Tel Aviv but most Arab countries, who prefer to back PA leader Mahmoud Abbas rather than Hamas. Only one problem: where is the support for Fatah, which was discredited by charges of inefficiency, corruption, and a failure to provide public services even before Hamas beat them at the Gaza polls in 2006? McClatchy concludes:

While there's Arab and Western support for Abbas' U.S.-backed security forces taking control of the crossings, it isn't clear how that could be carried out. U.S. officials acknowledge that there's little chance that the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, could reassume political power in the Gaza Strip anytime soon.

I think it's safe to say that the Hamas leadership in Gaza won't be accepting any proposal for Fatah security forces on the borders. So, if they maintain their support amongst the Gazan population, the question is thrown back to Israel and its supporters in Washington.

Do they accept another cease-fire proposal based not on the political goal of getting Fatah in but on an "international monitoring force"? Or does Israel play its last military card and send the ground troops across the border?