THIS IS NOT THE TIME FOR NEGOTIATIONS

Negotiating what with whom?

Israel seeks no conflict with either UNIFIL or the LAF. If they get out of the way, they will have no problem. 

 

By Shoshana Bryen

 

JNS

Oct 16, 2024 

 

The Axis surrendered in North Africa in May 1943. Maybe that was enough. Maybe the Allies should have sued for a negotiated settlement then. Afrika Korps prisoners are pictured.

 

U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin is a decorated retired Army officer. He was supportive of Israel’s foray into Lebanon in the beginning. It would have been hard for him not to be, as Israel delivered justice for hundreds of U.S. and Allied military personnel murdered by Hezbollah in Lebanon and elsewhere. But his Oct. 12 phone call with Israeli Defense Minister Yoav Gallant pivoted into this:

“The secretary strongly emphasized the importance of ensuring the safety and security of [United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon] UNIFIL forces and Lebanese Armed Forces and reinforced the need to pivot from military operations in Lebanon to a diplomatic pathway as soon as feasible. Sec. Austin also raised the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza and stressed that steps must be taken to address it.”

There is a lot that remains troubling in those two sentences.

Israel seeks no conflict with either UNIFIL or the LAF. If they get out of the way, they will have no problem. The Israel Defense Forces is destroying Hezbollah’s vast arsenal in Southern Lebanon, doing the job that had been entrusted to both UNIFIL and the LAF, largely at the U.S. taxpayer’s expense. Between 2006 and 2022, according to the U.S. State Department, the LAF received more than $3 billion in U.S. funding. For UNIFIL, the United States pays about 25% of the tab (the United Nations wanted 26.94%, but Congress capped it). In 2023, the assessment was $143 million. But despite the infusion, both organizations failed in their stated mission, either out of fear or out of commonality with an internationally labeled terror organization.  

The “dire humanitarian situation” in northern Gaza is a function of Hamas stealing aid which it sells at enormous profit (watch the video here or see @Imshin on X). Is Austin proposing Israel return to northern Gaza and carry out police functions against Hamas to protect the shipments? And what happened to the U.S.-built Gaza pier, the floating disaster that cost either $320 million or $230 million, depending on which Department of Defense report you read? Either seems a bit much for a four-month boondoggle that was canceled in July.

To be fair, Israel’s hostages—held in contravention of international humanitarian law (IHL) for more than a year, with no visits from “humanitarian” organizations and with no “humanitarian aid” from the United States or the international community—were mentioned: “the need to bring back all the hostages to their families as soon as possible.” There’ is nothing about a “dire situation” here, though.

Does Austin not think Israel is trying to do that? What would make it “possible” sooner rather than later? Does he think that talking to Hamas will do it? Just this month, U.S. officials said Hamas senior leader Yahya Sinwar is the primary impediment to a deal. And again, to be fair to Austin, he goes where the president goes, and U.S. President Joe Biden said the country is “doubling down” on negotiations.

Instead of doubling down, the administration should try a different path—one with which the secretary of defense should be familiar.

• In 1939, following years of belligerence and the Anschluss, Nazi Germany launched World War II with the invasion of Poland. The Blitzkrieg followed in May 1940. Then Dunkirk, the French surrender, the Battle of Britain, Operation Barbarossa and Stalingrad. The Axis surrendered in North Africa in May 1943.

Maybe that was enough. Maybe the Allies should have sued for a negotiated settlement, offering the Germans … what? Autonomy for France and a promise never to take back Alsace? It was, after all, largely German-speaking and not terribly happy with France anyhow.

• Then, the siege of Leningrad ended in the east and Italy surrendered in the west; followed by D-Day and the liberation of Paris.

Maybe that was the time to offer the Nazis a deal they could live with; after all, a lot of civilians had already been killed.

• While the Soviets moved westward, the Allies moved east. The Germans launched the Battle of the Bulge in December of 1944, intending to split the Allied forces and allow the Germans to encircle the Allied armies and force them to negotiate a peace treaty in Germany’s favor.

Maybe they’d only keep half the concentration camps.

• The Allies kept going and on May 7, 1945, Germany surrendered. Unconditionally. VE Day was on May 8.

President Franklin Roosevelt was a very mixed bag for Jews, to put it kindly. But on unconditional surrender, he was right, opposing half-measures for temporary quiet in Europe that might have been mistaken for “peace.”

Back to the present: Negotiations work best when the parties agree on an endgame and discuss, even acrimoniously, how to get there. Israel seeks security for its people; the removal of the military and political power of Hamas and now Hezbollah as well; and the return of the hostages. As long as Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah and friends believe the endgame is the destruction of Israel, their surrender is necessary.

There was nothing then and there is nothing now to negotiate with evil.