"The Knife in the Back"
by Uri Avnery
THE
DAY after the war will be the Day of the Long Knives.
Everybody will blame everybody else. The politicians will
blame each other. The generals will blame each other. The
politicians will blame the generals. And, most of all,
the generals will blame the politicians.
Always, in every country and after every war, when the
generals fail, the "knife in the back" legend
raises its head. If only the politicians had not stopped
the army just when it was on the point of achieving a
glorious, crushing, historic victory
That's what happened in Germany after World War I, when
the legend gave birth to the Nazi movement. That's what
happened in America after Vietnam. That's what is going
to happen here. The first stirrings can already be felt.
THE SIMPLE truth is that up to now, the 22nd day of the
war, not one single military target has been reached. The
same army that took just six days to rout three big Arab
armies in 1967 has not succeeded in overcoming a small
"terrorist organization" in a time span that is
already longer than the momentous Yom Kippur War. Then,
the army succeeded in just 20 days in turning a stunning
defeat at the beginning into a resounding military
victory at the end.
In order to create an image of achievement, military
spokesmen asserted yesterday that "we have succeeded
in killing 200 (or 300, or 400, who is counting?) of the
1000 fighters of Hizbullah." The assertion that the
entire terrifying Hizbullah consisted of one thousand
fighters speaks for itself.
According
to correspondents, President Bush is frustrated. The
Israeli army has not "delivered the goods".
Bush sent them into war believing that the powerful army,
equipped with the most advanced American arms, will
"finish the job" in a few days. It was supposed
to eliminate Hizbullah, turn Lebanon over to the stooges
of the US, weaken Iran and perhaps also open the way to
"regime change" in Syria. No wonder that Bush
is angry.
Ehud
Olmert is even more furious. He went to war in high
spirits and with a light heart, because the Air Force
generals had promised to destroy Hizbullah and their
rockets within a few days. Now he is stuck in the mud,
and no victory in sight.
AS
USUAL with us, at the termination of the fighting (and
possibly even before) the War of the Generals will start.
The front lines are already emerging.
The
commanders of the land army blame the Chief-of-Staff and
the power-intoxicated Air Force, who promised to achieve
victory all by themselves. To bomb, bomb and bomb,
destroy roads, bridges, residential quarters and
villages, and - finito!
The followers of the Chief-of-Staff and the other Air
Force generals will blame the land forces, and especially
Northern Command. Their spokesmen in the media already
declare that this command is full of inept officers, who
have been shunted there because the North seemed a
backwater while the real action was going on in the South
(Gaza) and the Center (West Bank).
There
are already insinuations that the Chief of Northern
Command, General Udi Adam, was appointed to his job only
in homage to his father, General Kuti Adam, who was
killed in the First Lebanon War.
THE MUTUAL accusations are all quite right. This war is
plastered with military failures - in the air, on land
and on the sea. They are rooted in the terrible arrogance
in which we were brought up and which has become a part
of our national character. It is even more typical of the
army, and reaches its climax in the Air Force.
For years we have told each other that we have the
most-most-most army in the world. We have convinced not
only ourselves, but also Bush and the entire world. After
all, we did win an astounding victory in six days in
1967. As a result, when this time the army did not win a
huge victory in six days, everybody was astounded. Why,
what happened?
One of the declared aims of this war was the
rehabilitation of the Israeli army's deterrence power.
That really has not happened.
Thats
because the other side of the coin of arrogance is the
profound contempt for Arabs, an attitude that has already
led to severe military failures in the past. It's enough
to remember the Yom Kippur war. Now our soldiers are
learning the hard way that the "terrorists" are
highly motivated, tough fighters, not junkies dreaming of
"their" virgins in Paradise.
But
beyond arrogance and contempt for the opponent, there is
a basic military problem: it is just impossible to win a
war against guerillas. We have seen this in our 18-year
stay in Lebanon. Then we drew the unavoidable conclusion
and got out. True, without good sense, without an
agreement with the other side. (We don't speak with
terrorists, do we? - even if they are the dominant force
on the ground.) But we did get out.
God
knows what gave today's generals the unfounded
self-confidence to believe that they would win where
their predecessors failed so miserably. And most of all:
even the best army in the world cannot win a war that has
no clear aims. Karl von Clausewitz, the guru of military
science, pronounced that "war is nothing more than
the continuation of politics by other means". Olmert
and Peretz, two complete dilettantes, have turned this
inside out: "War is nothing more than the
continuation of the lack of policy by other means."
MILITARY
EXPERTS say that in order to succeed in war, there must
be (a) a clear aim, (b) an aim that is achievable, and
(c) the means necessary for achieving this aim.
All
these three conditions are lacking in this war. That is
clearly the fault of the political leadership. Therefore,
the main blame will be laid at the feet of the twins,
Olmert-Peretz. They have succumbed to the temptation of
the moment and dragged the state into a war, in a
decision that was hasty, unconsidered and reckless. As
Nehemia Strassler wrote in Haaretz: They could have
stopped after two or three days, when all the world
agreed that Hizbullah's provocation justified an Israeli
response, when nobody was yet doubting the capabilities
of the Israeli army. The operation would have looked
sensible, sober and proportional.
But
Olmert and Peretz could not stop. As greenhorns in
matters of war, they did not know that the boasts of the
generals cannot be relied on, that even the best military
plans are not worth the paper on which they are written,
that in war the unexpected must be expected, that nothing
is more temporary then the glory of war. They were
intoxicated by the war's popularity, egged on by a herd
of fawning journalists, driven out of their minds by
their own glory as War Leaders.
Olmert was roused by his own incredibly kitschy speeches,
which he rehearsed with his hangers-on. Peretz, so it
seems, stood in front of the mirror and already saw
himself as the next Prime Minister, Mister Security, a
Second Ben-Gurion.
And
so, like two village idiots, to the sound of drums and
bugles, they set off at the head of their March of Folly
straight towards political and military failure.It is
reasonable to assume that they will pay the price after
the war.
WHAT WILL come out of this whole mess?
No one talks anymore about eliminating Hizbullah or
disarming it and destroying all the rockets. That has
been forgotten long ago.
At the start of the war, the government furiously
rejected the idea of deploying an international force of
any kind along the border. The army believed that such a
force would not protect Israel, but only restrict its
freedom of action. Now, suddenly, the deployment of this
force has become the main aim of the campaign. The army
is continuing the operation solely in order to
"prepare the ground for the international
force", and Olmert declares that he will go on
fighting until it appears on the ground.
That is, of course, a sorry alibi, a ladder for getting
down from the high tree. The international force can be
deployed only in agreement with Hizbullah. No country
will send its soldiers to a place where they would have
to fight the locals. And everywhere in the area, the
local Shiite inhabitants will return to their villages -
including the Hizbullah underground fighters.
Further on, the force will also be totally dependent on
the agreement of Hizbullah. If a bomb explodes under a
bus full of French soldiers, a cry will go up in Paris:
bring our sons home. That is what happened when the US
Marines were bombed in Beirut.
The Germans, who shocked the world this week by opposing
the call for a cease-fire, certainly will not send
soldiers to the Israeli border That's just what they
need, to be obliged to shoot at Israeli soldiers.
And, most importantly, nothing will prevent
Hizbullah from launching their rockets over the heads of
the international force, any time they want to. What will
the international force do then? Conquer all the area up
to Beirut? And how will Israel respond?
Olmert
wants the force to control the Lebanese-Syrian border.
That, too, is illusory. That border goes around the
entire West and North of Lebanon. Anybody who wants to
smuggle weapons will stay away from the main roads, which
will be controlled by the international soldiers. He
will find hundreds of places along the border to do this.
With the proper bribe, one can do anything in Lebanon.
Therefore,
after the war, we will stand more or less in the same
place we were before we started this sorry adventure,
before the killing of almost a thousand Lebanese and
Israelis, before the eviction from their homes of more
than a million human beings, Israelis and Lebanese,
before the destruction of more than a thousand homes both
in Lebanon and Israel.
AFTER THE war, the enthusiasm will simmer down, the
inhabitants of the North will lick their wounds and the
army will start to investigate its failures. Everybody
will claim that he or she was against the war from the
first day on. Then the Day of Judgment will come.
The conclusion that presents itself is: kick out Olmert,
send Peretz packing and sack Halutz.
In order to embark on a new course, the only one that
will solve the problem: negotiations and peace with the
Palestinians, the Lebanese, the Syrians. And: with Hamas
and Hizbullah.
Because it's only with enemies that one makes peace.
|