Gaza…
You may have missed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu piece in the Wall Street Journal laying out conditions for an end to the Gaza War (absent Hamas’ surrender and liberation of all the hostages). In summary, his demands included an end to Hamas rule, the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip, and the deradicalization of the Palestinian population. He also said there would need to be a security belt around Gaza, new measures to monitor the entry of goods through Egypt into Gaza, and rejected the prospect of Palestinian Authority (PA) rule in Gaza.
In the category of an opening salvo, Netanyahu’s piece may have been good and fine for some. But as both a strategic and tactical matter, I (Dany) think it was a mistake. First, not all of his goals are achievable. As we discussed with Elliott Abrams last week, deradicalization — certainly as a short or medium term goal — is a pipe dream. Bibi analogizes the deradicalization demand to post-World War II Germany and Japan. But what is going to happen in Gaza will bear no resemblance to the nuclear attack on Japan or the complete destruction of Nazi Germany.
Second, some of his demands lack strategic intelligence. Of course, the PA is not currently suited to rule Gaza. (I talk about that here, if you’re interested in what needs to happen.) But you can’t beat something — the PA in this case — with nothing. Sure, it’s not Israel’s job to decide the best shape of Palestinian governance. But absent the articulation of conditions in which a Palestinian government could lead Gaza, Israel simply leaves the field open to the useless peace processors and antisemitic international bureaucrats that have dominated the cause of a two-state solution for decades. (Here’s a fine Elliott Abrams piece on the return of those peace processors.)
Last, Netanyahu’s demands about the demilitarization of Gaza are correct and reasonable. But absent any thought about what comes after that, under what conditions, with whose guarantees, the Israeli PM again leaves open the field to Israel’s opponents to define just how and under what conditions Gaza can be rid of the tens of thousands of weapons currently there.
A little Trump…
Your faithful podcasters were off this week. But given the Colorado Supreme Court decision to uphold the use of the 14th amendment of the Constitution to keep Donald Trump off the ballot (and the breaking Maine decision), we thought you might be interested in a look back at our conversation with John Yoo on the purposes, interpretations, and uses of the 14th amendment. (The substack covering that pod is here.) Long story short, in a normal world, the U.S. Supreme Court would bounce this dodgy bit of jurisprudence 9-0. That may not happen because… politics. But it will go down.
And just a little asterisk on this question: Part of what has driven us nuts over the last two years is the Trumpian contagion that has infected the left — namely the notion that the law is only the law if it serves “my” interests. It’s not that it wouldn’t be nice to see all of America’s political problems solved by the magical waving of a wand. But we’re not Never Neverland. Sorry.
Other odds and ends…
The New York Times had a piece on the systemic rape by Hamas of Israeli women. It is so graphic, so terrible, so heart rending, it’s very difficult to read. But with the piece’s appearance, one cannot help but be struck by the fact that the attack of October 7 happened almost three months ago. Had this happened to anyone but Jewish women — Israeli women — it would have been front page news. As it is, however, the Times’ investigation underscores just how pathetic women’s groups, the United Nations and the “believe all women” hypocrites really are.
Marc has a piece on The 10 Best Things Biden Did This Year. Inevitably, it will be followed by the 10 worst. We’ll discuss the whole shebang on next week’s pod.
Most importantly, we hope you had a brilliant Christmas week, and whether you celebrated or not, that you found time to spend with family, friends, pets and/or all of the above.