It?s impossible to evaluate the success or failure of a war and all its ramifications at an early stage, but the American military deserves credit for its overall approach to the war in Iraq so far.
Many pros and cons have been expressed over the reasons for this war and the effects it could have. Some opponents expect the sky to fall in, while some supporters come close to claiming that the war will transform the Middle East into Utopia.
Whatever the merits of the war, someone at the Pentagon has been using his brains, and these are lessons that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon should heed.
So far, the United States military has proven that their strategists have at least thought out the initial stages of the war extensively, and so far the military has demonstrated considerable public relations savvy in at least minimizing criticism of the way the war is being waged. Even those with reservations about the war or who are opposed to it have to be impressed with the military?s performance.
No matter how much one supports Israel, as I do, one has to concede that Sharon?s approach to the war is hardly an example of long-range planning and that he takes steps needlessly antagonizing people in America and Europe. I am confused by much of Sharon?s handling of the war.
When someone criticizes Israeli military actions, the rule for me is that I don?t try to defend specific actions unless I?m certain about my answer. Usually, my stock response is simple: The Arabs wanted a war, and now they have it. Live with it.
I?m not the first one to complain about Israel?s sense of public relations. A Jewish newspaper columnist with whom I often disagree wrote recently that Israelis are unperturbed by perception. However, perception is important: Why antagonize people who might be open to helping you? Why give anti-Semites a ready excuse?
As a Jew in America, I have been feeling the heat, though not nearly as badly as Jews in Europe.
I know I am not in Israel, but here are a few rough suggestions that Israeli authorities may wish to apply to their current situation:
1) Sharply criticize the actions of other groups or individuals that inflame this conflict. Israel has been very subdued about the United Nations permitting militants to operate in refugee camps. Israel has been limited in acting against foreigners who disrupt military activities. Their actions should not be tolerated as they endanger people?s lives.
2) Call people on their lies and blind accusations each time. For example, friends of Rachel Corrie insisted she was murdered before the case was fully investigated. Israeli officials could have castigated these outsiders for judging the bulldozer operator guilty before all the facts could be checked out. They left the concept of innocent-until-proven-guilty back home.
3) Be more selective in targeting for retaliations. Whenever the Israeli military occupies an Arab town or shells an area, the action is usually followed by more terrorist acts. At least some of these military actions appear to have proved fruitless in routing terrorists. In one instance, it sounded as if militants who used a hilltop in Hebron had cleared out by the time the military shelled the area. What is the point of endangering civilians when there is a minimal chance of finding terrorists? However, it would be much more effective to make incursions only in areas where there is probable cause to find terrorists.
4) Wait a few days before engaging in retaliation when possible. When Israelis are killed in a suicide bombing, give it a few days to let the shock and horror sink in for Americans and Europeans, so by the time Israel retaliates, Westerners might even be cheering. Previously, the Israeli Defense Forces often retaliated immediately. In terms of news cycles, the first-day coverage in the press would focus not on the original terrorist act, but on the retaliation. Who looks like the bad guy in such an instance?
5) Review military procedures. There have been cases of excessive force and lapses in intelligence gathering, which led to unnecessary deaths.
I know it sounds grisly to propose changes for the sake of public relations, but the Arabs have no compunction about exploiting the conflict to win support from people. Two can play that game.
--------------------------------------------------------
Bruce S. Ticker is a freelance writer and former journalist living in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He can be reached at Brucetic@aol.com.
************
Spend Passover with Arutz Sheva at a resort in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or Kfar Pines (near Hadera). Click here for info.
Many pros and cons have been expressed over the reasons for this war and the effects it could have. Some opponents expect the sky to fall in, while some supporters come close to claiming that the war will transform the Middle East into Utopia.
Whatever the merits of the war, someone at the Pentagon has been using his brains, and these are lessons that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon should heed.
So far, the United States military has proven that their strategists have at least thought out the initial stages of the war extensively, and so far the military has demonstrated considerable public relations savvy in at least minimizing criticism of the way the war is being waged. Even those with reservations about the war or who are opposed to it have to be impressed with the military?s performance.
No matter how much one supports Israel, as I do, one has to concede that Sharon?s approach to the war is hardly an example of long-range planning and that he takes steps needlessly antagonizing people in America and Europe. I am confused by much of Sharon?s handling of the war.
When someone criticizes Israeli military actions, the rule for me is that I don?t try to defend specific actions unless I?m certain about my answer. Usually, my stock response is simple: The Arabs wanted a war, and now they have it. Live with it.
I?m not the first one to complain about Israel?s sense of public relations. A Jewish newspaper columnist with whom I often disagree wrote recently that Israelis are unperturbed by perception. However, perception is important: Why antagonize people who might be open to helping you? Why give anti-Semites a ready excuse?
As a Jew in America, I have been feeling the heat, though not nearly as badly as Jews in Europe.
I know I am not in Israel, but here are a few rough suggestions that Israeli authorities may wish to apply to their current situation:
1) Sharply criticize the actions of other groups or individuals that inflame this conflict. Israel has been very subdued about the United Nations permitting militants to operate in refugee camps. Israel has been limited in acting against foreigners who disrupt military activities. Their actions should not be tolerated as they endanger people?s lives.
2) Call people on their lies and blind accusations each time. For example, friends of Rachel Corrie insisted she was murdered before the case was fully investigated. Israeli officials could have castigated these outsiders for judging the bulldozer operator guilty before all the facts could be checked out. They left the concept of innocent-until-proven-guilty back home.
3) Be more selective in targeting for retaliations. Whenever the Israeli military occupies an Arab town or shells an area, the action is usually followed by more terrorist acts. At least some of these military actions appear to have proved fruitless in routing terrorists. In one instance, it sounded as if militants who used a hilltop in Hebron had cleared out by the time the military shelled the area. What is the point of endangering civilians when there is a minimal chance of finding terrorists? However, it would be much more effective to make incursions only in areas where there is probable cause to find terrorists.
4) Wait a few days before engaging in retaliation when possible. When Israelis are killed in a suicide bombing, give it a few days to let the shock and horror sink in for Americans and Europeans, so by the time Israel retaliates, Westerners might even be cheering. Previously, the Israeli Defense Forces often retaliated immediately. In terms of news cycles, the first-day coverage in the press would focus not on the original terrorist act, but on the retaliation. Who looks like the bad guy in such an instance?
5) Review military procedures. There have been cases of excessive force and lapses in intelligence gathering, which led to unnecessary deaths.
I know it sounds grisly to propose changes for the sake of public relations, but the Arabs have no compunction about exploiting the conflict to win support from people. Two can play that game.
--------------------------------------------------------
Bruce S. Ticker is a freelance writer and former journalist living in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He can be reached at Brucetic@aol.com.
************
Spend Passover with Arutz Sheva at a resort in Jerusalem, Tel Aviv or Kfar Pines (near Hadera). Click here for info.