Israel at War—Cease the Cease Fire

The Editors of the Wall Street Journal discuss the increasing pressure being placed on Israel from Joe Biden and Anthony Blinken who are, in effect, doing the bidding of the growing hard-Left, pro-Hamas segment of the Democratic party.

Mr. Blinken is adamant: It must be nothing like the operation in north Gaza. The Secretary of State said he “underscored” to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “the imperative to the United States that the massive loss of civilian life and displacement of the scale we saw in northern Gaza not be repeated in the south.” He said Israel must take “more effective steps to protect the lives of civilians.”

The best way to save civilians is to get them far from urban combat zones, away from Hamas strongholds like the city of Khan Younis. But Mr. Blinken demands “avoiding further significant displacement of civilians inside of Gaza.” Instead, he called on Israel to create “safe zones” for civilians near the fighting.

But what should Israel do when Hamas positions itself in those zones? That’s how it used hospitals and schools in the north. Could Israel attack Hamas in those sanctuaries?

Mr. Blinken tried to close that door, too. Protecting civilians “means avoiding damage to life-critical infrastructure like hospitals,” he said. “Intent matters, but so does the result.”

If Israel must do more to protect civilians but can’t evacuate them and can’t hit Hamas when it hides in key civilian infrastructure and safe zones, how is it to fight at all? It could try a methodical, grinding campaign to force Hamas into the open. But Mr. Blinken demands Israel keep fuel flowing—precisely what Hamas needs to hunker down in its tunnels. That leaves relying on the infantry, at great cost in Israeli lives.

As I discussed on the very first day of Israel at War, the West, influenced by the fantasy thinking of leftist elites, always steps in to stop Israel from destroying the Muslim extremists (and it always is Muslim extremists) who want to obliterate the State of Israel. They're now doing it yet again. Biden and Blinken aren't pro-Hamas (yet) but their stated restrictions will save an Islamist death cult and will set the stage for further atrocities down the road.

Eitan Fischberger comments:

The obvious allure of the ceasefire lies in its immediate cessation of hostilities. But this is merely a facade of progress, a superficial calm that does not address the core of the conflict: Hamas’s genocidal intentions for Israel, which it has repeatedly stated in its founding charter and public statements, and which it acted upon in grisly fashion on October 7, on a scale never before achieved.

Indeed, as Israel has painfully learned time and again, ceasefires do more than just allow problems to continue to fester: they provide Hamas with invaluable opportunities to regroup, rearm, and strengthen its military capabilities. Even the term “ceasefire” is a misnomer, as Hamas has consistently violated such pauses to keep up its campaign of terror over the years. On November 30, for example, Hamas gunmen opened fire at a bus stop in Jerusalem, murdering three innocent people in the process. Later that evening, Hamas resumed launching indiscriminate rockets at Israel’s cities, forcing the Israeli military to respond. As the adage goes, “We cease. They fire.”

... The hostages-for-terrorists framework [for the cease fire] brings with it immense cognitive dissonance. While it yields obvious and immediate benefits for Israel, it also establishes a dangerous precedent, as it gives Hamas an incentive to take new people hostage when hostilities resume. And now that Israel has established the pattern in which it will agree to ceasefires in exchange for hostages, Hamas will doubtless see how far it can stretch the line. Thus, Israel will likely see diminishing returns to this approach—fewer hostages returned in exchange for longer ceasefires and larger quantities of fuel entering Gaza.

On a broader military level, agreeing to the type of long-term ceasefire that some in the West envision and failing to vanquish Hamas would pose an existential danger to Israel, as it will embolden Iran and its other proxies like Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad to heed Hamas’s example and launch deadly attacks against Israel. Additionally, it would cement Qatar as an indispensable player in any enduring solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and amplify the monarchy’s already outsize influence in international matters, despite its being largely responsible for financing and legitimizing Hamas in the West.

Given these considerations, it’s disturbing that the Biden administration would tacitly hint at reduced American support unless Israel achieves the nearly impossible goal of swiftly eliminating Hamas with minimal civilian casualties. A diplomatic shift like this would also galvanize Iranian proxies across the Middle East to intensify their attacks on American troops, including in Syria and the Gulf.

It might be "disturbing" that a Democrat administration would "hint at reduced American support" for Israel, but it is hardly surprising. 

After all, in some ways another 'hostage' situation is on-going. The old Democratic party is now being held hostage by hard-left, pro-Hamas members of Congress, by leftist useful idiots among their college age and progressive supporters, and by a substantial percentage of the propaganda media. The 'cease fire' that the old school Democrats seek with these hard left Democrats requires that Israel is prohibited from destroying Hamas.

A long time ago, a old school Democrat Icon and President named John F. Kennedy wrote a book entitled Profiles in Courage. Today, "courage" might be defined by a Democrat leader who has the balls to push back against the hard-left wing of the party and support Israel unequivocally as it destroys an Islamist death cult. There's very little Democrat courage in evidence at the moment.

UPDATE:

Chants of "ceasefire" are essentially chants that advocate a Hamas "victory." @AGHamilton29 posts this: