Skip to main content

View Diary: SoS Hillary Clinton and Egyptian Foreign Minister Announce Cease-Fire Between Hamas and Israel (163 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If the restrictions are lifted (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jrooth, corvo, poco

    to an extent sufficient to permit real economic development in Gaza, that will indeed be hugely positive. I doubt we'll be seeing that: what will likely happen is a repetition of previous border closure 'easings' that improve the quality of life somewhat, but without permitting the economy to function properly. But of course how it pans out is not set in stone: it will depend on how much pressure is applied to Israel, via other governments, by people like us.

    On borders, I'd recommend looking at this map (scroll down). We don't lack a solution, we just need to get Israel to accept it.

    •  Absence of rocket fire would be a big step (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      askew

      A. Israel is legitimately upset about it.
      B. It's given them a good reason to not even consider border negotiations.

      People have always claimed that the attacks happen because the Palestinians lack a voice in the process. They have one now. It's time for them to stop.

      •  The historical record (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo, wu ming, poco, Tonedevil

        doesn't support this. In 2008 there was a ceasefire that held for some six months. In exchange Israel was supposed to ease or end the blockade, but didn't. Nonetheless the ceasefire held and rockets reduced to virtually zero. What happened? Israel violated the truce, rejected repeated offers to renew it in exchange for an end to the siege, and then launched Operation Cast Lead in December. So, Israel hasn't maintained the siege because of the rockets. It has maintained it despite the fact that by ending it it could have virtually eliminated the rockets a long time ago.

        There are two ways to respond to rocket fire, political and military. Politically, Israel could respond by ending the grievances that cause it, namely the siege and the occupation, both of which are illegitimate in any case. But Israel isn't prepared to do that, because it rejects the international consensus for resolving the conflict. And so, repeatedly, it goes for the military option, misleadingly describing it as defensive.

        "People have always claimed that the attacks happen because the Palestinians lack a voice in the process."
        Really? I haven't heard that. Seems much more plausible to think that the rockets occur against the backdrop of enforced economic deprivation, political unfreedom and military domination by Israel.

        Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but this ceasefire doesn't propose an end to the diplomatic boycott of Hamas, does it?

      •  (Though of course, I agree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo, poco

        that an end to Palestinian rocket fire and to Israeli violence in Gaza is hugely welcome).

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (136)
  • Community (67)
  • Elections (26)
  • Environment (25)
  • Culture (24)
  • Media (23)
  • Science (22)
  • Law (22)
  • Civil Rights (22)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (21)
  • Josh Duggar (20)
  • Labor (19)
  • Economy (19)
  • Marriage Equality (17)
  • Rescued (17)
  • Ireland (17)
  • Memorial Day (16)
  • Bernie Sanders (16)
  • Republicans (16)
  • Education (16)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site