The United States' attempt to impose on Israel "moral" constraints in the war, now that hostilities have resumed, has one implication: More IDF soldiers will be in harm's way and killed, God forbid.
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
If IDF soldiers enter the southern strip without prior and substantial air shaping operations, as was done in the northern part of the strip, they will encounter much greater resistance. If there is a lid on the fighting after several weeks, God forbid, as the Americans want, the option of "slow but steady" will be denied from the IDF; because fighting quickly in a built-up and densely populated area is the opposite of safe.
If we refrain from moving the ostensibly uninvolved population from the combat zones to a place where they are not fighting at the moment so that the IDF can concentrate its fighting against the enemy without harming and endangering "uninvolved" individuals, the meaning will again be clear: A cumbersome and much more dangerous movement of forces, and much more extensive use by Hamas of civilians as human shields. Hamas has already begun pushing the civilian population to UNRWA camps in the south, and if it was up to the organization, this is just the beginning.
The US insistence that Israel conduct itself differently in the renewed fighting, must be countered with a polite but firm rejection. I recall how Biden – after a persistent journalist tried to extract criticism from him regarding Israel's conduct in Gaza – responded: "I wonder what we would do if that were the case?". Biden was essentially asking what the US would do if it were the target of the Oct. 7 massacre.
And indeed, what would the Americans have done? Would they have endangered and sacrificed the lives of their soldiers? Or would they have evacuated the uninvolved individuals to a safer area so they could operate decisively, with less restraint (and also without a date certain for ending operations) against the real enemy?
According to the "Costs of War" project at Brown University, the wars that the United States has prosecuted as a result of the 9/11 attacks have claimed the lives of about 400,000 civilians directly and another about 3.5 million indirectly.
Considering the size of the populations of the US and Israel, the share of the population murdered in the October 7 massacre was 30 times greater than those killed on 9/11. In the wars in Afghanistan, Vietnam, and Iraq, many thousands were killed in bombings and combat, and hundreds of thousands more indirectly. Israel already capitulated once to American pressure by having fuel delivered to Gaza, thus maintaining the generators and air blowers used by Hamas as a lifeline in the tunnels. If it had been forced to emerge above ground, the fighting of our soldiers would have been easier and safer, and fewer soldiers would have been killed.
We are grateful for the US, but the additional demands it has made that constrict Israeli activity have to be rejected. Even if the whole world criticizes and condemns the IDF, one of the most ethical armies in the world, it is preferable to absorb 100 condemnations than to lose 100 soldiers. The IDF chief of staff explained to Secretary of State Atony Blinken that the IDF acts on the basis of "proportionality, distinction, and international law." The US does not need a chief of staff to know this. It also knows that Israel has never intentionally attacked uninvolved individuals.
The US demands are a product of the internal state of US politics, as the 2024 election heats up. It is also, at times, a result of a mistaken set of perceptions.
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories!
