REALITY VS. DOGMA IN ISRAEL'S WAR ON TERROR AND OUR OWN

This column from Jonathan Chait takes apart one of the most deceiving and dangerous nostrums about Israel's war against terror - that Israeli military responses to Palestinian terror are ineffective in increasing Israeli security.

When intelligent people (like the Times editors) believe something so wildly wrong, it's usually because they're in the grip of a theory that helps them to ignore real-world evidence. In this case, the theory is that Palestinians resort to terrorism out of despair. The corollary to this theory is that all Israeli military action will inevitably backfire since it simply makes Palestinians more desperate and angry. For those who believe this—a group consisting of most liberal newspaper editors, the foreign policy establishment, and virtually the entire outside world­—the case against Israeli military action (such as the recent one in the West Bank) is simply an a priori truth.

The problem as Chait notes is that this theory runs smack against the historical record:

Palestinian terrorism does not result from Israel's occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, but from Israel's existence. Palestinian terrorism long predates the 1967 occupation; the Palestine Liberation Organization was formed in 1964, three years earlier. But hasn't the more recent phenomenon of suicide bombing come about because of long-simmering Palestinian despair? Not really. Suicide bombings started only after the 1993 Oslo Accords, which provided Palestinians with their best opportunity for a state. They intensified massively after Israel withdrew from Lebanon and offered a series of generous territorial concessions. If anything, then, history suggests that Palestinian violence results not from desperation but from hope.

Case in point, the Spring 1996 terror offernsive, which I personally experienced, which came at high point for the Olso process: Shimon Peres was prime minister, the Israeli right was discredited from the Rabin assasination, and the Israeli army had for the first time withdrawn from all West Bank cities but Hebron. Yet this period experienced far more terror than the latter stages of the obstructionist Netanyahu government.

As Chait points out, despair is not the limiting factor in determining the amount of terror. Despite the record of the United Nations, there are plenty of people on this earth far more wretched, far more abandoned than the Palestinians. Why have they not brought equivalent terror to their oppressors? Simple - because they can't.

[T]he number of suicide attacks depends upon more factors than simply the number of willing martyrs. Successful suicide bombings require plenty of other ingredients: the capacity to get past Israeli security (which necessitates training and, probably, fake identification); the ability to fashion hidden explosive devices; and the explosives themselves. Yes, some bombers use homemade ingredients, but they're far less effective than the professional-grade stuff—such as the explosives that the Palestinian Authority imported from Iran. The choke-point in the production line is almost certainly not the number of volunteers. It's the other ingredients. And it's those ingredients Israel has tried to cut off, by arresting or killing terrorist leaders, seizing bomb-making equipment, and sealing off its borders.

The Israeli experience has major implications for the American war on terror. Despair is not the sole source of global Islamic terror - the critical driving forces are it religious fundamentalism, oil wealth, and tacit and explicit state support. A vigorous American military response that targets terror leaders, deprives of them of bases of operation, funds, and eliminates state support for their organizations has and will continue to put a dent into Islamist terror. Of course as long as there are angry religious fanatics with access to explosives, such terror can not be eliminated - but it can be reduced and contained.

This is not to say that the demand side of the question is not important - we need to reduce the misery that breeds support for terror. However, the supply side can be dealt with immediately and should. Just as Israel could not allow the infrastructure of Palestinian terror to remain, we can ill afford to leave the infrastructure of global Islamist terror in place while we wait to win the hearts and minds of the Muslim world. Finally, the favorite solution of the despair theorists - appeasement - will not lead to a reduction in the demand for terror. Appeasing Hamas or Arafat will not create a thriving Palestinian economy and polity. Nor will appeasing Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, the mullahs of Iran and the Saudis create a thriving, free Islamic world. Until then, there will be despair - and those who will seek to exploit it. They can not be negotiated with, or appeased - they must be defeated.