Proportionate response

One on the major criticism on the Israeli operation in Lebanon was that it is, as define by Jacques Chirac ,"totally disproportionate". This demand for proportionate response become a mantra repeated by many diplomats and reporters.
Obviously nobody really bother to define what proportionate is. Trying to define what proportionate response might be will demonstrate that this is not only extremely vogue term but rarely executed. What kind of proportionate response will be if a country like, for example Afghanistan which is not developed technologically, will spread computer viruses that will paralyzed the US economy? What is appropriate response for the terror attack of 9/11 - destroying two towers in Afghanistan?
However even if we are cable to formulate the proper proportion would it be wise?
Proportionate response allowing the aggressor, many times now terrorist organizations, to decide when and how much to escalate the conflict, leaving the "responding" party only to react in the limits best suiting the aggressor. Similarly to setting "Red Lines" which allowing the aggressor to cross them in time suite them, proportionate response is not only completely vogue, it is unwise method.
blog comments powered by Disqus
Add New Comment
Viewing 4 Comments
Thanks. Your comment is awaiting approval by a moderator.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Second, Hezbulla continued to attack Israel and threaten its civilians life for the last 6 years - Lebanon and the UN did not do anything to stop this attacks and to enforce the UN resolution 1995.
My point was that it was for Hezbulla advantage to hold the Israeli north hostage for the last 6 years, keeping the fighting at the level comfortable for its goals. The demand from Israel not to use its own advantages to protect its citizens is immoral!
Could Israel handle this war differently? maybe. But it is easy to demand from the comfort and safety of being in England, or the USA.
And one last question- if it was your son that the Hezbulla took as hostage would you still think that his life isn't more than power plant? I doubt that very much.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
If the response has to be proportionate it give the aggressor, Hezbolla in our case, full control of the escalation of crisis. Why would a country agree to give its enemy this advantage?
As a bonus argument here is a little story:
The French, that criticized Israel for attacking the Lebanese Air-ports, destroyed the Ivory coast air ports and air force when they arrive to "keep the peace" - so I am a little bit careful when listening to criticism from European... :)
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Of course - they didn't. Trying to resuce a soldier is all well and good, but it doesn't justify (for example) destroying a power plant. That's disproportionate.
Nice site, by the way :)
Add New Comment
Trackbacks