What role is did Washington Play in the Flotilla Event.
Game Theory in the Mid-east. By Stephen C. Sanders, June 14, 2010
The Parsha that we just recently read over Shabbos is the quintessential Parsha about tough love.
In the Parsha of Korach we have a rebellious faction lead by Korach coming to deliberately challenge Moshe’s authority over the people of Israel. The concept of how could Korach lead a rebellion such as this after all the great miracles that G-d has done for the Jewish people has been beaten to death by Rabbis of days gone by, so naturally I will not even bother to discuss these ideas.
I however have always looked at this particular parsha from an entirely different angle. Did we not just learn in the previous parsha that G-d has issued a decree the the newly formed nation of Israel is destined to wonder in the desert for 40 years, and then die there.
When we take into account the decree that was just set upon the Jewish people to wonder in the desert for 40 years, and never move into the land that G-d swore to their ancestors, then we can understand some of the inner motivation of the characters in this drama.
As a matter of fact Chazal (A term used to collectively refer to the massive body of commentary which is universally accepted as authoritative by orthodox Jews) tell us that if there was a ever an auspicious or righteous time for a rebellion, this certainly was the time. The reason of course being that G-d wants us to fight, even against great adversity to accomplish our G-d given purpose.
An essential component of the identification of the Jewish people after G-d enacted great signs and wonders as he pulled out the Jewish nation from within the midst of Egypt, was for the Jewish people to go up, into the land of Israel, conquering the existing nations that were residing there, and to settle the land eternally as the nation of G-d’s chosen people, to live in the land selected by G-d for the Jewish people.
An essential component of the identification of the Jewish people after G-d enacted great signs and wonders as he pulled out the Jewish nation from within the midst of Egypt, was for the Jewish people to go up, into the land of Israel, conquering the existing nations that were residing there, and to settle the land eternally as the nation of G-d’s chosen people, to live in the land selected by G-d for the Jewish people.
G-d entrusted the Jewish people to have this piece of land, known as Israel to be their eternal home. Bringing in issues related “the Biblical borders” and then the 1948 borders, and then the 1967 borders are all nice ideas, however now that Israel has survived numerous attacks designed to destroy it, it must now act in it’s own best interest.
If conditions are ever expected to improve in the land of Israel the author of this post believe the following things or conditions must be enabled or acted upon:
Condition number one of Israel acting in its own best interest, as well as the best interest of the world is very simple and might even sound familiar by now:
1) For The Sake Of World Peace Israel Must No Longer Cede Land to Her Enemies
This is a link to Facebook Group that you can join to support this cause.
Condition number two concerns a long time practice of a policy of appeasement from the nation of Israel, the nation of and for the Jewish People:
2) Never Again Should Israel Endanger Jews to Placate Public Opinion!
Antoher Facebook Group you can join to support the cause.
Finally if Israel is unwilling to learn from the errors of it’s past, it will forever be doomed to repeat them. Game theory clearly shows that if a predictable response to a specific stimulus will always be the normal reaction, then the opponent will always use the very same tactic to gain the desired result.
If acts of aggression on the part of the enemies of Israel will always be met with by some level of concession on the part of Israel, then game theory teaches us that the enemies of Israel will always attempt to obtain the same result using the same technique. The current Flotilla incident proves this to be true beyond a shadow of a doubt.
3) Condition number three Israel must learn from it’s mistakes and always seek to restore the imbalance created by it’s strategic error.
The disengagement from Gush Katif was a horrible experiment gone wrong!
Apparently the buffer zone represented by a living border between Israel and Gaza was quite a significant and important and important stabilizing factor in the delicate peace equation of Israel in relation to Gaza.
Finally if Israel is unwilling to learn from the errors of it’s past, it will forever be doomed to repeat them. Game theory clearly shows that if a predictable response to a specific stimulus will always be the normal reaction, then the opponent will always use the very same tactic to gain the desired result.
If acts of aggression on the part of the enemies of Israel will always be met with by some level of concession on the part of Israel, then game theory teaches us that the enemies of Israel will always attempt to obtain the same result using the same technique.
The current Flotilla incident proves this to be true. The flotilla event was not simply a method being utilized to bring in humanitarian aid to Gaza. The Flotilla event was a specific action taken against Israel with the specific intention to weaken the blockade.
Therefore if Israel wants the it’s enemies to stop using acts of aggression against Israel then Israel needs to the change the game by changing it’s response. In other words the proper game theory reaction to the recent act of aggression in the Flotilla incident must be accompanied by some loss of privilege for the enemies of Israel.
For example it does seem as if the desired result of the Flotilla event was specifically accomplished that is the weakening of the joint Egypt and Israeli Naval blockade of Gaza has been accomplished, however it also may have cost the enemies a very dear cost. For example the cost to the faction which initiated the event is that the commander in Chief of the US armed forces may no longer be allowed such free reign in matters concerning diplomacy in the Mid-East.
If the people of the United States understand game theory in the Mid-East well enough to understand that it was the US President’s posture as having only lukewarm relations with the nation of Israel as a matter of foreign policy, that allowed and perhaps even advanced the agenda of the Flotilla, and the role that Turkey played in it’s enactment.
If indeed there was some theoretical gain on the part of the US in courting some sort of diplomatic relationship with Turkey, then the US President can not simply blame Israel for it’s deterioration because the US played in role in the action by exhibiting a cooling of a previously strong bond with Israel. It specifically was this cooling off that allowed Turkey to play such a strong role in this Flotilla action. If Turkey felt that it would be met with sanctions from the US for taking such a strong lead in the Flotilla incident, then perhaps it might not have ever opted to do so.
The conclusion of this thesis is that if Israel wants to stop the violence that is currently being used as a weapon against Israel to obtain concessions, then it must stop giving concessions to their enemy as the expected reward for aggression. Alternatively if because of the real politics of the situation it becomes impossible to maintain is current hard line, for example in the Naval Blockade, then it must additionally seek some sort of compensation in the form of some significant and quantifiable penalty for it’s opponent. It is my belief that the penalty may have already been enacted in some sort of subtle way, however it is my belief that this penalty is already affecting the enemies of Israel, and it is us to Israel, to use the momentum of this diplomatic victory with regards to the US and Turkey to it’s best advantage.
Stephen C. (Aharon Moshe) Sanders
June 14, 2010, 5:14Am EST