Learning the Gaza lesson

Op-ed: Gaza Strip withdrawal taught us that there’s no substitute for control of territory

Reuters | Published: 12.24.10, 14:05

A short time after the Gaza disengagement in 2005, then-IDF Chief of Staff and current-day Kadima member Dan Halutz declared that “at the end of the day we shall have an answer to the Qassams.”

Five years have passed since then, yet the end of the day is late in coming. For the time being, there is no answer to the Qassam rockets. It also doesn’t seem like we’ll have an answer anytime soon.

Meanwhile, the Iron Dome anti-missile venture is slowly emerging as an expensive screw-up. It is unable to intercept primitive mortar shells and it is also not built to stop upgraded missiles. Besides, seems like it’s aimed at protecting military bases more than it is meant to protect population centers.

When IDF forces were deployed on the outskirts of Gaza City and Rafah, western Negev residents were much safer and happier. Yet one day the State of Israel decided to get out of there, because it was unpleasant to deal with stone throwers, instead betting on Iron Domes.

Instead of controlling the territory, Israel set up fences around it.

Experts say that the US military industry has much better answers to missiles. However, at this time already the IDF possesses many great weapons made in the America, yet they have not helped the military resolve the Gaza problem.

Again, we are learning the hard way that there are no technological substitutes to primitive control of territory; in fact, we’re not really learning.

There are still many geniuses around here who propose that we adopt the Gaza model in Judea and Samaria as well and get out of there. For the sake of our future, it would be best to make these people retire already.