Dove (per ora) l'unilateralismo ha fallito

Riprendendo le ruminazioni sul fallimento dell'unilateralismo...
Nessuno poteva credere (anche se io l'ho sperato) che i ritiri portassero
di per sé la pace. Con una nebulosa terrorista come controparte, l'attesa era
francamente eccessiva.

L'unilateralismo doveva servire ad assicurarsi confini più difendibili, oltre a
diritto e consenso per rispondere agli attacchi. Non sono gli attacchi di razzi
che hanno colpito questa politica, ma il ritardo della risposta di Olmert. Che
ora sta faticosmente (e a caro prezzo) cercndo di ricostruire credibilità e
consenso.

Yossi Klein Halevi su "The New Republic"
Those of us who have supported unilateralism didn't expect a quiet border in
return for our withdrawal but simply the creation of a border from which we
could more vigorously defend ourselves, with greater domestic consensus and
international understanding. The anticipated outcome, then, wasn't an illusory
peace but a more effective way to fight the war. The question wasn't whether
Hamas or Hezbollah would forswear aggression but whether Israel would act with
appropriate vigor to their continued aggression.

So it wasn't the rocket attacks that were a blow to the unilateralist camp, but
rather Israel's tepid responses to those attacks. If unilateralists made a
mistake, it was in believing our political leaders--including Ariel Sharon and
Ehud Olmert--when they promised a policy of zero tolerance against any attacks
emanating from Gaza after Israel's withdrawal. That policy was not
implemented--until two weeks ago. Now, belatedly, the Olmert government is
trying to regain something of its lost credibility, and that is the real meaning
of this initial phase of the war, both in Gaza and in Lebanon.

Yossi Klein Halevi is a foreign correspondent for The New Republic and senior
fellow of the Shalem Center in Jerusalem.

Technorati tags.

gaza
hezbollah
israele
israel at war
libano