Breaking News! The PA and Hamas issued the
following joint statement this morning, 10 am in Ramallah.
We state clearly that we
recognize the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state and to live in peace
in this region. We commit ourselves to peaceful coexistence conditional upon
the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the West Bank, the removal of checkpoints
and the establishment of normal cross-border relationships
that encourage trade and cultural exchange. This is further conditional on the
satisfactory settlement of the harm caused by the settlement of Israelis in the
West Bank and the cessation of all settlement activity. In return we offer the
following guarantees of our peaceful intent.[whereupon followed a list of
specific proposals for joint monitoring of military and terrorist activities
and reporting and redress procedures].
Just kidding
===============================================================
This awful event [the videotaped beheading
of an American journalist] prompts me to agonize over something that is in my
mind 24/7 these days.
Given the undeniably escalating threat of Islamist terrorism - ISIS, Boco
Haram, Hamas, and I am sure many others whose names I do not know, the question
arises as to what the best response politically, militarily, economically, is.
Libertarianism inclines strongly towards total non-engagement on a state level
- though I imagine it would defend the right of private individuals in
defending victims who are attacked, murdered, raped, etc. Libertarians and
others will also argue, correctly in my view, that in many (most, all?) cases,
the gain in power of these barbarians is a direct and/or indirect result of our
and our allies' past cumulative military adventures - the horrible unintended
consequences of war, even "defensive" war - the most obvious example
being the rise of ISIS as a result of the disastrous invasion of Iraq, which
has left the country inestimably worse off than under Saddam Hussein.
Be that as it may, how can we know how things would have been in the absence of
such intervention. I recall when asking this question before some responses
pointing toward situations suggesting that it was only when and after such
intervention that the terrorists gained any traction. Not decisive, but
suggestive. Still, there remain many who absolutely deny that the power of the
Islamists depends on the misdeeds of the west. I confess to being at a loss on
this. I just don't know and I don't know know how anyone can know. And related
to this, I don't know what "we" ought to do regardless of the the
"why" - given where we are now, is it preferable (at the level of the
government) to ignore the threats or to somehow react to them. No doubt we have
a huge public choice problem - incentive and knowledge problems - the
belligerent personalities tend to take things over and mess them up big time. A
real dilemma.
About one thing I feel sure. These are barbarians who have taken terror and
violence to a new level - their utility functions include pleasure from the
suffering of others - they are unmitigated sadists - worse even than the
industrialized killers of the Nazi state. They need to be taken at their word
and not underestimated.
