23.11.03
US seeks Israeli advice on Iraq occupation
Something that readers of this site (all 2 of them) are already well aware of: the LA Times reports that the US military has sought advice from Israel on occupation techniques and strategies.
The article contains some apologetic passages:
As the article notes, Israel's tactics are under fire within Israel itself. The question is: why on earth would the US military want to adopt tactics that will make the entire population under occupation hate the occupying force? Wouldn't this promote violent resistance? In the Palestinian case, a lack of suitable weapons prevents more effective armed resistance. Iraqi guerillas, with access to shoulder-fired SAMs, large quantities of explosives, and heavy weapons, do not suffer this handicap. The US military might find out that tactics that haven't worked in Palestine will be even more counterproductive in Iraq.
Something that readers of this site (all 2 of them) are already well aware of: the LA Times reports that the US military has sought advice from Israel on occupation techniques and strategies.
The article contains some apologetic passages:
U.S. officials were particularly interested in the "balancing act" that Israeli officials say they have tried to pursue between fighting armed groups and trying to spare civilians during decades of patrolling the occupied territories.Yes, that famous Israeli "balancing act", whereby collective punishment, ruthless house demolitions, and thousands of noncombatants killed over the past three years can be magically redefined as "sparing civilians".
Much of the information shared with the U.S. involves the defensive tactics and training that Israel has constantly updated for its troops and police in the occupied territories, where they are familiar not only with the most current tactics and code of ethics but the international laws that apply as well, the two Israeli officials said.Considering that groups like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty, and even the State Department, regularly criticize the Israeli army for its gross breaches of international law, it would appear that this training is a little deficient.
As the article notes, Israel's tactics are under fire within Israel itself. The question is: why on earth would the US military want to adopt tactics that will make the entire population under occupation hate the occupying force? Wouldn't this promote violent resistance? In the Palestinian case, a lack of suitable weapons prevents more effective armed resistance. Iraqi guerillas, with access to shoulder-fired SAMs, large quantities of explosives, and heavy weapons, do not suffer this handicap. The US military might find out that tactics that haven't worked in Palestine will be even more counterproductive in Iraq.
