Professor Krauss Writes of the Perils of Disengagement in Gaza
Professor Michael Krauss writes that "disengagement cannot be a one-way street. There must be clear incentives for positive behavior and consequences for irresponsibility. The consequences of terror must be so terrible as to frighten the terror masters. If Hamas doesn't get this, Gaza must be firmly reoccupied. Otherwise, we are all sold short" in a National Review Online op-ed examining the question of disengagement from
Gaza and its consequences for the region.
Break It Off? Was disengagement from Gaza a mistake?, National Review Online, July 11, 2006.
By Michael I. Krauss and J. Peter Pham.
"Serious scholars have long argued that terrorism is best understood in terms of its strategic function. The motivations of individual terrorists — especially those of the suicide variety — may be inscrutable, but the strategic goals of their handlers is quite comprehensible. Most terrorists don't act alone. Whatever his background and circumstances, he was likely recruited, indoctrinated, and deployed by some organization with a political agenda. In the current crisis in Gaza, both with respect to the kidnapping of Cpl. Shalit and the Qassam attacks, that organization has a name: Hamas. Even if one accepts the widely propagated view that terrorists are driven by an irrational despair to lash out, it does not follow that this holds true for those (the Hamas leadership) who direct them. The masterminds of terror have strategic aims; they are subject to deterrence if the cost of their operations redounds on them in the form of unsustainable damage."