現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> 戦争４１ > 1251.html
★阿修羅♪
|
現在地 HOME > 掲示板
> 戦争４１ > 1251.html
★阿修羅♪
|
|
同じくSunday Heraldから。
イスラエル軍の中に、パレスチナ人への攻撃を拒否する兵士が増えてきているらしい。
あくまで強硬路線を強いる政権への反感を持つ者も少なくないようで
政権と軍との関係は危機ポイントにあるかもしれないとの記事。
Newsquest (Sunday Herald)
http://ww1.sundayherald.com/
http://ww1.sundayherald.com/37774
Is Israel losing its army?
With pilots refusing to attack Palestine, the top brass briefing against hard-line policies and outrage at conscription, the Israeli army is at crisis point. By Robert Tait in Jerusalem
FOR more than half a century it has been a symbol of invincibility and the bedrock of the Jewish state. But now Israel’s much-vaunted army has been riven by a row with the political establishment over how to deal with the Palestinians.
So deep run the divisions, seasoned observers believe, that they provide a worrying harbinger for the disintegration of the army, an institution long regarded as the guardian of Israel’s existence, and even of Israeli society itself.
Tensions between the army and the right-wing coalition of Ariel Sharon, Israel’s Prime Minister, burst into the open after the army chief of staff, Lieutenant-General Moshe Ya’alon, gave what was intended to be an off-the-record briefing to three senior Israeli journalists last week. The resulting reports in Israel’s three main daily newspapers amounted to a devastating critique of policy in the occupied territories of Gaza and the West Bank.
Attributed to “senior military sources”, the articles cited deep unhappiness among the military’s top brass over the Israeli cabinet’s refusal to lift restrictions that would ease the lives of ordinary Palestinians. The present policy, characterised by closures and curfews and exacerbated by seizures of Palestinian land to build a so-called “security fence” through the West Bank, risked provoking an unprecedented explosion in the territories, the warnings said. In a particularly damning comment, the political leadership was accused of taking “tactical decisions” that run “contrary to our strategic interest”.
The criticism even extended to partly blaming the government for the downfall of the reform- minded Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas two months ago because of a “stingy” refusal to make more concessions. It also condemned September’s decision to “remove” Yasser Arafat from his leadership position in the Palestinian Authority – which only served to restore Arafat’s standing among his own people, in the military’s view.
As well as targeting Sharon, the remarks added up to a withering assault on defence minister Shaul Mofaz, who has staunchly opposed lifting restrictions on the territories on the grounds that they would increase the risk of suicide attacks.
As it became clear that the author of the criticisms was the chief of staff himself, Sharon and Mofaz moved into overdrive. Sharon’s office reported that he was “furious” and wanted Ya’alon fired, while Mofaz summoned his military underling to explain himself.
Yet, with the row assuming cacophonic proportions even by Israeli standards, it has become clear that Ya’alon’s observations have exposed a degree of alienation on the part of the army that neither the deployment of political spin nor the pulling of rank can conceal.
They go to the core of a growing belief in Israel that the hardline policy against the Palestinians has failed and that, with the government’s failure to stop “terrorism” and tackle a persistent economic crisis, the nation is dangerously adrift.
That Ya’alon’s comments characterise a deeper malaise are highlighted by his own credentials as a renowned hawk who once advocated a military crackdown to teach the Palestinians a psychological lesson that Israel is “invincible”.
According to Professor Martin Van Creveld, a military historian at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, Ya’alon’s criticisms are an admission that such an approach is bankrupt and has serious consequences.
“I think people are beginning to realise that the ship is sinking, so they are deserting it and blaming each other,” he said. “Israel has been fighting people much weaker than itself for the past 20 years. This particular argument involving Ya’alon will pass over but it’s very symptomatic of what I would say is a disintegration of the Israeli army. We have God knows how many soldiers refusing to turn up for reserve duty and others preferring to go to jail . It compares to the disintegration the Americans experienced in Vietnam. This army is running out of people willing to fight and die. We are faced with the question of whether we allow ourselves to be torn to pieces fighting this intifada or do we build a wall and get out.”
That gloomy diagnosis is an illustration of the distance Israeli society has travelled since the concept of the “people’s army” was pioneered by the country’s first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, after the declaration of independence in 1948. Officially, all Israeli males are eligible for three years’ military service at age 18, with women required to serve 21 months. Exemptions are given to certain categories, such as ultra-Orthodox Jews and Israeli Arabs.
But in a tacit admission that universal conscription is losing public support, the army is considering replacing the current set-up with a selective draft system.
Disenchantment with the military’s place in Israeli society has also expressed itself in the growing number of “refuseniks ”. Last month, nine reserve pilots signed a letter addressed to the head of the Israeli airforce declaring their unwillingness to participate in missions in the occupied territories. The letter followed a spate of targeted attempts on the lives of Palestinian militants from army aircraft.
Rows between the Israeli military and the political establishment are nothing new. A failure to heed the army’s warnings of danger signs leading up to the 1973 Yom Kippur war eventually led to Prime Minister Golda Meir and defence minister Moshe Dayan losing their jobs.
Historically, however, the relationship between army and government has been close, with many former generals climbing up the political ladder after distinguished army service. Sharon graduated into politics after a career as an army general, while Mofaz rose to his current post after having been army chief of staff.
That cosy relationship, it seems, has come to an abrupt halt under the increasing strain of Israel’s occupation of the territories, with the result that the army and the Israeli body politic could be on a long-term collision course.
“The novelty of this row is that it has been initiated by the chief of staff, whereas past arguments have been caused by the chief of staff responding to the politicians,” said Professor Stewart Cohen, a military expert at Bar-Ilan University.
“This shows the army is somewhat alienated. This could be a slippery slope. Alienation isn’t a good thing and Israel ought to be very worried about where it could lead to.”
02 November 2003
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。