So Much Gaslighting

"The international realm is a zone of lawlessness."

By , and
30

Jonah and David French commandeer The Skiff to give their reactions to Israel’s response to the Iranian attacks and explain the shortcomings of deterrence theory.

–G-File: The Problem With Biden’s ‘Don’t’ Doctrine

–David’s NYT article about Gaza

–Yesterday’s Ruminant

This content is available exclusively to Dispatch members
Try a membership for full access to every newsletter and all of The Dispatch. Support quality, fact-based journalism.
Start Your Free Trial
Already a paid member? Sign In
By , and
Comments (30)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    George.Skinner

    David's point regarding uncertainty about Israel's objectives in Gaza is a really key point: without a clearly defined objective, it's going to become increasingly difficult to defend Israel's actions. If the goal is to punish Hamas and win a desistence from attacks, it's already near impossible to defend given the context of an unfolding humanitarian crisis among the civilian population of Gaza. If the objective is to remove Hamas, there's got to be some plan for occupation, governance, and rebuilding.

    Unfortunately, I suspect the likely explanation is that Netanyahu's government has no real plan: key positions are still held by the same people whose failure to plan and poor management created the situation that allowed for October 7 to occur. Netanyahu might be motivated as much by his own political survival as looking after the national interests of Israel: as long as this conflict is going, he's secure as head of a coalition government. The more time he accumulates since October 7, the more time he's had for memories to fade, emotions to dull, and for political partisanship to reassert.

    The failure to plan for what comes next is also a failing by the rest of the world: I've heard none of the proponents for Gaza advocating for some new civil governing authority or rebuilding initiative, no acknowledgement that security is the fundamental problem that must be solved for a cessation of hostilities.

    Collapse
  2. Avatar photo
    Anne W (Raw5254)

    This was excellent, and I’m so glad my husband and I are members. He hasn’t had a chance to listen yet, but I’ll gladly listen a second time so we can enjoy it together. But, YES, I’m frustrated with the way Israel is treated, and YES, I’m frustrated with how we have dragged our feet in helping Ukraine. Thank you for talking about these really important issues, and bringing clarity to the discussion.

    Collapse
  3. Cliff Puckett

    This podcast episode alone was worth the monthly subscription price.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Markdavis918

    Listened to the podcast this morning. Outstanding, I firmly agree with all or most of the points brought up.

    Collapse
  5. Austin from Atlanta

    Japan is also a crucial partner in the new “good guys” group being formed.

    Collapse
  6. Avatar photo
    Michael Berkowitz

    "Good talk." And a pertinent question from Adaam, to which Mr. French gave the correct answer: Israel can't trust the UN; specifically, it can't expect any agreement guaranteed by the UN to be enforced to Israel's benefit.

    One thing, though, that infuriates me (and I'm not easy to anger, much less infuriate), is the ready acceptance of the rhetorical victimization of Israel. You take for granted that any time Israel responds militarily to a provocation that would have any other country out for blood, there's a shot-clock running. It's not that you can do anything about it yourselves, except, well, you can. You're in positions where many people listen to you, so when officials say "It's unfortunate, but Israel doesn't get to do what others do because the world won't stand for it," you should shout back "What the hell are you talking about?! 𝐘𝐨𝐮'𝐫𝐞 the world! Nobody's stopping you from giving Israel exactly the latitude you'd expect for us and you'd grant to anyone else!"

    To its credit, the Biden Administration seems to have been supporting Israel in practice, but don't think that all the rhetorical barbs don't hurt -- both emotionally and practically. Practically, like, soldiers die using unheard-of caution to minimize civilian casualties. And don't think the lack of push-back against the excesses of CR, Edward Said, etc. for the past few decades hasn't contributed to what we're seeing now on campuses and elsewhere.

    I've yet to see a comprehensive write-up of the West's culpability for prolonging the suffering of Israelis -- and yes, Arabs -- by the 𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑒𝑠 𝑓𝑖𝑥𝑒𝑠 of its politicians, diplomats and intellectuals, whose guiding principle seems to be "If we can't prevent Israel from winning the war, we can at least prevent it from winning the peace."

    (Not to give the wrong impression: I appreciate the attitude of everyone I've heard at TD -- and of Mr. French, despite his defection -- and I appreciate as well the time you spent in this podcast on the very issue that spurred my comment. Still, I believe more can and should be done.)

    Collapse
  7. Avatar photo
    Ehoop

    I wonder how many people thought Iranians would be better off with regime change in 1953 and 1979?

    Collapse
  8. Avatar photo
    Pgrossjr47

    How about having the fair Jessica interview Nancy the next time?

    Collapse
  9. Jswed

    I enjoyed this as usual and agreed with almost everything. One quote from Jonah that jumped out: “regime change in Iran would be good for Iran.” In general, I think I agree, but I have an honest question, to which I imagine the answer is yes but I would be interested to hear the evidence.
    Honest question: was regime change good for Iraq? I lean toward yes, but feel like it is not the bastion of democracy we were promised. Would be interested to hear the Dispatch gang talk about this.

    Collapse
  10. Avatar photo
    Pastorfbt

    I was waiting for more inside information on the Adirondack towed canoe incident.😁

    Collapse
Load More