Carl von Clausewitz's most famous line is "War is merely a continuation of politics." In this age of warfare that is less than total, it is appropriate to indicate that it also reads well as: politics is a continuation of war.
In all the years since 1945, there has not been an all out effort to destroy an enemy, or to demand unconditional surrender.
Perhaps some have not got the message. In wars and politics, it is not always easy to decipher the message. There is a great deal of disinformation. It is easier to pump up the rhetoric than to pursue outright victory.
Did George W. Bush mean it when he said that he would remake Iraq and Afghanistan into stable democracies? So far there have been 5,000 American deaths, and who knows how many others. Bush's goal remains elusive.
Warfare is more prominent than politics in the United States efforts in those countries. It has supported governments in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and may be getting ready to be more forceful in Pakistan. However, it does not seem to be dealing (or even hinting that it might deal) with the likes of al Qaida or Taliban.
Politics is prominent in the conflict that is closest to me. Israel has entered at its own volition, and has been pushed into conversations and cooperation with various elements in the Palestinian leadership. Israel also sends units into the West Bank, is only three months away from a devastating operation in Gaza, and maintains a tight (but not total) blockade on Gaza.
Some of the difference between Israel and the United States reflects what Israel has learned. It cannot bring the neighbors to their knees. Moreover, much of the world accepts the Palestinian narrative, or is paying lip service to the weight of Arab governments in energy and international politics.
We all might be better off if the United States would deal with al Qaida or Taliban. It is likely to happen. Remember Korea and Vietnam.
The United States is negotiating with Iran and North Korea. They are antagonists at a distance. The difference between them and the people waging war against Americans may be small, but enough for Obama and even Bush to send in the diplomats.
Like war, politics can involve outright opposition without a prospect of compromise, as well as feint, deception, occasional accomplishments and losses, and a great deal of uncertainty.
On April 28th, Ha'aretz carried a headlined that Israel was surprised by a story in the Los Angeles Times that the Obama administration was asking Congress to change the laws that prevented aid to Palestinians if Hamas is part of their leadership.
We can expect Israelis to protest in response to this news. And if the LA Times account is correct, and if Congress cooperates with the Administration's request, and if Hamas and Fatah reach an accord that allows Hamas to enter a united Palestinian leadership, then there will be more Israelis considerably more upset.
Temperate voices will note that Israeli officials have been dealing with Hamas for some time. Partly this has been under the umbrella of indirect talks via the Egyptians. At one time, no Arab countries were willing to deal with Israel except secretly or only indirectly through third parties. There still are countries like that, but Israel is not a supplicant in those discussions.
In this age of non-total war and non-total political conflict, the persistent questions are:when to fight, when to deal, and how modest or severe should be the military and the political activity?
In Israel's case, another question of some importance is, how to counter what may be a spreading acceptance of the Palestinian narrative?
Just as there are no absolute victories in limited war, there are not likely to be total victories in competing campaigns of persuasion. Israel has a good case. It has offered reasonable compromises to the Palestinians. Neither Fatah nor Hamas seem ready to reduce their extreme demands. Israel remains in the political game, has some success in persuading others of its justice, and uses a level of force that is, arguably, appropriate to the threat of the moment.
Not making things worse is the prime consideration, and an appropriate standard of judging performance in both war and politics.
There are no easy answers to the open questions, just as there are no clear victories, and are not likely to be an early end either to the conflict involving Israel and the Palestinians, or that between the West and radical Islam. Von Clausewitz, as modified, should remain our guide. Politics is less destructive than war for all concerned, but at times it is not sufficient.
I welcome comments sent to my e-mail address, below.
Ira Sharkansky (Emeritus)
Department of Political Science
Hebrew University
Jerusalem, Israel
Tel: +972-2-532-2725
email: msira@mscc.huji.ac.il