Davisite logo
Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

<

>

Israel Needs to Ceasefire

Jew-for-ceasefireBy Scott Steward

I want to thank the City Council's Mayor Will Arnold and Councilmember Gloria Partida for placing a "Proposed Resolution Calling for Peace in Israel and Gaza" on the December 12 City Council Agenda. 

The current violence, persecution and loss of Palestinian lives is abhorrent. As much as Hamas is rightly condemned and routed for its most recent attack, it is not acceptable that Israel will not ceasefire and instead finds reason to continue to disproportionately kill thousands of civilians, mostly women and children, to randomly kill a small number of combatants. 

The continued use of a government's military to kill a functionally incapable combatant, and in so doing kill a vastly disproportionate number of millions of displaced civilians, with munitions and by furthering the conditions of starvation and disease, is a war crime. 

Israel needs to ceasefire. Thousands in Davis are part of this worldwide plea. 

The Council's ascent to consider a ceasefire resolution was supported by some 15 public speakers and 10 callers, with a hundred people in the gallery in support, at the December 5th City Council meeting.  1 voice of public dissent.  "Ceasefire and Peace in Israel and Gaza" That would be an improved title for the draft resolution.  Why the word ceasefire was so obviously left out of the entire draft resolution, can only be guessed. The public needs to tell our City Council to add back the word ceasefire.  CityCouncilMembers@cityofdavis.org. 

Davis groups for human rights, Palestinian human rights, Jewish Voices for Peace have been organizing around a ceasefire since October 17th, joining vigils and peaceful demonstrations to remind our members of Congress to sign HR 786 a "ceasefire resolution." The UN is trying to pass a "ceasefire resolution."  No one in the City Hall chambers on December 5th, speaking for a City resolution in support of humanity and sincere peace and repair for Palestine and Israel, was speaking to anything other than a ceasefire resolution. 

I expect that Council members are honest about intending to constructively amend the draft resolution and to vote on the amended version on the 12th. Respectfully, Council, somewhere in the "Peace" resolution needs to be the word ceasefire.

Posted by

davisite2

on

in

,
Davisite logo

Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

Comments

20 responses to “Israel Needs to Ceasefire”

  1. Roberta L. Millstein

    Imagine you lived in a country a little bigger than the state of New Jersey, but instead of being surrounded by other states, you are surrounded by countries that are hostile to your existence. Also imagine that within your country, there is an area on the coast run by people who have explicitly stated that they not only want to overthrow your government, but they want to slaughter most of the people in it (the people of your heritage). In fact, this is the stated charter of that government. You feel that your own government has committed atrocities against people in the coastal area, and you have fought hard to change that — but in the meantime, you have been more or less assured of the safety of you and your loved ones and have become inured to bombs falling in your country as part of your life.
    That relative safety is shattered, however, when forces from the coastal area invade your country, slaughtering civilians (including children) and taking some hostage. Your country is small enough that everyone knows someone who has been killed or taken hostage; your own family may have had to separate and/or evacuate and still feels under threat.
    Then your country engages in military actions in a way that you are deeply uncomfortable with, although it is hard to get clear information about exactly what is happening, with neither “side” of the media unbiased. Globally, many people call for a ceasefire, and by that, they seem to mean an unconditional ceasefire — no return of hostages, same government in place that has vowed your destruction and wants your people dead, no reason to think that the same sort of incursion won’t happen again and again, with the government of the coastal area now emboldened by its “success.”
    Would you still call for a ceasefire? Would you trade your own safety for that of the people in the coastal area?
    Some people in that position would, but I suspect that it would be a much smaller percentage than are calling for one now.

    Reply
  2. Scott

    That fearsome Hamas “government” was voted in by less than the majority and then enabled by Israel’s Likud party. That population of Gazans has protested peacefully for human rights and self determination and been shot at each time. That same majority of people who participated in peaceful protest remain in Gaza and are now entirely displaced after 14 years of the most brutal sanctions on the planet. What does peace look like with such fear driving Israel? It’s hard to beleive that ethnic cleansing has not been the end game all along. And after the Palestinians are starved out…? An eternal battle with boardering countries who knows that their neighbor has no intention of doing anything other than relate to them with the threat of nuclear war? Why is this on the heads of Palestinians whose homeland has been turned into a war zone. What has come before must end.
    Ceasefire for Palestinians and for Israel.

    Reply
  3. Keith

    No ceasefire until Hamas is eradicated.
    Take care of the terrorists now or it will just happen again down the road.

    Reply
  4. Alan C. Miller

    Scott say: “What has come before must end.”
    What do you mean by that?
    Seriously, I don’t know, so please explain.

    Reply
  5. Roberta L. Millstein

    Scott,
    Who supports Hamas? You think this is clear, but it isn’t.
    Who is bringing harm to Palestinians? You think there is clear, but it isn’t.
    Whose homeland is a war zone? You think this is clear, but it isn’t.
    What will bring peace? You think this is clear, but it isn’t.
    I am not saying that eternal war or ethnic cleansing is the answer. I am saying that anyone who claims to have any answers, who claims to understand what is happening in the middle east and what it is like for people there, is deluding themselves. And for Davis City Council to think it has the information and the knowledge to weigh in on this is ludicrous. You are pushing them to take a stand well beyond what they can reasonably speak to, and pushing them to say more (especially in a short statement) will only have the consequence of inflaming things more in Davis and the region.

    Reply
  6. Keith

    “And for Davis City Council to think it has the information and the knowledge to weigh in on this is ludicrous.”
    I totally agree Roberta. A waste of time.

    Reply
  7. Scott

    End to the extreme elements tugging each side into seemingly unreconcilable postions where too many can’t recognize the humanity in the other.
    The information that the elected representatives have is enough to decide to add Davis’ voice against the distortion that an entire population, of starving displaced people, are not a terrorist organization and deserves to live.
    A minimum is to ask for ceasefire in a community that holds humanity and dignity as central to its values.

    Reply
  8. Roberta L. Millstein

    Of course Palestinian citizens are not a terrorist organization and of course they deserve to live. That is not in question. I certainly hope that you aren’t putting that view on me, in the name of good public discourse.
    What is in question is whether an unconditional (yes?) ceasefire at this time will bring good results, much less peace, to the people who live in the area, whether Palestinian or Israeli.
    So what is my answer? I don’t know. I do know enough to know that I don’t know and that the vast majority of people – certainly most or all who live in Davis – don’t know either. I certainly desperately hope that someone does and can act, although it is hard to have hope right now.
    A bad answer is worse than no answer.

    Reply
  9. Keith

    I remember Gazans dancing in the streets with glee after the Oct. 7th massacre of innocent Israeli citizens. So let’s not pretend they’re innocent bystanders in all of this. Maybe if they had known the Israeli response to the Oct. 7 slaughter they would’ve had a different perspective.

    Reply
  10. Victoria Whitworth

    First of all, it is not ludicrous for our council to weigh in on this, however absurd or ineffectual it may be. They represent us and I’m not alone in feeling strongly about the wholesale bloodbath that both Hamas and Israel continue to perpetrate on innocent civilians.
    Roberta, you make a very poignant and valid argument for Israel’s situation and the necessity and right to protect itself. Israel’s right to exist is indisputable and necessary.
    Unfortunately, retaliation rarely works for either side and only increases the amount of generational hatred and violence on a never-ending loop of extremism. How is Israel identifying Hamas from innocent civilians? How could their current campaign do anything but create thousands more grieving, embittered Palestinians who feel powerless except through extreme violence?
    I agree that the word “ceasefire” should be added to the council’s statement.

    Reply
  11. Roberta L. Millstein

    Victoria, thanks for your comment. I should have been clearer — I don’t think it’s necessarily ludicrous for the City Council to say something, but I don’t think it should be weighing in on things that require a deep understanding of the situation on the ground, because I don’t think any of us have that. I think it risks promulgating mistaken views and also risks inflaming an already challenging local situation, aside from urging the federal government to act in a way that might be harmful rather than helpful.
    Calling for a ceasefire, is, I believe, in the category of things that require a deep understanding of the situation on the ground, because it presupposes that one knows what Hamas will do toward Palestinians and Israelis were such a thing to occur — especially unconditional ceasefire. But then what would the appropriate conditions be? Again, that is complicated and beyond what I think the City Council can grapple with.
    I agree that retaliation rarely works for either side and that the current situation is horrible. Again, I am not saying that I have any answers — I am saying that I have no answers.
    I completely understand the urge to say something, to do something, anything. I understand that many people, perhaps you, perhaps Scott, see this as simple and clearcut. I am saying that it isn’t clearcut or obvious at all. I wish it were.
    I am saying that the City Council should resist the urge to do this simply because a vocal, passionate group of well-meaning citizens has asked for it.

    Reply
  12. Lorin Kalisky

    …[I]t is not acceptable that Israel will not ceasefire and instead finds reason to continue to disproportionately kill thousands of civilians, mostly women and children, to randomly kill a small number of combatants.

    There were an estimated 30,000 Hamas combatants before the Oct. 7 attack, and Israel may have killed as many as half of these combatants to date. [1] If this is true, the Gaza Health Ministry (which is controlled by Hamas) count of 18,000 killed (if true) may include a significant number of Hamas combatants.

    The continued use of a government’s military to kill a functionally incapable combatant and in so doing kill a vastly disproportionate number of millions of displaced civilians, with munitions and by furthering the conditions of starvation and disease, is a war crime.

    Hamas was not “functionally incapable” on Oct. 7 and will remain an existential threat to Israel as long as it continues to exist. The Hamas charter calls for the extermination of Jews and the destruction of the State of Israel, and Hamas has vowed to perpetrate more Oct. 7th-style attacks [2].
    The killing of innocent civilians during war (or armed conflict) is not specifically a war crime (as defined by both the Geneva Conventions and Human Rights Watch) unless innocents are explicitly targeted [3].
    Israel is in the unfortunate position of having to eliminate an enemy deeply embedded in a civilian population, one that has no regard for the lives or well-being of its own people, and one that clearly commits war crimes by explicitly targeting civilians [3]. This type of battlefield has little precedent in modern warfare. That said, there were an estimated 20,000 French civilians killed in the battle of Normandy [4], more than 70,000 Afghan and Pakistani civilians killed in Afghanistan [5], and somewhere between 5,000 and 40,000 killed in the battle of Mosul [6].
    Throughout the pervasive calls for ceasefire, the aggressor in this conflict (Hamas) continues to launch rockets into Israel. If Hamas were to put down their weapons and recognize the right of the State of Israel to exist, a ceasefire may well be warranted. Until then, Israel has a right and an obligation to defend itself.
    [1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/05/middleeast/israel-hamas-military-civilian-ratio-killed-intl-hnk/index.html
    [2] https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/hamas-covenant-israel-attack-war-genocide/675602/
    [3] https://www.hrw.org/reports/2002/isrl-pa/ISRAELPA1002-04.htm
    [4] https://apnews.com/article/d-day-invasion-normandy-france-nazis-07094640dd7bb938a23e144cc23f348c
    [5] https://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/human/civilians/afghan
    [6] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/why-the-human-toll-of-the-battle-for-mosul-may-never-be-known

    Reply
  13. Ron O

    I don’t think that any decision by the Davis council (regarding national issues) has much effect on national policy.
    The situation in Gaza has to change. But when I see images of some Palestinian kid with his legs blown-off/amputated (as I did on the national news the other day), it moves me in a way that reported deaths do not.
    I’m increasingly thinking that the U.S. might actually be the best country on earth, as all can live here relatively peacefully. Or at least, have a chance to do so.
    John Lennon: “Imagine” (no countries, religion, etc.). “It isn’t hard to do”.

    Reply
  14. Roberta L. Millstein

    If you’re going by photos, you might as well look at these too:
    https://www.hamas-massacre.net/
    WARNING: This is really grim stuff. I had to click off very quickly.

    Reply
  15. Scott

    I have been listening and I beleive that the statement that ït would be healthy if both sides could acknowledge that their position necessitates deeply painful tradeoffs.” Respect for both sides of a question. For me, I recognize a ceasefire could give Hamas a modicum of legitimization (and risks future attacks), but I think that the later is true no matter the method of war or outcome in Gaza. That’s why it is important to recognize that the humanity of the immediate situation falls to ceasefire. While Hamas hurls rockes too, the threat of tactical vicotry is nil.
    We all bear some responsibility for what has become a lethal quagmire. Ceasefire is the way to provide possiblity for something other than a lot more civilian deaths.

    Reply
  16. Ron O

    Yeah.
    Some might claim that this is the reason that civilians need to arm themselves.
    Some believe that they need to arm themselves against their own governments (e.g., Hamas possibly providing an example).
    I guess as long as the “right people” get killed?

    Reply
  17. Alan C. Miller

    RO say: “Some might claim that this is the reason that civilians need to arm themselves.”
    This is indeed happening in Israel. I heard a report yesterday that — I am doing this from memory but the point is the jump — personal gun permit applications went from from 300/day to 4000/day since Oct. 7th. I see this trend as irreversible.
    Kitat Konenut, small volunteer armed forces, saved many where the IDF did not. Including a kibbutz established by distant relatives.

    Reply
  18. George Galamba

    I agree with Ron O that it is inappropriate for the city council to decide who is right/wrong in this conflict. Each member of the council has the same right as any other city resident to offer their opinion, but when speaking as representatives of the city, they should confine themselves to city business. I’m not sure, but I believe that the Brown Act mandates this.
    This is a horrible conflict, and I hope it ends soon, but it is not a city matter.

    Reply
  19. Roberta L. Millstein

    Scott, you speak as though a ceasefire would prevent Hamas from attacking again and would prevent civilian deaths. Given the stated mission of Hamas along with Oct 7, what reason is there to believe that?
    Now, some might reply and say, what reason is there to believe that Israel would honor a ceasefire? To which I would respond: there is little reason to think that Israel’s current leaders would adhere to a ceasefire.
    So why think that a ceasefire is the answer? Why think it does anything beside divide us here?

    Reply
  20. South of Davis

    I agree with George that the city of Davis should focus on city business in city meetings (not wasting city time and getting people on both sides upset getting involved with something out city had no business getting involved with). P.S. To Victoria before writing “retaliation rarely works” ask some guys you know what happened when a bully got a beat down from the football team after picking on a team members little brother (hint he never bothered the kid again) or ask the French people what happened when they retaliated after getting attacked twice in the last 110 years (hint you won’t have to speak German to ask them).

    Reply

Leave a reply to Scott Cancel reply