Obama Greenlights Continued Slaughter in Gaza and Novorossiya while Adding Sanctions on Russia

Israel is telegraphing in the newspapers that it is readying for a ground invasion of Gaza. It was the headline that led Google News all yesterday. But when you read the story by Jodi Rudoren, "Military Official Says Israel Invasion of Gaza Is Likely," what one comes away with is that it is, at least for the time being, a bluff. Ever since Hamas and Islamic Jihad started firing off rockets into Israel several weeks ago, Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman and strategic affairs minister Yuval Steinitz have been promising a full-on invasion to exterminate Hamas. My sense is that the present temporary humanitarian ceasefire, which expires at 3 PM today, was rolled out to coincide with the ground-invasion bluff with the hope of locking in a long-term ceasefire that is being negotiated in Cairo with Paestinian Authority head Mahmoud Abbas.

One thing seems clear, the Israeli military is skeptical about the efficacy of re-occupying Gaza:

Mr. Netanyahu has been fending off demands for a ground operation from some members of his cabinet and party. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who has been at turns partner and rival to the prime minister, reiterated his call for a more substantial campaign against Hamas on Wednesday, as did Yuval Steinitz, the minister of strategic affairs, who has been a Netanyahu stalwart and frequent mouthpiece. 

“It is not possible to ensure summer vacation, a normal summer for our kids, without a ground operation in Gaza,” Mr. Lieberman said during a visit to Ashkelon. 

“We don’t need to rule Gaza or build settlements in Gaza,” he added. “We need to ensure that all Hamas terrorists run away, are imprisoned or die.”

Mr. Steinitz said in a radio interview that it was possible Israel would begin a ground campaign in the next few days. He urged Israel to take over Gaza for a few weeks to demilitarize it, topple Hamas and pave the way for “something else.” 

But the senior military official said it would not be so simple. 

“We estimate that sitting there and eliminating Hamas terrorism from the Gaza Strip is a matter of many months. It’s not a matter of two or three months; it’s much more than that,” he said. “We have a very good idea of what does it mean to take over Gaza Strip in all aspects: military, civilian, infrastructure, economical. We have a very good idea, and I think it’s one of the issues that the Israeli government should consider very seriously.” 

He added: “That’s a huge burden on anybody who would do it. Everything has its own prices.”

So while Obama defends as justified Israel's slaughter of children playing on the beach and an old man walking to mosque, the Nobel Peace Prize winning POTUS announces at the same time additional sanctions on Russia for not doing more to look the other way as Ukraine engages in a similar civilian slaughter in Novorossiya.

The new sanctions target the Russian oil company Rosneft and the financial arm of Gazprom, Gazprombank, cutting them off from U.S. financial markets, but not entirely. The restrictions apply only to loans over 90 days. The sanctioned firms can still access overnight loans. Peter Baker and James Kanter have the story, "Raising Stakes on Russia, U.S. Adds Sanctions":

The firms targeted by the capital market restrictions were some of the most prominent in Russia. Rosneft, owned by the state and headed by a longtime adviser to President Vladimir V. Putin, is the country’s largest oil producer.

Gazprombank is the financial arm of Gazprom, the state-controlled natural gas giant, which is also headed by a Putin ally. Also targeted were VEB, the state economic development bank, and Novatek, another natural gas producer.

The administration also barred business dealings with eight state-owned defense firms; four Russian government officials, including an aide to Mr. Putin and a top official in the Federal Security Service; an oil shipping facility in Crimea, which Moscow annexed; a pro-Russian separatist leader; and the rump rebel organizations in the eastern Ukrainian cities of Donetsk and Luhansk.

The four banks and energy companies will be barred from future loans with a maturity of more than 90 days, meaning they will still be able to conduct day-to-day business with overnight capital but will find themselves shut out of longer-term equity. 

Some officials and experts said it could raise the cost of borrowing for Russian firms as they seek other creditors who may be wary of future American steps. 

Gazprombank has $8.2 billion in debt over 90 days denominated in American dollars, and while some of that may have come through European or other institutions, officials said the vast majority of it could not be financed, cleared and settled without involving participants in the United States capital markets who would be affected by the new measures. 

Mr. Obama’s actions would not bar the targeted Russian banks or energy companies from doing business with Americans or seize their property. Rosneft, for instance, has major joint ventures with ExxonMobil that will still be permitted. But administration officials pointedly noted that such moves were still possible if Russia did not back down.

Craig Pirrong, a professor of finance at the University of Houston, said the current moves might not have that much impact because the affected companies could get American dollars elsewhere. “This will constrain to some degree the size of the capital pool that the sanctioned firms can access, but not nearly as much as could be,” he said. 

Douglas A. Rediker, a visiting fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said the actual exposure to the American capital market may be small. “But the chilling effect on hitting sizable banks and energy companies could cause major second thoughts for doing business and investing far beyond direct U.S. capital market impact,” he said. 

Others were more skeptical of the political impact. “What happens if this doesn’t work?” asked Samuel Charap, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. The “risks of escalation seem huge,” he added, “and there’s a question of whether this level of pain makes losing Ukraine acceptable to Putin. Unlikely, in my view.”

Several lawmakers from both parties praised Mr. Obama’s move, but some Republicans called it inadequate. “Limited actions like those announced today make U.S. threats look hollow,” said Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida, adding that Mr. Obama was “continuing to avoid decisive action.” 

American business groups have objected to unilateral sanctions, arguing that they would only hurt domestic businesses while their European competitors swooped in.

The National Association of Manufacturers said it “is disappointed that the U.S. is fundamentally extending sanctions in increasingly unilateral ways that will undermine U.S. commercial engagement and reduce the effectiveness of the measures imposed.” 

Mr. Obama tried to address that concern on Wednesday. “These sanctions are significant, but they are also targeted, designed to have the maximum impact on Russia while limiting any spillover effects on American companies or those of our allies,” the president said.

This is the weakness of the U.S. strategy. In order for it to be effective, Europe has to follow suit. So far my read is that Merkel is merely mouthing words of support but slow-walking any sort of real commitment:

Mr. Obama called his British and French counterparts, but the critical call came Tuesday with Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, the driving force behind Europe’s response to Russia, when the two coordinated the actions on Wednesday. 

In Brussels, the European Council, which defines the European Union’s political direction and priorities, told the European Investment Bank to suspend new financing for projects in Russia and suggested that the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development follow suit.

The council also said it would decide by the end of July on a list of additional sanctions targets, including those “who actively provide material or financial support to the Russian decision-makers.” 

That language suggested that Europe might next take aim at Russian oligarchs who are part of Mr. Putin’s ruling clique, a group already penalized by the Americans but so far spared by the Europeans.

“Of course, it is a deepening of the economic sanctions,” Ms. Merkel said after the meeting. Whether it is as much as previously threatened, she added, “We are entering the economic sphere here.”

The reality though is that Europe has really done nothing other than the merely cosmetic here; hence, the Merkel "but, of course they're real" quote above.

Meeting in Brussels, leaders of the European Union refused to match the American measures and instead adopted a more tempered plan that blocks new development loans to Russia and threatens to target more Russian individuals. 

The disparate moves suggested a widening gulf in the response to the crisis in Ukraine and may dilute the impact of the American actions.

The United States is walking the plank. Europe has an advantage now, something that is making the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers uncomfortable. And let's not forget the overarching issue before turning to Putin's clear comments from Brasil. As with George W. Bush, to too Barrack Obama: Everything the U.S. does turns to shit. Here is David Herszenhorn, "Putin Criticizes U.S. Over New Sanctions":

Mr. Putin, speaking to reporters in Brasília, where he is winding up a trip through central and South America, warned that the American sanctions would backfire. 

“I have already said they tend to have a boomerang effect, and without any doubt, in this case they are driving Russian-American relations to an impasse, causing very serious damage,” Mr. Putin said, according to a Kremlin transcript. “And I am convinced that this is harmful to the national long-term strategic interests of the American state, the American people.”

Mr. Putin said that rather than imposing sanctions like those announced in Washington on Wednesday against Russian banks and energy companies in retaliation for Moscow’s intervention in Ukraine, the Obama administration should be working to end the bloodshed in Ukraine, where pro-Russian separatists have been fighting the government since early April.

Although there is evidence that Russia has been supporting the insurgents with weapons, tanks and other equipment, and some of the leaders of the insurgency have identified themselves as Russian citizens, Mr. Putin said that the United States should do more to assist Russian efforts to achieve a peace agreement. 

“This must be done together — it must be jointly, of course, to encourage all sides in the conflict in Ukraine to an immediate end to hostilities and negotiate,” Mr. Putin said. “Unfortunately, we don’t see this on the side of our partners, especially the American partners, who it seems to me on the contrary are pushing the Ukrainian authorities to the continuation of this fratricidal war and the continuation of this punitive operation. This policy has no prospects.” 

Mr. Putin, who has never hidden his disdain for American foreign policy in the Middle East, once again held up the region as evidence of failed interventionism on the part of Washington. 

“In general I would say that those who are planning foreign policy actions in the United States — unfortunately we are not seeing it only in recent times, but say, the last 10-15 years — they conduct quite aggressive foreign policy and, in my opinion, very unprofessional,” Mr. Putin said.

“Look: In Afghanistan, problems. Iraq is falling apart, Libya is falling apart. If General Sisi had not taken Egypt in hand, Egypt no doubt would now be wasted and feverish. In Africa, there are problems in many countries. They touched Ukraine, and there are problems.” 

Mr. Putin said that he remained open to negotiations with the United States. “It is a pity that our partners are going on this way, but we have not closed the door to negotiations, to resolve this situation,” he said.

Gaza, the Center of a Global Meltdown

In the many years I have been a news consumer, principally of the New York Times, at no point has it been like it is today. The planet is convulsed by organized violence. Everywhere one turns there appears to be war.

The Middle East is being restructured. Islamic State, a Salafist construct of the Gulf Sheikhdoms, is raising a caliphate in northen Iraq and northern Syria (see Patrick Cockburn's excellent article, posted on Niqnaq's blog, for the latest there); Kurdistan is also rising out of the ashes of Iraq, while Iraqi Shiite parties are trying to figure out what to do next. Iran is spread thin, trying to negotiate with Great Satan on the future of its nuclear program while playing a central role in two hot wars.

In old Europe, conflict rages in Hitler's Lebensraum, as a U.S.-directed fascist junta in Kiev wages war on its civilian population in an attempt to draw the Russian Bear into a quagmire that isolates it from the rest of world capitalism. On the other side of Asia, Uncle Sam is attempting the same thing with the Chinese Dragon, drawing it into open hostilities with its smaller-nation neighbors over resource-rich and strategically-important island chains in the China Sea.

The spot on the map, AfPak, that led to the currently fraying U.S. Weltanschauung -- the post-9/11 reorganization of the state to facilitate a Global War On Terror (GWOT) -- is about to blow sky high. Much as Afghanistan descended into bloody warlord anarchy following the Soviet withdrawal in 1989 (the year of Tiananmen and the fall of the Berlin Wall), the tribes are preparing for battle royale once again as Great Satan readies for the exit.

But potentially the biggest burst of flame is the ongoing Israeli assault on Gaza. I say potentially the biggest because we appear to be at a moment when the occupation, which began not too long after I was born fifty years ago, is going to crack. Most, except for the hard right Israelis like foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, realize that the occupation cannot continue, that the every-two-year Israeli attacks have to stop, and that border crossings have to be opened. Palestinians are willing to weather, at least for now, the slaughter dished up by Israel because they are unwilling to accept the Gaza status quo. As Anne Barnard reports in "Gazans, Desiring Deep Change, Are Ambivalent on Egypt Cease-Fire Plan":

[H]is grandmother Wedad al-Jarba might have been angry that Hamas, the militant group that dominates the Gaza Strip, did not embrace the cease-fire proposed by Egypt, and kept firing rockets as Israel briefly held its fire. Instead, she shrugged. Like many Gazans interviewed, she said she longed for a deal — one that would change life in Gaza. But she doubted Egypt’s proposal would do that. 

“Every time, they have a cease-fire, but then everything comes back: the siege, the closures,” she said. “Then they bomb again.” 

That ambivalence is widespread in the strip, a narrow, 25-mile-long Palestinian enclave sandwiched between Israel, Egypt and the sea. It may help explain why a beleaguered Hamas kept firing even after Israeli officials declared that such a decision would justify further escalation. 

Israel occupied Gaza during the 1967 Six-Day War and controls its borders, airspace and seas even now, nearly nine years after pulling out its settlers and troops. Since then, tough restrictions have effectively amounted to a blockade, reducing imports and exports to a trickle and preventing all but a few Gazans from leaving. Short but devastating wars deepen the misery.

In a story yesterday, "Gaza Families Near Israeli Border Struggle to Build a Life in the Heart of a Conflict," Barnard limned a helpful sketch of the occupation of Gaza as seen through the eyes of the Marouf family:

Ms. Marouf’s son-in-law, a father of four, lost part of a leg and suffered internal injuries in a strike on Saturday as he headed to his work at a chicken shop. That was only the latest blow to a family whose experience traces every stage of Gaza’s disappointments since 2005, when Israel unilaterally pulled out its settlements and troops, and residents briefly hoped for a new order of increased autonomy and opportunity.

Ms. Marouf grew up in the shadow of an Israeli settlement, subject, she said, to frequent security clampdowns. Her husband waited hours each day to get through security to work on Israeli farms. Then, Israel billed the pullout as the end of its occupation of the Gaza Strip, a narrow, 25-mile-long coastal territory that it seized in the 1967 war.

“We built good hopes,” Ms. Marouf said. “We want Gaza to be like any other nation, with a state, a seaport, a future for our children.”

But things only got worse. Israel never relinquished control of Gaza’s borders, airspace and waters; Palestinians consider it still occupied. Israel imposed even harsher restrictions on the movement of people and goods as militants periodically fired rockets and Hamas, which had killed hundreds of Israelis in suicide bombings, won Palestinian elections in 2006. Ms. Marouf’s husband could no longer reach Israel for work, so they invested their savings in renting land to grow strawberries.

Gaza kept sinking. Facing a boycott from Israel and the West, Hamas failed to form a government; it captured an Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, in 2006, prompting more Israeli bombardment as Palestinian rocket attacks continued. In 2007, Hamas took over Gaza from its rival party, Fatah, by force, dividing the Palestinian Authority.

An agreement with Israel to ease its near blockade grew even more remote, making it hard for farmers like the Maroufs to export their harvests.

Then, in late 2008, came what Israel called Operation Cast Lead, involving airstrikes and an incursion into northern Gaza to destroy rocket launchers. The Maroufs fled to a United Nations school, where an Israeli airstrike killed several people; Israeli officials called it a mistake.

Ms. Marouf gave birth to her seventh child, Saja, days later. Her daughter Hadeel, then 11, and a teenage brother went home to get baby clothes, and found their house a smoking ruin, the fields burned. As they walked away, Hadeel said Monday, several neighborhood children tagged along. An Israeli tank shell killed six of them.

“One person’s insides were spilling out,” Hadeel said, reaching for her mother’s hand. Also destroyed was the house of Ms. Marouf’s married daughter, Sabeen.

“We all have childhood memories there,” Sabeen said of her mother’s house. “But the occupation killed our memories as well.”

The family lived in tents for a year, shivering at night as the wind blew under the flaps. Their only income was about $6 a month Ms. Marouf earned making cheese at a women’s factory run under a European Union aid project; even that has disappeared, the project discontinued.

They received United Nations compensation for their house, enough to build a home only half its size, Ms. Marouf said. Construction was slow because of Israeli restrictions on importing building materials. Money ran out before the house was done, but the family moved in, without furniture, which they could not afford. The children went to school in tattered uniforms.

In an Israeli assault in Gaza in 2012, the family stayed put, but last week, they cowered under the most intense bombardments they had ever heard, knowing that if wounded, they would be too frightened to go to a hospital. Ms. Marouf said that each morning, “We thank God that the day has come and we are all right.”

In the shelter, where the family sleeps on bare floors, her daughter Saja, now 5, stared gravely from her mother’s arms and played with a shekel coin. “She won’t eat,” Ms. Marouf said.

Around the corner, a building was flattened by an airstrike on Sunday, and the family is not sure whether they are safe.

Ms. Marouf blamed Israel, Hamas and Fatah for failing to achieve peace.

“We don’t hate the mujahedeen; they defend our people, ourselves, our land,” she said, using the Arabic word for holy warriors to refer to militants. “But we are the victims,” she added, “caught between the three sides.”

Let's keep an eye on the Palestinian resistance. Their continuing steadfastness in the face of terror will offer insight as to how this global conflagration that we are in will spread. The old warpigs will not give up without a great deal of savagery.