Search  |  Login  |  Register

By David French1309377806000

Yesterday, while driving near Denver, I caught a lengthy NPR report on the latest Gaza Flotilla. This year’s (potentially deadly) episode of protest theater stars not only Code Pink founder Medea Benjamin but also noted author Alice Walker. Walker is sailing because — and I am not making this up – she loves “children,” “water,” “trees,” and “parents who are happy.” I love those things as well, but for some reason I don’t feel compelled to support terrorists against our close democratic allies.

While the flotilla is obviously intended as a public-relations challenge to Israel, it has a not-so-hidden legal element as well. For years, the Left has tried to narrow and constrict the law of armed conflict so that it effectively denies Israel (and, by extension, the U.S.) the ability to conduct effective combat operations against jihadists. And while the legality of military blockades against belligerents is well-established under the laws of war, the Left essentially and functionally denies that a state of armed conflict or actual “war” exists against Hamas.

While at home we often argue about the military versus law-enforcement paradigms in our own war on terror, the distinction has real meaning in the international legal debate. Simply put, if you’re fighting a war, a lawful belligerent enjoys a freedom of action that a police officer does not. Yet when the Gaza Flotilla sails (the first ship has already left) and Israel intercepts it on the high seas, the airwaves will fill with allegations that Israel’s actions are “illegal.”

But such claims — just like the claim that the American strike on bin Laden’s compound was unlawful — are grounded in a political argument, not a legal reality. The goal of the Left is to change the law of war to render the use of military force nearly impossible. Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Taliban cannot defeat American or Israeli forces on the battlefield, so their functional allies attempt to use international law to accomplish what the actual terrorists cannot. That is the essence of “lawfare.”

Latest in
Jihad

Revoke Citizenship of Terrorists

By Jay Sekulow1421250209569

Last week, France faced the threat that is arguably the toughest to defeat—a threat from within, from its own terrorists. By now, the stories are familiar. France has a problem with homegrown radicals. At least 900 French citizens are among the 2,000 to 3,000 westerners who’ve left home for...

read more

Boko Haram Murders 2,000 More

By Matthew Clark1421182058630

As the world has watched the horrific terrorist attacks in Paris, France last week, as radical Islamic jihadists murdered over a dozen innocent civilians and struck at the very heart of freedom, another terrorist group carried out what is being called the “ second-deadliest terrorist attack in...

read more

The Pyramid of Support for Jihad

By David French1421101789922

As an Evangelical conservative, I can’t say that a militant, condescending atheist like Bill Maher is my favorite comedian or my favorite pundit, but when a man’s right, he’s right. His statement last week that “Hundreds of millions of them support an attack like this. They applaud an attack like...

read more

When Barbarism Is Propaganda

By David French1420653566312

The civilized world is confronting a movement that defines “victory” as the slaughter of unarmed cartoonists at work at their desks. Even worse, that movement knows that its barbarism — the very conduct that revolts us — is perhaps the jihadists’ most effective recruiting tool. Jihadist snuff films...

read more