Three newspapers discuss the attack on the IDF patrol in northern Israel yesterday in which two IDF soldiers were killed. The attack was an apparent response to the recent attack on senior Hezbollah and Iranian military leaders attributed to Israel:
Haaretz states: “Israelis are paying the price
of a showcase operation.” The editor feels that the timing of the attack may be connected to the elections, and warns that the elections “must not be allowed to affect military or political decision and lead Israel into disaster.”
Yediot Aharonot asserts: “Israel's deterrence has long faded from the world,” and declares: “We cannot destroy states and large terror organizations. We can hurt them, we can inflict a lot of damage on them, we can postpone the war and the next battle, but there is no war that can end all wars.”
Yisrael Hayom believes that a mature Israeli government “understands that, unlike the strategic attack on the convoy manned with Hezbollah and Iranian terrorists, any Israeli fire now would be fueled by the desire to settle the score, take revenge and increase deterrence. These are all worthy goals, but they fall short of strategic goals.” The author asserts: “With deterrence and prestige on one hand and the benefit in having things return to how they were on the other, continued quiet along the northern border is the clear choice,” and adds: “Since Israel did not attack Wednesday night, there is a chance that quiet with Hezbollah has been achieved.”
========================================
The Jerusalem Post criticizes the Steimatzky bookstore chain for backing down from its decision to hold a special sale of the Charlie Hebdo post-massacre “survivors’ issue” because of threats from local Arab and Muslim politicians, and asks: “How can we, as a society, criticize the craven surrender of so many abroad to Muslim bullying, if we are no better than the cowards we take to task in Europe?” The editor points out that “The aim of the Charlie Hebdo cover was to tell the enemies of free expression that they will never win,” and adds that the politicians “place themselves unambiguously on the side of those who seek to silence voices they dislike and who aspire to coerce us all to resort to their idiom – or else.”
Globes op-ed was not available today.
[Eitan Haber and Dan Margalit wrote today's articles in Yediot Aharonot and Yisrael Hayom, respectively.]