Many, and probably most, would have it that Israel’s last line of defence must rest upon those several hundred nuclear warheads that she has long had in her possession. When all else fails and the situation has grown far too critical for correction by any other means, then the case for using such weapons, as a threat or in earnest, can become ever more pressing. But such a course of action must be taken only ‘in extremis’ and when every other option has proven unequal to the task.
But, to date, can it truthfully be said that ‘every other option’ has been explored?
All peace negotiations thus far have come to nothing; they continually break down under pressure from the polarised positions that both sides bring with them to the table. Neither one can be seen to concede too much and, since ‘too much’ is always ‘too little’ depending on the viewpoint taken, the smallest movement towards any sort of final settlement arrives stillborn and, ‘… as things have been, so they remain.’
The reaction to this lack of progress in finding a solution, even a temporary one, has seen an inevitable escalation of violence to various levels and at intervals throughout the past 64 years. Here the vain hope must be that, somehow, this type of action can produce results unlikely to be gained through mere discussion and still further deliberation.
So far, matters have only been made that much worse by such activities. Yet there will always be those for whom acts of aggression are a standard response to constant failures in the search for peace.
Since peace seems content to remain ever elusive via the ‘normal’ channels, it may be to everyone’s advantage if a truly ‘abnormal’ method were now to be given some serious consideration.
Peace, thus converted to play a much more active role in the conflict, might very well succeed where peace, as an objective only to be attained, clearly has not.