Ignoring the Downside of Hard Choices

Faced with a number of grim choices, we do eventually decide to pick one course of action.  Having chosen that unpalatable, but necessary, choice, advocates may feel the temptation to ignore its downsides. They may evaluate it as an easy decision. They may look down on people who would decide the other way. In this, they may succeed in fooling others; worse, they may fool themselves.

Sometimes we find it more comfortable to close our eyes. I think we should make hard choices with our eyes open.

I have a few examples in mind.

Maybe the hard choice demands that Israel conduct war against Hamas everywhere in Gaza, but not take control of Gaza City.  Let us not fool ourselves. That choice means that Hamas retains its fighters, its weapons, and its hostages, all those that it can keep in Gaza City.  After the war, whenever we get to there, Hamas probably retakes Gaza.

Or maybe, as the government seems to have decided, Israel does pursue Hamas even in Gaza City.  This choice comes at the cost of lives on both sides of the conflict, at the cost of prolonging an unpopular war, at the continuing cost to Israel’s reputation, and perhaps at the cost of the remaining hostages.

Maybe, as the street protesters claim, Israel must end the war and bring the hostages home. Except that Israel does not have the power to do both of those at the same time; it might not have the power to do either of them. Israel cannot bring the hostages home, because Israel does not hold the hostages. Hamas and its allies hold the hostages, and, at best, they have demands before they will consider letting any hostages go home.  The demands might include releasing hundreds of convicted murderers.  The demands might include guaranteeing safety for Hamas fighters in Gaza, along with their weapons.  Imports, including humanitarian aid, can remain under the control of Hamas and its international allies.  A flood of humanitarian aid will predictably come in under the control of Hamas. Even if Israel surrenders to all demands, Hamas still gets to decide which hostages to release.

And Israel cannot just end the war.  It can withdraw Israeli troops across the border, and not protest as Hamas allies take the place of the troops.  It can promise not to go back into Gaza.  All of that does not end the war; it just postpones the next round until Hamas feels ready to launch the next attack. That leaves Israelis next door to a regime totally dedicated to killing them.

Which of these grim options should Israel take? I do not pretend to know.  Let us, at least, not fool ourselves into ignoring the downside of our preferred option, whatever one we choose. Please spare me an analysis that leaves out the downside of your favorite outcome. Please spare me nasty rhetoric about the people who do not agree with you. They might be as wise and as moral as you.