Aug. 30, 2006
 
COMMENTARY: ‘Disproportionate’: The Most Disproportionate Word Used in Israeli/Hezbollah Conflict
 
By Joseph J. Honick
 
Bainbridge Island, WA (HNN) -- If one word emerged during recent torrid conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, that word was “disproportionate.” Almost minute by minute on newscasts from morning to night, reporters trumpeted the quotes from the international association known as the United Nations.
 
There, from Secretary General Kofi Annan to many delegates, mostly Arab and European Union critics of Israel, “disproportionate” was the greatest accusation of the Jewish State’s response to Hezbollah storm of Katyusha rockets purposely aimed at civilians near the Lebanon border and miles beyond, rockets that contained shattering ball bearings that could kill for many yards from the place of impact.
 
Nothing the Hezbollah attackers seemed to be “disproportionate” to the majority of the sanctimonious judges in the UN, however.
 
Worse, none of those intoning the indignant words about Israeli conduct could come up with what they perceived “proportionate.”
 
Suppose, for example, following Pearl Harbor or during the terrible Nazi blitz bombings of London, someone had called for “proportionate” response and avoidance of damage to civilian areas even though arms factories, military installations and other enemy operations were sheltered by those civilian areas?
 
Suppose someone had stood up in the United States Congress or British Parliament and called for more “measured” response and some truce as Germany and Japan marauded across two different continents, imprisoning civilians?
 
So much for foolish suppositions and groundless hypotheticals. Just about all the nations demanding Israel cease its “disproportionate” response to Hezbollah, a non-government entity financed by Iran and likely Syria as well were threatened by Israel’s doing its duty to protect its citizens. On the other hand, many of them had all sorts of agendas, few of which included striking some reasonable means to disarm Hezbollah as an integral part of producing a truce.
 
But words, especially in the world of diplomacy, carry very heavy weight and meaning. So the charges of “disproportionate” had much larger intent than simply the idea that something more measured would have been more acceptable when those making the charges have no record of complimenting Israel for any kind of behavior.
 
Returning to the days of WWII again, was it “disproportionate” response as thousands of American and British air crews day after day risked their lives to level whole cities of Europe to frustrate the Hitler production capability and drive any popular support for the Nazis into the ground? The same questions arise in considering allied response to Japan in which we fire bombed sections of Tokyo and other cities, culminating in the two atomic bomb attacks which, while killing tens of thousands, avoided many more thousands of allied lives being lost to bring the war to an end.
 
So, at the proverbial end of the day, not one of the critics crying out the accusation of “disproportionate” response against Israel has come forth with what any version of what would have been proportionate this time or at any other time.
 
Perhaps the best description of this kind of behavior would be “disproportionate” hypocrisy.
 
* * *
 
Joseph J. Honick is a contributing columnist to many publications, including Huntington News Network, and is President of GMA International Ltd.