If you did you also noted he's a pretty well respected military historian. His works are used in our war colleges and on the USMC recommended reading list, probably others. I wouldn't dismiss him out of hand.
He makes some very valid points. Israel will not win a war of attrition, or a cycle of terror/retaliation, which is how they are allowing the Palestinians to define the conflict.
There are other options he doesn't mention, such as a decisive military move to capture and annex a large chunk of the West Bank, resettle the population as needed. Thus far, Israel hasn't the will for that.
Yup, Van Creveld actually is one of the more prominent military historians and authors out there. Hard to avoid him if you read about modern strategy, and he's cited by everyone.
Whatever. It doesn't change the fact that his argument here -- or, rather, his asserstion -- is unsupported by reason or relevant analogy. Seriously, what is his argument? If read carefully, I don't think you find one. He just idiotically asserts that the Pallies are strong because they are weak. Huh?
Note that all his analogies are to nations that were fighting foreign wars, and lost the will to fight against a determined enemy. The goal of war is indeed to destroy the enemy's will to fight. As for the Pallies, the only effective means they have found to fight Israel is by means of terror attacks directed against the hearth and home. The problem is that killing your enemy's women and children invariably strengthens his will to fight.
The Pallies would do much better (i.e. have some chance of weakening rather than strengthening their enemy's resolve) if they rigorously restricted their attacks only to Israeli forces in the West Bank and Gaza, but their fanatacism does not permit of such restraint. This, btw, is also their key weakness as military opponents of Israel: their potency depends entirely on maintaining hyper elevated levels of hatred and fanatacism against the Jews, and, one might add, the overwhelming obsession with victim hood that is the primary psychological feature of nearly all terrorists whatever their nationality or religion.
Such an extreme and debilitating psychological state is not stable under most circumstances. It has only been maintained so long among the Palestinians due to the support of their cause from the rest of the Arab world. Of course the Arab world has "supported their cause" by purposefully keeping them stuffed into squalid refugee camps, propagandizing them with hatred, keeping them focused on Israel rather than their own sorry state, and defending and underwritting the thugs and gangsters that "lead" them by driving them to destruction and siphoning off their resources to Swiss bank accounts.
Any change of affairs that would cause the Palestinians to more or less permanantly shift their focus away from the Jews, and toward their own prospects for a better way of life, will undercut the fanaticism that drives their will to fight. Say, for instance, that the U.S. topples Sadam and manages to establish a successful democracy in Iraq. Suppose that this triggers a democratic revolution in Iran. The Palestinians, I think, really do want a democracy in the end, and they have the unique experience in the Arab world of having been able to observe one, in Israel, at close hand. If other Arab or regional Islamic countries start to go democratic, one can expect the Palestinians to become jealous of someone besides the Jews. And once they begin to think in terms of putting their own interests ahead of destroying or damaging Israel, the war will be over.
Granted the Palestinians may win in the end by sustaining their fanatical attrition-warfare terrorism, and eventually destroying the Israeli economy -- and thus the Israelis' ability to field technologically state of the art military forces -- if you want to call that "winning". (Palestinian economic viability is dependent on Israel, and their "victory" would bequeath them a Somalia-like hell on earth.) But to say, as Martin does, that the Pallies will inevitably, or even probably, prevail is simply stupid.
It is not an easy thing to maintain that level of fanatacism. It takes hard work, and outside help. If the Arab world, for instance, ever decides to reconcile itself to the existance of Israel, and the Palestinians try to nevertheless maintain the conflict, they literally won't stand a chance. Their ability to damage Israel depends on many circumstances that are subject to change.
There are other options he doesn't mention, such as a decisive military move to capture and annex a large chunk of the West Bank, resettle the population as needed. Thus far, Israel hasn't the will for that.She doesn't have any desire to be treated as South Africa was in the 80s or Serbia in the early 90s, that's why. No nation on Earth would support such an action.
-Eric