"Without compromise, without concessions and without mercy"

From The Guardian:

Israel's defence minister, Ehud Barak, said no shipment would cross into Gaza without his personal approval. A spokesman for the defence ministry said the closure was a "signal" to Hamas, the Islamist group that won Palestinian elections two years ago and last summer seized full control of Gaza. The Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, warned that his military operations in Gaza would continue "without compromise, without concessions and without mercy".

I try to understand why Barak seems to think that political points can be scored by convincing the public that Israel's military operations will be "without mercy". What political aims are achieved by pointing out that military interventions are uncompromising? Is the point here that it will become evident to everyone that Barak will not let human suffering and death distract his political strivings? The politics of retaliation.

Palestinians fire rockets into Southern Israel. Barak is, apparently, convinced that there is only one option: striking back, without mercy. Israel bombs the Palestinian interior ministry. People are killed (and, guess what, they are civilians). Israel seals the border of the Gaza strip, a decision that implies shortage of water for the Gaza inhabitants. Merciless politics, indeed. A Palestinian man, whose brothers were killed by Israeli warfare, is quoted in the same article: "What is our guilt? We ask to live in peace and we ask them to leave us alone," he said, surrounded by family and neighbours. "With one hand the Israelis talk about peace, with the other they continue fighting."

When "acting without mercy" is prized as a virtue, the presupposition of this is that the merciless agent's actions are guided by principles, which s/he will not abandon, no matter how much suffering and misery her actions give rise to. If acting without mercy is given the status of a necessity - which seems to be Barak's position - it is acknowledged that one will, most likely, be responsible for having done gruesome things, but one should not let oneself be bothered by it too much. One should keep going, relentlessly.

"Acting without mercy". The other side of this coin is "getting one's hand dirty". Abstaining from acting upon these merciless principles will be seen as a desire to preserve one's moral cleanliness, i.e. one's reputation. "If you won't do it, I'm sure I will find somebody who will." The gruesome things one has done or is expected to do are transformed into questions regarding psychological well-being. Tough principles - nothing for sissies. A man's gotta do what a man's gotta do. Busines is business is business. Sometimes it is one's business to drop bombs on Palestinians, at other times it's someone else's. Criticism becomes impossible. If you have qualms about doing your job, that's just because you are soft-skinned, sentimental, naive. If you won't do it, somebody else will. Business is business. Necessities. Living in a tough world. Doing what one has to do before it's too late. You're such an idealist, irresponsible wussy. Responsibility shows no mercy.

Are you familiar with this sweet-talkin' "tough responsibility"?

Will acting "without mercy" help Israel and Palestine achieve peace? Will a suspension of fuel supplies promote the prospects of peace? Is it an intelligible scenario to think that peace could be the result of blackmail? We've seen this before, haven't we, and the future does not look good.