There is an unspoken assumption that underlies most of the reporting from the area since Israel withdrew form the Gaza strip. That assumption is that, like the scorpion who kills the frog and thus drowns, Hamas and the Gazans must attack Israel with their rockets because "its their nature." In this conception, Hamas cannot possibly want war because it would devastate Gaza, kill many innocent Palestinians, and destroy Hamas's power base. There may be some truth to this, but it is always worth considering, when an escalation takes place, cui bono?, who benefits?
The Middle East has always been an incredibly complex web of interconnecting moving parts. An action in one area often has reverberations elsewhere in the region. Most often the connections are hidden; this is facilitated by a compliant, easily manipulated and managed press, and an incurious West.
In the Middle East, trends lines emerge, meander about, and intersect unexpectedly. It is certainly possible that any impending war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza will be triggered by a successful terror attack on Sderot or Ashkelon in Southern Israel. Hamas fires rockets into Southern Israel which have no guidance system and strike randomly with the goal of killing as many Israelis as possible. The only reason war has not yet occurred is because the Gazan terrorists are inept. Yet as they increase the number of rockets fired and acquire and use more sophisticated rockets (from their patrons in Iran) with greater range and accuracy the likelihood of Israeli casualties increases. Even Hamas must know that there is a relatively low threshold for an Israeli response, up to and including an incursion and re-occupation of Gaza. Why would Hamas risk such a move at this time? Is it just that with their recent opening of the border with Egypt, they now have the means to escalate? Does Hamas and Iran leave their foreign policy up to the vagaries of random rocket attacks? I doubt it. Which means that Iran and Hamas must want war.
The government of Ehud Olmert, which gives the impression of conducting foreign policy in an ad hoc basis with minimal strategic vision, are willing to oblige:
Israel prepares for assault on Gaza
As Hamas drew Ashkelon into the circle of communities coming under heavy rocket attacks, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and the Foreign Ministry on Thursday began preparing both Israeli and world opinion for the possibility of a large-scale incursion into Gaza.
Barak, during a series of meetings at the Defense Ministry, said, "We should be prepared for an upswing in hostilities in Gaza. The big ground operation is a reality and it is tangible. We are not eager to embark upon such an operation, but we are not put off by it either."
According to defense sources, the goals of such an operation - reportedly in the planning stages for weeks if not months - would not "merely" be to reduce the threat of rocket fire and rocket manufacturing in the Gaza Strip, but would also likely entail paralyzing the Hamas government's ability to operate, and even include "regime change."
The Israelis seem to be operating on the assumption that they have working partners in the oxymoronic "Peace process":
In light of the recent tension with Egypt over the situation on the border, the Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying the Israeli delegation "stressed the strategic importance of the relationship between Israel and Egypt, in enhancing and addressing challenges to peace in the region and promoting peaceful coexistence."
In a related development, government officials said Israel was not getting "too excited" over an interview Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas gave to a Jordanian newspaper that appeared Thursday saying he did not rule out returning to the path of armed "resistance" against Israel.
The official said these comments were aimed at Abbas's domestic audience and that Abbas should be judged by his deeds - a willingness to negotiate peace - rather than by statements "meant for internal consumption.
It is hard to know where to start but a few pieces of the puzzle stand out:
- Hamas has essentially brought down the border with Egypt
- There are plans to integrate Gaza's electrical system with Egypt
- Egypt sees Hamas as a threat and will not be nearly as diffident in killing Hamas members, and bystanders, if Hamas steps out of line
- The depiction of Gaza as a place of deprivation and oppression is breaking down, since they clearly have much more money than the Egyptians next door
- The depiction of Hamas as failing in governance is gaining credibility
Add in a couple of other details from outside the immediate neighborhood:
- Iran needs to "run out the clock" on the Bush administration in oder to ensure the acquisition of a nuclear capacity
- Syria would like nothing more than to deflect attention so that it can get on with the business of destabilizing Lebanon
Further, Hamas knows that a war with Israel would do several important things. It would likely lead to the re-occupation of Gaza by Israel, simultaneously removing the need to govern from Hamas and restoring them to the more heroic role of "Resistance", ie terror. It would remove the threat of Egypt taking full control and responsibility for Gaza and strengthen the hand of their fellow travelers, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, in so doing. (The Muslim Brotherhood can not safely oppose the Egyptian government but there is great cachet in solidarity with Hamas against the Jewish oppressor.)
Thus, there is every reason for Hamas to desire a war at this time. In addition, they know from the summer war with Hizbollah, that Israel will be forced to fight under Marquis of Queensbury rules which maximize Hamas's ability to inflict casualties and minimize Israel's chances of attaining a definitive victory. All in all, war with Israel is a no-brainer for Hamas.
On the other hand, there is very little good that can come of such a war for Israel. They will not be allowed to win; even if they win and achieve regime change, they will just have exchanged an openly terrorist and genocidal enemy for a more covertly terrorist and genocidal enemy in Fatah. They will have relieved Egypt of responsibility for Gaza and will find themselves back in the quagmire.
Perhaps the Olmert government believes that a war will cement their leadership indefinitely. That it is not in Israel's long term interests to re-occupy Gaza is unimportant to such people who value their own political ambitions more than the lives of their citizens. And for those who claim there is no other way, I leave you with this, courtesy of Robert Avrech at Seraphic Secret:
... Israel has the right to cut off the electricity that it supplies to Qassam workshops, the fuel it provides, which is used by launching vehicles, and the cement used to build tunnels and posts that will be used to fire at IDF soldiers one of these days. Israel's right to cut off the supply of these goods cannot face any legal or moral controversy; it also cannot clash with common sense, which demands that we ensure that our enemies would not "enjoy" Israel's economic and strategic power while attacking it.
The price paid by the Gaza population will benefit Israel. This is a legitimate and moral price, and claims regarding a humanitarian disaster are unfounded. We are no longer in Gaza, we made sure not to leave behind anything, and we withdrew to the last inch. Now Gaza is an enemy state. As such, we must address its indiscriminate hostility when it attacks civilians in contradiction of all international conventions and basic morals.
...
Therefore, before we send our sons to fight in Gaza's alleyways, reinforced with cement that we have transferred to Gaza through crossing points, and before we expose them to the fire of weapons smuggled into the Strip from Egypt - we must try to topple the Hamas regime, and certainly to weaken it through sanctions, while hermetically sealing off the border between the two warring parties.
The impossible situation whereby the Palestinians continue to fire Qassams, while receiving electricity for their Qassam workshops and fuel used by vehicles that fire Qassams, is deluxe terrorism that fits well with the dictum: "The master of the house has gone mad."
In this case, we are the master of the house, and the price we are paying is the security of Sderot and Gaza-region residents, and the stability of the entire State of Israel."
Is it too much o ask Olmert and Livni to cut off Gaza (which they are charged with doing in any event in the international press) before sacrificing more precious Jewish blood doing exactly what Hamas wants them to do?
Recent Comments