About Us

IMRA
IMRA
IMRA

 

Subscribe

Search


...................................................................................................................................................


Saturday, November 24, 2012
Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi: The Long-Term Implications of the Israel-Hamas Clash

Gaza’s transformation into a terror entity, with an extensive military
infrastructure and advanced weaponry, removes the basis for any claim that
territory is no longer important in the missile era, and demonstrates the
vital need for continued Israeli control of key areas of the West Bank that,
under any scenario, would give it even minimally defensible borders.

The Long-Term Implications of the Israel-Hamas Clash
Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi, November 21, 2012
The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs Vol. 12, No. 27 21 November 2012
http://jcpa.org/article/the-long-term-implications-of-the-israel-hamas-clash

- The current clash between Israel and Hamas did not begin with rocket fire
but with ramped-up terror activity on the Israel-Gaza border. Hamas’
strategy has changed over the past two years. It believes the “Islamic
Spring” has altered the balance of power between the Arab world and Israel.

- Egypt is now Islamist and led by the Muslim Brotherhood movement, the
parent-movement of Hamas. Egypt’s new Islamist government regards Hamas as a
strategic partner in the struggle against Israel. Indeed, it is through
Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood regime that Hamas now enjoys the possibility of
dialogue with the United States and Europe.

- Liberating Palestine “from the river to the sea” is portrayed as a fully
realistic goal for the present generation thanks to the Islamic Spring,
which has redrawn the map of the Middle East. Conversely, Hamas views Israel
as floundering in growing strategic distress as Turkey and Egypt become
major, bitter enemies within the Arab world’s new vision of its struggle.

- Hamas views each round of armed conflict with Israel as a stage in a
long-term war of attrition. Hamas leaders hope the increasingly severe and
violent outbreaks will eventually erode Israel’s resilience, while goading
the masses toward the emergence of a united military front for the
liberation of Palestine.

- Despite the military blows it has suffered, Hamas is coming out stronger
from this round of conflict with Israel. With its rocket fire on Tel Aviv
and Jerusalem, Hamas enjoys wall-to-wall backing in the Arab world. The
financial aid that will flow into Gaza will enable Hamas to rebuild and even
further develop its military infrastructure for the next round.

Hamas Changes Its Strategy in the Wake of the Arab Spring

The current clash between Israel and Hamas has been continuing in a mode of
static warfare, marked by ongoing missile fire at Israeli communities from
Gaza and Israeli aerial attacks on terror targets. Intensive,
behind-the-scenes political activity is aimed at working out a ceasefire.
Israel’s call-up of tens of thousands of reservists for a Gaza ground
operation is meant to pressure the Hamas regime to agree to a ceasefire.

Even now, with the hostilities still going on, the main political and
security implications of this round of fighting are evident. This clash did
not begin with rocket fire but with ramped-up terror activity on the
Israel-Gaza border, including the detonation of an explosive-filled tunnel
that had been dug into Israeli territory and the firing of an anti-tank
missile at an IDF jeep on a border patrol.

These attacks, part of a long series of shooting and explosive-charge
incidents along the border, showed how Hamas’ strategy had changed over the
past two years. In Hamas’ view, the Arab Spring, which has become an Islamic
Spring in the Middle East, has altered the balance of power between the Arab
world and Israel.

Egypt, in the past a close U.S. ally and supporter of the Palestinian
Authority in Ramallah led by Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), is now Islamist and
led by the Muslim Brotherhood movement, the parent-movement of Hamas. Egypt’s
new Islamist government regards Hamas as a strategic partner in the struggle
against Israel. It musters all its political power to help Hamas in the
international arena, including harnessing the Arab League to this mission.
Indeed, it is through Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood regime that Hamas now
enjoys the possibility of dialogue with the United States and Europe.

Hamas has also drawn great encouragement from its political achievements.
Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh was received as a head of state in
visits to the Arab Spring countries and Iran, and the emir of Qatar made the
first state visit to Gaza and bestowed Arab legitimacy on Hamas’ rule.

An Accelerated Timetable for Israel’s Destruction

The power-drunk mood is evident in the statements of senior Hamas officials
over the past two years. In the past, Hamas leader Ahmed Yassin predicted
Israel’s destruction by the end of the third decade of this century, and
other senior Hamas figures said the next generation would be the one to
witness the liberation of Palestine. Today, though, the tune has totally
changed. Liberating Palestine “from the river to the sea” is portrayed as a
fully realistic goal for the present generation thanks to the Islamic
Spring, which has redrawn the map of the Middle East, and in light of the
decisive role of the jihad-ready Muslim masses in giving the region its
character.

Conversely, Hamas views Israel as floundering in growing strategic distress
as Turkey and Egypt become major, bitter enemies within the Arab world’s new
vision of its struggle. The Hamas leadership sees Israel’s political and
military options, including the exercise of its right to self-defense, as
increasingly limited.

In the context of the new balance of power, Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal
asserted that Israel can neither swallow Gaza nor eject it; that is, it has
no real way of coping with the challenge Hamas poses to its security and, in
the long term, existence. It was this that led Hamas to adopt a new, bolder
and provocative policy that seeks to substantially and systematically erode
the “rules of the game” that prevailed in the informal ceasefire
understandings between Israel and Hamas, whereby the Palestinian armed
struggle was kept on a low flame.

Building a United Front for the Liberation of Palestine

Although, in hindsight, Hamas made a tactical error regarding Israeli
policy, its basic approach has not changed: it views each round of armed
conflict with Israel as a stage in a long-term war of attrition. The
increasing severity and frequency of these clashes are, then, analogous to
birth pangs, with Hamas leaders hoping the violent outbreaks will eventually
erode Israel’s resilience and afflict its economy. At the same time, Hamas
sees these armed clashes as a means of inflaming the West Bank, thereby
opening a further front against Israel and wresting rule from the
Palestinian Authority. The ultimate goal is to goad the masses into more and
more Islamic revolutions until the emergence of a united military front for
the liberation of Palestine.

Despite the military blows it has suffered, Hamas is coming out stronger
from this round of conflict with Israel. Neither Egypt nor Turkey, nor any
of the Arab League countries, has condemned Hamas’ rocket fire on Israeli
communities, including Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, as a war crime. On the
contrary, Hamas enjoys wall-to-wall backing in the Arab world, and the
current crisis has highlighted Egypt as Hamas’ new patron since the closing
of the group’s offices in Damascus. The financial aid that will flow into
Gaza will enable Hamas to rebuild and even further develop its military
infrastructure for the next round.

“Blockaded” Gaza is not blockaded at all. Its border with Egypt is open, for
all intents and purposes. Hundreds of thousands of people pass through it,
along with commodities at a rate of millions of dollars annually, together
with enormous quantities of weapons, as the latest clash has made evident.
This de facto open border with Egypt gives Hamas an important advantage in
rehabilitating its capabilities and developing its military infrastructure.

Long-Term Trends

The new Middle East has not brought tidings of democracy with Western values
of human rights. Instead democracy has provided a one-time means for the
Muslim Brotherhood and other movements to take the reins of power. The real
aim is to institute shari’a law in stages – in the view of the worldwide
Muslim Brotherhood movement, the only real form that democratic values can
take.

Egypt is hostile to Israel and in a historical process of conflict with it.
At this juncture, Egypt is not prepared politically, economically, and
militarily for a military campaign. The regime is still engaged in
consolidating its rule, and the economy (and the army as well) is still
dependent to a great extent on Western aid. Syria, for the time being, has
other preoccupations as its army suffers harsh blows in a protracted civil
war, and this too reduces the chances of an Arab front threatening Israel as
in the 1973 war.

Egypt, then, given all these constraints, is focusing instead on encouraging
the Palestinians in an ongoing campaign of attrition that displays patterns
of popular struggle and terror with on-and-off escalations. The background
stage-setting of Palestinian terror, or what Egypt and the Palestinians call
“exercising the right of resistance,” is vital to Egypt’s diplomatic
endeavor that seeks, through political channels, to weaken Israel in the
international arena and, using political, economic, and legal tools,
circumscribe its right to self-defense, erode its resilience, and loosen its
hold on the West Bank territories that are indispensable to its national
security.

The Iranian Role

Although Hamas has tried to conceal Iran’s role in building the military
infrastructure in Gaza, that role has been confirmed and officially
acknowledged by Islamic Jihad. Fajr-5 missiles and other weapons have been
ferried from Iran and Hizbullah to Hamas and the Palestinian terror
organizations, and Iran has given much assistance in training the
Palestinian forces for battle.

Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are prepared to cooperate with Iran even
though it is actively supporting the Assad regime in Syria – which, over the
past two years, has been committing war crimes against the Sunni population
that reach the level of crimes against humanity and genocide.

The Iranian role reveals more than anything else the supreme common
denominator between radical Shiite Islam and radical Sunni Islam. The two
sides are able to overcome their profound differences and cooperate on the
basis of a shared sphere of interests: the struggle against Israel, the
continuation of the revolutions of the Islamic Spring, and the ejection of
Western influence from the region.

Israel’s Need for Defensible Borders

Gaza’s transformation into a terror entity, with an extensive military
infrastructure and advanced weaponry, removes the basis for any claim that
territory is no longer important in the missile era, and demonstrates the
vital need for continued Israeli control of key areas of the West Bank that,
under any scenario, would give it even minimally defensible borders. A
withdrawal to the 1967 lines would likely result in Israel facing yet
another military and terrorist front that could, by linking up with regional
actors such as Iran, Egypt, and Hizbullah, threaten Israel’s continued
existence.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, unlike other loci of confrontation, exerts
strong impacts on the Middle East and the world as a whole. The
international community, which has sprung into political activity to prevent
a wide-scale Israeli military operation in Gaza, is thereby effectively
safeguarding Hamas’ regime and granting it immunity. The fear is that an
all-out confrontation would spark an uncontrollable eruption of violence
that would endanger Western interests in the Middle East, while also
agitating Muslim communities in the West.

Once again, radical leftist organizations have come out in support of Hamas.
In Toronto, for example, Canadian leftist activists have upheld Hamas’
“right of resistance” as evidenced in the current hostilities, ignoring the
fact that international human rights organizations define such tactics as
war crimes. The unwritten alliance between the radical left and Hamas rests
on common demands that the West change its policy in the Middle East, stop
supporting “illegitimate” Israel, and instead opt for cooperation with the
rising Islamic forces.

===============
About Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi

Lt. Col. (ret.) Jonathan D. Halevi is a senior researcher of the Middle East
and radical Islam at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. He is a
co-founder of the Orient Research Group Ltd. and is a former advisor to the
Policy Planning Division of the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

Search For An Article
....................................................................................................

Contact Us

POB 982 Kfar Sava
Tel 972-9-7604719
Fax 972-3-7255730
email:imra@netvision.net.il IMRA is now also on Twitter
http://twitter.com/IMRA_UPDATES

image004.jpg (8687 bytes)