What is clear is that, despite vague Israeli hopes that Hamas could be completely removed, that has not happened. Much of the group’s manpower remains, mostly because it made a point of fighting at a distance — or not at all — whenever possible despite the fury of the Israeli advance and bombardment. Full Story »
Posted by Kaizar Campwala
Detailed strategic analysis of the chess game between Israeli government and Hamas, with the vast majority of Palestinian civilians caught in the middle.
Israeli officials themselves said Sunday in briefings to the cabinet that even though Hamas institutions had been badly damaged, its militants might well keep shooting rockets just to prove otherwise. The chief of military intelligence, Amos Yadlin, asserted that even Hamas had to figure out how badly it had been harmed. What is clear is that, despite vague Israeli hopes that Hamas could be completely removed, that has not happened. Much of the group’s manpower remains, mostly because it made a point of fighting at a distance — or not at all — whenever possible despite the fury of the Israeli advance and bombardment.
The caution is at least in part because Hamas wants to keep ruling in Gaza, not return to its previous role as a pure resistance movement. Therefore, Israeli officials say, an offensive that caused average people to suffer put pressure on Hamas in real and specific ways. “Hamas is the dominant organization in Gaza,” a top military official said in a briefing last week that was given on condition of anonymity. “They are the regime and feel very connected to the people. They do not want to lose that connection to the people.”
For most, of course, feeling abused like this has created deep rage at Israel. “If you want to make peace with the Palestinians, they are tired of bombs, drones and planes,” said Mohammad Abu Muhaisin, a 35-year-old resident of the southern city of Rafah who is affiliated with Fatah, the rival to Hamas that rules in the West Bank and was ejected from Gaza in June 2007. “But a guy whose child has just been killed doesn’t want peace. He wants war.” There are, however, limited indications that the people of Gaza felt such pain from this war that they will seek to rein in Hamas.
As an example, Mr. Eiland, the former national security adviser, noted that Israel “can destroy the infrastructure of the regime, and that is much more painful than only hitting military targets.” “The regime will be under pressure to stop the violence and will be careful not to repeat this experience again,” he said. “Due to the terrible devastation on the ground, there will be a lot of political pressure.
So the Israeli government did fully intend to destroy civilian targets. And recognized that Hamas is the governing body in Gaza. This is a bit like having, say, Bin Laden “influence” American elections in his favor by attacking the World Trade Center. And those results have been so positive…
Still, the actual damage to Hamas appears to have been limited partly because it acted so cautiously. There is irony in this, that Israel, the state with the well-trained army, wildly pressed the attack, while Hamas, the Islamist militia that supposedly embraces death, shied from the fight.
An alternative view is that perhaps Hamas lacks the military capacity to engage the Israeli military. And perhaps the common perceptions of Israeli government’s need for such preemptive ‘self defense’ against Hamas “degenerates” are inaccurate? Or perhaps Hamas has learned something by observing the past 200-300 years about guerrilla tactics when they face overwhelming odds?
Shlomo Brom, a researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University and a retired brigadier general, said it was wrong to consider Hamas a group of irrational fanatics. “I have always said that Hamas is a very rational political movement,” he said. “When they use suicide bombings, for example, it is done very consciously, based on calculations of the effectiveness of these means. You see, both sides understand the value of calculated madness. That is one reason I don’t see an early end to this ongoing war.”
Watching the political maneuverings around the world over this issue, I begin to understand how World War I happened...world leaders were jockeying for power, and nobody was concerned at all for the civilians. I also begin to understand that this is likely true for most all wars. But most of all, I begin to appreciate what the founders of the United States of America meant by their revolutionary concept: "government Of the People, By the People, For the People." Isn't THAT what the US and our allies are supposed to support?