{Previously published in the Jerusalem Post}
According to Avi Issacharoff writing in The Times of Israel, Israel has already lost the Fourth Gaza War. Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar “has not only managed to score military and diplomatic victories, but can even claim to have likely brought about the end of Netanyahu’s government.”
A positive spin would see a Hamas victory as possibly giving them political cover to accept a longer-term ceasefire, much as Sadat was able to claim success after the 1973 war before reconciling with Israel. Make no mistake, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Hamas is an American-designated terrorist entity that will never accept a Jewish state, but Israeli and American interests may be served if its claim to victory delays the next war, giving Israel and America some more years of quiet before Israel has to “mow the grass” again. Unfortunately, the more likely assessment is that Hamas will see their victory as evidence of Israeli weakness, encouraging them to be aggressive sooner rather than later.
For America, the first fact we need to be clear about is
that the agenda of radical Islamist ideology will continue to trump the
humanitarian needs of the Palestinian people. Economic incentives or sanctions
will not alter Hamas’ goal. After years of incitement against Israel, the
people of Gaza would still re-elect a radical Islamist government over the
corrupt Palestinian Authority.
Israel has no apparent military answer for Gaza, despite the Israeli public
being in favor of a significant operation against Hamas to end the constant
threat of missiles that have made life intolerable for Israelis living in the
South in a perpetual state of traumatic stress.
Senior Likud official Tzachi Hanegbi was forced to apologize this week for
publicly stating the unspoken truth that within the government and IDF
leadership, Gaza’s conflict is considered a “minor” and non-existential threat,
as long as life goes on in the Tel Aviv bubble.
We hear from Israeli politicians like former defense minister Avigdor Lieberman
and Jewish Home Party leader Naphtali Bennett, whose call to war is more
calculated to influencing voters before the next election, but whose demand
that their government protect its citizens from the constant threat of mortars
is completely reasonable.
So then why is Israel not contemplating a full-scale invasion to remove Hamas
from Gaza once and for all? Why is the IDF so leery about conquering Gaza?
1. Logistics: Within the dense urban networks are miles of advanced tunnels
crisscrossing Gaza with booby-trapped civilian structures set as traps to
kidnap Israeli soldiers.
2. Lawyers and Proportionality: Israeli commanders may fear lawyers more than
Hamas. Israeli lawyers will be embedded within all levels of the IDF,
perpetually second-guessing every operation, knowing every Palestinian civilian
killed will be part of the evidence used against Israel at the ICC
(International Criminal Court). The army’s hands will be tied as it tries to
fight a terrorist entity that uses human shields as canon fodder, and hospitals
and schools as forward bases of operations. Israeli lawyers will also be
dealing with the politicized definition of proportionality where Israel will be
accused of disproportionality if more Palestinians are killed than Israelis.
3. Keeping the Eye on the True Existential Threat: According to David Makovsky
of the Washington Institute, “Many senior security officials see Gaza as a
distraction from Israel’s primary military challenge: keeping Iran from
entrenching a Hezbollah-style military infrastructure in Syria.
Former Military Intelligence head and National Security adviser Maj.-Gen.
Yaakov Amidror said, “A war in Gaza will only benefit [PA President] Abu Mazen
and Iran, and we don’t want to give Iran any gifts.”
4. Nation Building With a Hostile Neighbor: The last thing
the IDF wants to do after defeating Hamas is control and provide for two
million Gazans who have been indoctrinated to blame Israel for all of their
ills. Just think of Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon from 1982 to 2000
after the Second Lebanon War, except this time with much more dangerous
possibilities.
So what happens the day after Israel “wins”?
Does Israel hand Gaza over to the Palestinian Authority (PA) as many American
foreign policy advisers advocate? If it did, Gaza could turn into an even more
chaotic territory where Iran and Turkey would support an Islamist insurgency,
while Israel supports an unpopular Palestinian Authority who will be portrayed
as Jewish collaborators without the support of the Gazan people.
That new reality in Gaza may also be a lightning strike destabilizing the West
Bank and Jordan, empowering jihadists to ramp up terrorism while challenging
both the PA and the Hashemite monarchy, a pillar of any American peace plan. A
domino effect could also motivate Iran to unleash Hezbollah in the north, while
it enjoys weakening Israel in a new proxy war in Gaza.
Some American Middle East experts say the end game would include Egypt, or a
consortium of Arab states working with the Palestinian Authority. Unfortunately
no Arab nation wants any part of Gaza, knowing it is a basket case that will
cause political repercussions with its own citizens.
Egypt has enough on its hands with al-Qaida in the Sinai and chaos next store
in Libya. All Egypt wants from its enemy Hamas is for it to stop supporting the
jihadists in the Sinai. The Saudis do not want to be involved in another Yemeni
proxy war with Iran in Gaza, and Israel would never allow Qatar or Turkey into
Gaza, knowing that both are in cahoots with Iran.
So where does that leave us?
“Cutting the grass” every few years, unless Hamas steps over a red line such as
hitting a school bus full of children, or incinerating a kindergarten. That
would automatically elicit an overwhelming Israeli response where Israel might
finally take the fateful decision to take Hamas out of Gaza.
Then the law of unintended consequences will rear its ugly head.
The writer, a regular contributor to The Jerusalem Post, is
the director of MEPIN™ (Middle East Political and Information Network™), a
Middle East research analysis read by members of Congress, their foreign policy
advisers, members of the Knesset, journalists and organizational leaders.