Last week, Hamas started a war with Israel that it could not win militarily. The hundreds of missiles it has fired at Israeli villages, towns and cities have terrorized millions of civilians, but thanks to effective civil defense procedures and a generally successful use of the Iron Dome system, they have failed to kill or injure many people. On the other hand, the Israel Defense Forces have exacted a heavy price from Hamas in terms of leaders and terrorists killed and destruction of their armaments. But Hamas still thinks it can win. As in the past, by hiding their missiles and fighters among civilians, they have deliberately endangered Palestinian civilians and created a toll of casualties with which they hope to distort the world’s view of the conflict. All it takes is one errant Israeli bomb that kills (as one did yesterday) a family to create an international incident in which the terrorist-run enclave can falsely represent itself as a victim rather than a perpetrator.
But Hamas is hoping for more than just the usual media gang-tackle aimed at delegitimizing Israel’s right to defend its borders and its people. This time, Hamas is counting on the diplomatic support of Egypt and Turkey to not only force Israel to accept a cease-fire before the terrorist group’s military infrastructure is significantly damaged, but also to extract concessions from the Israelis. Hamas is using the indirect negotiations for a halt to the fighting currently going on in Cairo to pursue an agenda that would effectively render it invulnerable to future Israeli counter-attacks as well as to strengthen its hold on Gaza. It goes almost without saying that no Israeli government could possibly consider agreeing to those terms even if meant that a costly ground attack on Gaza was the only alternative.
Hamas’s confidence is based on the idea not only that Egypt and Turkey have its back but also that the United States will not support Israel’s refusal to accept its demands. That is where President Obama, who has sought to avoid direct involvement in the Gaza fighting, becomes a crucial figure in its resolution.
Up until this point, the Obama administration’s stand on Gaza has been everything Israel and its supporters could have asked for. The president has himself spoken up on behalf of Israel’s right to self-defense and specifically said that the rocket fire from Gaza could not be tolerated. But he has also made it clear to Israel that the United States would oppose a ground attack into Gaza. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu doesn’t need Obama to tell him that such a decision would be a disaster in terms of international opinion or that it would result in higher casualties on both sides. But he also understands that if Hamas sticks to its price for a halt to the rocket fire, the IDF may have no choice but to go in on the ground.
The only way to avoid that unpalatable scenario is for the president to make it clear to both the Turks and the Egyptians that not only will Israel not tolerate an end to the fighting that leaves Hamas the victor, but that the United States won’t accept it either. And if that means giving Israel the green light to take out even more of the terrorist infrastructure in Gaza, so be it.
Unfortunately, Hamas has construed Obama’s friendship for the ruling Islamists in Turkey and his embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as being a green light to their own escalation of the conflict as well as their unrealistic demands being placed on Israel.
Despite the pounding they have taken in the last week, Hamas still thinks it is winning the battle for public opinion. Even more important, it thinks it has the whip hand over Israel on the diplomatic playing field. The only way to correct their misperceptions is for the United States to make it clear that a Gaza cease-fire ought not to be allowed to make Hamas invulnerable or to strengthen the dubious legitimacy of the terrorist regime. If President Obama fails to speak out strongly on this point, the result will be exactly the escalation in fighting that he wants so desperately to avoid.
This entire war is Obama's fault in the first place. He is ignorant of the realities of the ME. Obama will never so openly support Israel as you suggest. It would destroy his narrative that he is befriedning the Arab world. His aim is to go down in history as the President that forced a solution to the Arab-Israeli crisis. He simply doesn't understand that only when there is a united front between the US and Israel will the Arabs actually sue for any kind of peace.
Israel, in 2008, calculated the need for calories in Gaza at 2290 which was 170 trucks per day. They then allowed 67 trucks per day (their own figures). This means that Israel deliberately pegged the amount of food coming to Gaza at 902 calories. The agreement between Israel and Egypt states that the Egypt-Gaza crossing is for people traffic only. nYou can have a truce between Israel and Gaza. But as long as Palestinian children are left malnourished by deliberate actions of Israel, no amount of guided missile surgical strike assassination is going to make world want to make peace with Israel. You cannot starve or bomb people into liking you.
Well, the Palestinians are the chubbiest, best dentitioned, best dressed, best Swiss-banked, and certainly best armed of any malnourished population the world has ever seen. n n
Oh yes, also the most genocidal of any 'malnourished' population since Cro Magnon man wiped out the Neanderthals.
Deployment of Turkish and Egyptian troops and gear in Gaza is inevitable. Both have US backing. I rather like the idea of them being occupied by foreign forces though.
Every time Israel has allowed foreign troops to serve as a buffer between itself and its Arab enemies the consequences have been disastrous. Prior to the 1967 war the UN troops immediately pulled out. In Lebanon the UN troops placed there as a result of Livni's disastrous UN Resolution 1701 have allowed Hizbollah to not only rearm but from time to time fire on Israel. It also lead to the French troops stationed there to threaten to shoot down Israeli reconnaissance flights. Even the American troops located in the Sinai have done nothing to stop the rising terrorism against Israel in the Negev/Eilat area. Placing Turkish and Egyptian troops in Gaza will probably lead to a causus belli with those countries once Israel is forced to return fire from the rockets that will inevitably be fired from Gaza.
That may be true but the political dimension of having the Gazans under the oppression of 3 different Muslim armies is too precious to ignore. Of COURSE The Turks would go to war with Israel but they'd be tasked with attempting to protect the Gazans they're ostensibly there to protect. Of COURSE the Egyptians would go to war with Israel but this would suck their country dry and probably result in a near implosion of the Muslim Brotherhood which would be shown to be impotent and worthless against the Jews.
You are a Warrior Empress!
That's right. They will be trip-wires, not peacekeepers. n n
The UN troops on the Lebanese border also helped cover a terrorist squad who kidnapped and later murdered three IDF soldiers, and deliberately prevented Israel from trying to rescure them.
There is going to be a fight. Better to have it on your terms than your opponents. There IS going to be a fight. I see nothing wrong with bogging down Egypt and Turkey in a mini Vietnam of their own making just as Turkey is trying to not get bogged down in a mini Vietnam in Syria and Kurdistan. Much better to surround Turkey an Egypt with expensive unwinnable conflicts on their own borders, and in Turkey's case two different borders. n nSince the UN and whomever isn't going to do their stated job of keeping the opposing sides apart anyway, may as well embroil all the 'peacekeepers' in it in order to keep Turkey, Egypt and Hamas busy not killing one another, UN observers, the civilian population and such. Because it's patently obvious, just as it was 10 years ago that all any of this has accomplished is resetting the waterlevel of 'acceptable levels of atrocities Israel is willing to let Hamas get away with. In a years' time they'll be back to firing missiles into Israel. But these will be bigger and better. The upside is that most of Turkey and Egypts armament is incapable at shooting at Israeli and American IFF equipped aircraft. This will force them to abandon or modify most of their anti aircraft gear for Russian or Chinese, Iranian or indigenous gear. Which flushes a few hundred million dollars or more down the toilet. At the same time you get to create wonderful confluence of tribal internal warfare among Gazans, Iranians, Palestinian Jihad, Egyptians and Turks, ALL of whom hold deep deep hatreds for one another. and have almost no ability to cooperate and work together. n nParallel to this of course, Israel has to cut all infrastructure services to Gaza. Let the Turks and Egyptians keep the lights on the toilets flushing the fuel flowing the food deliveries on time. They want a protectorate? They got it. n nOn a small scale, think of it as the final revenge you can have upon a maniacal control freak, which is, to actually hand them off all control. They don't want it and can't manage it. Then sit back and watch it all burn.
Isn't it just easier to force Egypt to absorb Gaza, and hold it responsible not only for feeding lighting and watering it, but also for its good behavior? n nStill not too late to rectify Begin's mistake. n nAnd if you don't like that scenario, what about population transferring them to Egypt? n n nTurning Gaza into a vietnam for Egypt and Turkey, with Israel one of the combatants does not sound like a good idea at all. n n
As I recall, Begin tried but Sadat refused to take it. n nSomeone once told me that Ohio and Michigan fought a war over Toledo during the 19th century, and Ohio lost.
He should have said 'no sinai without gaza'. n nHe allowed Egypt to make Gaza a sword forever at Israel's belly. n nOh well. n n
I like your comment about the maniacal control freak, YIM. A friend once told me that the way to deal with a bad boss is to give him exactly what he asks you for, no more no less, and this seems to be a similar response.
They have deliberately endangered Palestinian civilians — AND foreign reporters. nBy the way, are we sure it was an errant Israeli strike that killed that family? A few days ago there were other civilian casualties that were blamed on Israel but turned out to be from a Hamas missile that fell short. From what I have read, almost 10% of the missiles launched from Gaza fall within Gaza instead of reaching Israel.
No, we're not sure that any report by any news organization is credible in the slightest. Recycled footage from Syria, staged events, faked reports, history of fraud, unbelievable accounts by "health officials," body "mining" from morgues, casualties from internal Hamas murders of opponents, casualties from defective Hamas weapons, Hamas-loyal stringers, frightened or biassed news people…all this tells us that no report of Gaza civillian casualties can or should be believed and discussed as if real.
I believe the 10% failure rate on PA missiles, as that number (which I have rounded; it was 60 some out of 702, but that was several launches ago) because it came from the IDF and the MSM is studiously avoiding any reference to it.
Well then, ahad, those are probably the only credible estimates we have and are going to have. So, if anyone can ball-park the casualty rates in the crowds jumping and cheering the iminent destruction of the Zionist entity as 10% of their airborn jalopies crash on their heads or explode in the launchers, we might get somewhere. Otherwise, we're left with the null hypothesis that media reports of civilian deaths due to IDF ordnance are all sheer bunkum.
Noble try, but there is no mind there to change.
Maybe, but it's always good to stay in practice.