Commentary Magazine


Contentions

Kerry’s Unacceptable Ceasefire Seeks to Appease Hamas

Reports have emerged that Israel’s security cabinet is unanimously opposed to Secretary of State John Kerry’s latest ceasefire proposals. Much has changed since Israel unilaterally accepted the Egyptian-brokered ceasefire last week, before the discovery of the extent of Hamas’s underground terror tunnels and the massive terrorist attack planned for September. The Egyptian proposals—which had the backing of the Arab League—offered an immediate cessation of the violence without handing Hamas either a public-relations victory or any practical rewards for its latest terror outburst. Kerry’s half-baked plan, as reported, has none of those virtues.

Kerry’s proposals have two glaring flaws. The first is that while they would seek to halt the missiles being fired into Israeli population centers, and likewise Israel would hold its fire, it’s not clear that the plan would allow for Israel to continue to destroy the warren of cross-border terror tunnels that Gazan militants have dug into Israel, some stretching directly beneath Israeli homes. These tunnels represent an immediate and critical threat to the lives and safety of Israelis and it’s inconceivable that Israel be expected to agree to anything that impairs its ability to counteract this breach of its security borders.

The other problematic element of Kerry’s plan is that it seeks to establish a week within which all of Hamas’s demands would be put on the table for negotiation. This just takes us back to where the parties were in the 2012 negotiations when there was also an effort to grant Hamas concessions. There cannot be a situation whereby whenever Hamas wishes to issue fresh demands it does so by instigating successive rounds of rocket warfare against Israel. And besides, several of Hamas’s complaints are against the Egyptians and the closure of the Rafah crossing on the Egyptian border.

Hamas is now demanding a total lift of the so-called blockade on the Gaza Strip. But back in 2012 the restrictions on imports—and indeed exports—for Gaza were dramatically eased so as to only prevent materials that could be used by Islamists in their terror activities. For instance, any concrete brought into the strip was supposed to be done under the auspices of United Nations-approved projects. But just as UN facilities have been used for the storing of rockets, we’ve seen how that concrete, supposedly brought in for approved civilian purposes, has in fact been used to create a sprawling network of terror tunnels.

It is vital that Hamas is not rewarded for causing this latest round of violence; the Egyptians no doubt had this at the forefront of their minds when they drew up their proposals. But this seems to be beyond Kerry. President Obama has of course joined the chorus of voices calling for the “underlying issues” in Gaza to be addressed, thus buying into the notion that Hamas’s terrorism is fundamentally driven by a legitimate set of objectives which put the needs of the people of Gaza first. Nothing could be further from the truth and the very notion that Hamas has a set of negotiable demands is delusional. They want to kill Jews and end Israel, and no amount of pandering to “underlying issues” is going to change that.

If nothing else, the fact that the Egyptians came up with a ceasefire that Israel could accept, whereas Kerry has come up with something that Israel appears poised to reject, certainly says something about just how far down the rabbit-hole the Obama administration has gone with its foreign policy.


Join the discussion…

Are you a subscriber? Log in to comment »

Not a subscriber? Join the discussion today, subscribe to Commentary »


7 Responses to “Kerry’s Unacceptable Ceasefire Seeks to Appease Hamas”

  1. LAURA FINSTEN says:

    Every once in a while, I see someone who I normally respect say that it isn’t that Obama is anti-Israel, it’s something else. Can someone please explain to me how Obama/Kerry can be so stupid that they don’t get what it is at stake for Israel in this operation? Because that’s the only alternative I can see to antipathy toward Israel and HER innocent civilians.

    • THEODOR REBARBER says:

      Laura Finstein,
      Obama is not that stupid. In the Middle East, Obama and Kerry are LESS sympathetic to Israel than even the Europeans, who have large muslim populations. In the first week that Israel was being bombarded with missiles, before Israel entered Gaza, European leaders made statements supportive of Israel while Obama himself didn’t say a single word. In the ceasefire negotiations the last couple of days, Obama/Kerry have sided with Qatar and Turkey, which support Hamas, and have undermined Egypt and Saudi Arabia, which are opposed to Hamas. But, mainly, Obama cares at all about what is going on in that area because the left has become rabidly anti-Israel and Obama wants to maintain their political support. In other words, it’s really political. Otherwise, when it comes to foreign affairs, he doesn’t bother because he doesn’t care. Look at how little he has done about Ukraine, Syria, Libya, Iraq/IS, Chinese bullying of Japan in Asia, etc., etc. In his view, that’s all “over there”; it would only get in the way of his domestic policy and political goals, which he really DOES care about.

      • LAURA FINSTEN says:

        So why don’t Democrat-voting American Jews who support Israel see that they have been duped, and why aren’t they screaming bloody h@11 at the lying, two-faced b@$t@rd?

  2. RUTH GRETZINGER says:

    there’s a third “glaring flaw” in John Kerry’s ceasefire proposal: John Kerry.

    why should Israel trust him, or his boss? since the beginning of this conflict, the administration has been counseling “restraint” for Israel while asking little of the Palestinians.

    the hot-mic incident last weekend and the unnecessary FAA ban on US airlines flying into Tel Aviv were bad enough, but they’ve just possibly stooped lower, if the news can be believed:

    apparently the emergency request for $228 million for Iron Dome is going to be attached to the very unpopular Obama-border bill. could Obama really be this craven?

  3. TIKI SHAPIRA says:

    Kerry/Obama, part of the problem, not the solution!

  4. ROMAN SZEREMETA says:

    Looks like Kerry’s proposals are unacceptable to Haaretz – not an easy thing to do!
    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/haaretz-slams-kerry_797432.html

  5. STEPHEN PARKER says:

    Kerry’s spoken proposal, which he made to Israel, Hamas, and Egypt, and the written proposal received by them, was, as we know, radically different; the written terms might have been dictated to Kerry by Hamas, and Israel’s leaked rejection was predictable. Kerry continued to assert that his spoken and his written proposals were the same. Kerry is not particularly intelligent nor friendly to Israel, but I doubt he would be so transparently disingenuous. I suspect that the written proposal was composed by others: either written at or by the White House, or by a person or persons on Kerry’s staff who actually take their orders from the White House, and then sent to the parties through State Department channels, without Kerry having read it or–at the very least–without Kerry understanding the actual nature of the document’s terms. The proposal, meant to save Hamas’s tunnels and other infrastructure as well as enabling Hamas to replenish its rocket arsenal, was consistent with Hillary Clinton’s assertion that Valerie Jarrett controls the State Department and largely sets U.S. foreign policy, and is consistent with the White House’s policy toward Israel and treatment of Netanyahu. Thugs occupy the White House, and the Obama regime has been
    extremely successful in implementing its ruinous agenda. Obama and his handlers are not presiding over a political administration; this is a criminal enterprise whose titular head, Obama, was ,is, and will continue to be a criminal. Those who for seven years have believed or pretended to believe that this regime can be dealt with through political and civil processes, are either deluded, or corrupt or cowardly. The way to rid this nation of these criminals and avoid its total ruin, is to
    compel the Attorney’s General of our states, and the Federal Judiciary’s Circuit, Appellate, and Supreme courts, and Grand Juries, to uphold their oaths of office and bring indictments and trials for crimes under the U.S. Criminal Code.




Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor to our site, you are allowed 8 free articles this month.
This is your first of 8 free articles.

If you are already a digital subscriber, log in here »

Print subscriber? For free access to the website and iPad, register here »

To subscribe, click here to see our subscription offers »

Please note this is an advertisement skip this ad
Clearly, you have a passion for ideas.
Subscribe today for unlimited digital access to the publication that shapes the minds of the people who shape our world.
Get for just
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
YOU HAVE READ OF 8 FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
FOR JUST
Welcome to Commentary Magazine.
We hope you enjoy your visit.
As a visitor, you are allowed 8 free articles.
This is your first article.
You have read of 8 free articles this month.
YOU HAVE READ 8 OF 8
FREE ARTICLES THIS MONTH.
for full access to
CommentaryMagazine.com
INCLUDES FULL ACCESS TO:
Digital subscriber?
Print subscriber? Get free access »
Call to subscribe: 1-800-829-6270
You can also subscribe
on your computer at
CommentaryMagazine.com.
LOG IN WITH YOUR
COMMENTARY MAGAZINE ID
Don't have a CommentaryMagazine.com log in?
CREATE A COMMENTARY
LOG IN ID
Enter you email address and password below. A confirmation email will be sent to the email address that you provide.