Why Hamas Gained The Upper Hand In The Cease-Fire With Israel

Right wing politicians in Israel, along with politicans from the "centrist" opposition party Kadima, have slammed the truce between the Jewish State and the terror group Hamas.  “The goals of his operation were not reached, and the next round is only a matter of time,” the Kadima party chairman Shaul Mofaz said. “We should not have stopped at this stage. Hamas got stronger and we did not gain deterrence.”  Mofaz is a former IDF chief of staff who led Operation Defensive Shield in 2002.  While it should of course be noted that Kadima is the main opposition party to Benjamin Netyanyahu's Likud, and therefore politics are clearly in play with an election around the corner, Mofaz has good reason to make his claims.  “The army knows how to do its work, and we could have won this time. A cease-fire at this point is a mistake; this is not how a war against terror ends. Hamas has the upper hand,” he stated. 

“Instead of letting the IDF smash [Hamas], the government left this operation with its tail between its legs and having not reaching any of its objectives,” National Union MKs Michael Ben-Ari and Arieh Eldad, who will run in the next election as the leaders of the newly created Strong Israel party stated. They called the cease-fire a “white flag and a surrender to terror.”

A snap poll on Israel’s Channel Two news confirmed what many were saying. The poll found that 70 percent of the Israeli public did not support signing a cease-fire with Hamas, 24 percent were in favor and 6 percent were undecided. “We don’t have to listen to the public on these issues –the leadership must make the decisions,” Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said in an interview with Channel 2 when asked about the unpopularity of the cease-fire.  

Gaza celebrates in the streets, shots firing into the air, as a victory party ensues.  "Allahu akbar, dear people of Gaza you won," blared mosque loudspeakers in Gaza as the truce took effect. "You have broken the arrogance of the Jews."  

Is the jubilation on the part of the Islamoterror group justified?  Unfortunately, a strong case can be made that it is.  Hamas can claim that Israel brought tens of thousands of troops to the border, and then walked away. The Zionists talked a big game, but it was empty threats. It can claim that Hamas, on the other hand, has walked away quite intact, more popular than ever. It can claim that Abbas's Fatah is feckless and irrelevant, able to achieve nothing while it is only Hamas willing to stand up for the cause of terror and fight to destroy Israel. It can claim that Israel did not even hit back as strongly as it could have, and was threatening to. It can point to the fact that the cease-fire is administered by Muslim Brotherhood Egypt, and that therefore Hamas has nothing to fear, and the Gazans can be rest assured there will be more hostilities and terror to come with more weapons flowing in. It can say it stood up to the Jews by targeting civilians, and is not seriously weakened for it. I don't think Israel realistically achieved much of anything strategically, other than a handful of replaceable terrorists taken out. 

The fact remains that in order to credibly declare victory a terror group like Hamas simply needs to emerge from confronting Israel no weaker for it.  In this instance, they emerged stronger in terms of their position among Palestinians, in the Middle East, and around the world at large.  For Israel to declare victory, on the other hand, it has to achieve much more. It needs to dismantle, or else clearly weaken, its enemy when it chooses to confront it. Otherwise, the deterrent effect of Israel's military superiority itself inevitably lessens.

Can anyone trust Muslim Brotherhood Egypt to stop the flow of weapons into Gaza? And yet the U.S. is taking this cease-fire as some sign of good faith in Muslim Brotherhood Egypt? Keep the military aid flowing! The US heaping praise on Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi should make any civilized person's stomach churn. Egypt displayed unprecedented support for Hamas by sending its Prime Minister to Gaza during hostilities, a major success for Hamas as well. And then it is their Egyptian ally that becomes the "mediator." Who is on the Philedlphi corridor to make sure that weapons shipments do not continue? In other words, who mans that border between Gaza and Egypt? Hamas and its open ally that is Muslim Brotherhood Egypt, of course. What a joke. 

In fact, Israeli intelligence satellites have spied the loading of rockets and other material in Iran believed to be destined for the Gaza Strip, the UK-based Sunday Times reported, citing Israeli officials.  Iran began preparing the weapons shipment around the same time Israel and Hamas negotiated a cease-fire, with the shipment including the Iranian-made Fajr-5 medium-range rockets, the same model that was fired toward Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Is there even any indication that the Hamas rocket stockpiles were severely cut into? Hamas was literally still firing as the cease fire was being announced, so that is very hard to believe. I doubt that anyone seriously believes that had no cease-fire been made, that Hamas was on the verge of running out of its rocket arsenal. 

Furthermore, can Israel be serious when they talk about their expectations of this being "long lasting"? There were Hamas conditions for the truce, and they were met (e.g., Israel will stop any targeting of terrorism in Gaza and will ease the movement of people and goods at border-crossing areas). Israel's condition is that Hamas's holding back from engaging in terrorism will be "long lasting." Unfortunately, everyone knows this is not a meaningful arrangement for long-term peace. 

The Hamas Charter, which cites the Protocols of the Elders of Zion as a legitimate source, states unambiguously: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just  as it obliterated others before it."  There can be no armistice with an organization that dies for that mission.  There can only be temporary periods of quiet during which the terror group regroups and rearms for the next round of attacks.  And in view of the fact that Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood was sworn in as the new Egyptian president, and now serves as enforcer of the cease-fire, it is interesting to recall the words of the founder of that Islamic movement in an interview printed in The New York Times on August 2, 1948: "If the Jewish state becomes a fact, and this is realized by the Arab peoples, they will drive the Jews who live in their midst into the sea."
 
Outside of Hamas, is Iran more or less emboldened by this response to its rockets being launched and the hit Hamas took?   Israel is looking weak in Tehran, because I am sure the mullahs were paying close attention.  Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadenijad made sure to congratulate Hamas on "their great victory."  Maintaining a credible military threat against Iran is critical for Israel as Iran races towards nukes, and this recent confrontation with Hamas may have diminished the level of credibility.

Making matters worse is that Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu  may have folded to US pressure. If Israel wants a cease-fire it should be only because Israel thinks it is in its own security interest, not because Hillary Clinton swings by days into hostilities and having to consider American pressure.  The statement by the Israeli Prime Minister stated: "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this evening (Wednesday, 21 November 2012), spoke with US President Barack Obama and acceded to his recommendation give the Egyptian ceasefire proposal a chance..."  The statement from President Obama stated: "The President commended the Prime Minister for agreeing to the Egyptian ceasefire proposal – which the President recommended the Prime Minister do..."  Why is Israel "acceding" to U.S. "recommendations"? Israel has an inalienable right to self-defense, and should be able to make decisions in its own security interests rather than facing phone calls from the President and a Secretary of State running to Israel to exert pressure days into hostilities.

At least Israel can now breath a sigh of relief. The real question is for how long? It is surely temporary, there will be more attacks on Israel, no doubt about that. It is not a question of if, but of when. Tweet