Since Saturday when Israel abruptly changed its eight-day air assault against Hamas (the Islamic organization that controls the government in Gaza), into a ground offensive of the Gaza Strip, the Israeli army has reportedly taken over key strategic areas in northern and southern Gaza, including certain rocket launching sites where Hamas had been launching rocket fire into southern Israel.
In spite of the Israeli incursion, The Associated Press was reporting Hamas was still able to launch approximately 25 rockets at southern Israel by Sunday afternoon, according to a military source.
Meanwhile, AP was quoting a Ministry Health official who claimed 64 Palestinians have been killed, 31 of them civilians, while five Israelis have been killed since the ground campaign began. Since December 27th, the death toll in the Gaza Strip has risen to more than 512, according to estimates compiled from the U.N. and Palestinian health officials, including The Associated Press.
The confrontation is growing more threatening by the hour, with many questioning whether it will turn into urban warfare, with house-to house fighting, but more importantly, what the future holds for Israeli- Palestian relations if Hamas, considered a terrorist organization by Israel, the United States and the European Union, is not removed root-and-branch.
So I posed a few questionst to W. Nathaniel Howell, Professor of Public Affairs at the University of Virginia, and former Ambassador to Kuwait in hopes he could put this conflict into perspective on what the future holds for the region.
Q. Will anything of substance be achieved by Israel�s offensive into Gaza?
A. Israel is infinitely more powerful militarily than Hamas which is confined to the limited territory of Gaza. If Israel is prepared to accept the casualties, collateral damage to civilian Palestinians, and international isolation of an extended invasion of Gaza, it can eliminate the military capability of Hamas temporarily. In the process, however, it will make additional enemies among Palestinians and others without advancing the possibility of a durable solution of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. So, I guess the answer depends, ultimately on how one defines �substance�
Q. Do you see any political solution between Hamas and Israel?
A. In fact, the only lasting solution to the problem is political, whether the Palestinian side is represented by Hamas, or the Palestinian Authority. There is some evidence that Hamas is not monolithic in its opposition to negotiation. Hamas won the election in Gaza primarily because the Palestinian Authority proved incapable of demonstrating that it could produce a better life for the Palestinian people. Its possession of rocket capability presented Israel with a real dilemma. Whatever the outcome of the current confrontation, Israel�s most promising approach would be to demonstrate that the Palestinian Authority, not Hamas, can give the Palestinians a viable State. That, however, would entail the withdrawal of settlements from Palestinian territory, and Israel has not thus far shown that it values a just and lasting peace more than territorial acquisition.
Q. Are there any historical facts about Hamas that might give readers a better understanding of this terrorist organization, and how it has become such a threat to Israel�s security?
A. One of the least understood aspects of the evolution of Hamas was the role of the Israeli authorities in facilitating its growth in the early period. At a time when the PLO and Fatah were anathema to the GOI, some leaders saw in the rise of this Islam-based organization an opportunity to weaken the PLO and, perhaps, create an alternative negotiating partner. So, they did little to impede Hamas�s development. This was a partially mistaken judgment, as it turned out. Hamas was able to outpoll the nationalists largely because the Palestinian Authority had not achieved progress toward a better life. Still, the Palestinians as a people were never known as Islamic fundamentalists and, should Hamas also fail to produce, much of its popular support will evaporate.
Q. How much support or backlash do you feel Israel will receive from the international community after mounting such an aggressive action into Gaza?
A. Those who are already ill-disposed toward Israel will make a lot of noise but this is not what should concern the Israelis. Rather, it is the growing disenchantment in Europe and other areas, including this country, with its policies. The current action could accelerate this but the disenchantment also applies to practices during periods of relative quiet: blockades; deprivation; collective punishment; continuing territorial encroachments; etc. It is true that Israel withdrew from Gaza and southern Lebanon, but they did so because the human and other costs of occupation were too high. So, they probably do not plan to remain in Gaza. But, the Palestinians have been under their occupation and/or domination for more than forty years and, as long as that continues, neither Israelis or Palestinians will escape the conflict.
*****
This is a statement that the Israeli government released Saturday on its aims of the ground campaign.
Ground Operation Talking Points
January 3, 2009
� The limited scale ground operation is a continuation of our plan
a.) Israel embarked on this limited scale ground operation in order to change the security situation and to bring peace and quiet to our towns and cities in the south; which have endured eight long years of Hamas fire. Our central aim remains distancing and neutralizing the launching areas of rockets and mortars against Israeli targets.
b.) The operation up until now, which has been mostly carried out by air, has led to significant success and has severely damaged Hamas� capabilities.
c.) We have known all along that air operations by themselves would not be sufficient to bring about the needed change in the security situation. The ground operation is a continuation of our actions according to plan.
� Responsibility for the suffering in Gaza lies with Hamas
a.) It is clear to Israel that a ground operation might be costly in terms of the lives of our soldiers, as well as the lives of civilians in Gaza. Nevertheless, the terrorist activities of Hamas and its continued rocket attacks on our towns and cities leave us no choice. Responsibility for all that entails rests squarely with Hamas.
� Prevention of future hostilities
a.) The operation has been successful, but it is not over. An early end to the operation might allow Hamas to rebuild its forces and to renew hostilities, all of which would require further Israeli action.
b.) This operation must be seen through to its end so that we do not find ourselves back in the same place a couple of months hence.
� We have no desire to rule over Gaza
a.) When Israel disengaged from Gaza in 2005 and removed all of its soldiers and civilians, it proved it had no interest in ruling Gaza.
b.) The purpose of the present ground operation is to bring about a change in the security situation and not to establish Israeli rule in Gaza.
� Opportunity to strengthen moderates
a.) A significant change in the security situation in Gaza, one which can be attained through ground action, will make clear the failure of the extremist elements in the Palestinian camp. By doing so it may also create the necessary opportunity for strengthening the moderates.
-Bill Lucey
[email protected]
You seem to have got the niche from the root, Awesome work
Posted by: gmc indiana | 11/10/2009 at 02:35 AM