by Caroline B. Glick
What the Palestinian silence on who committed what atrocity tells us is that in this new terror war, Palestinians believe they can't lose.
What are we to make of the fact that no one has taken credit for Wednesday’s  bombing in Jerusalem?
Wednesday’s bombing was not a stand-alone event. It was  part and parcel of the new Palestinian terror war that is just coming into view.  As Israel considers how to contend with the emerging onslaught, it is important  to notice how it differs from its predecessors.
On a military level, the  tactics the Palestinians have so far adopted are an interesting blend of  state-of-the-art missile attacks with old-fashioned knife and  bomb-in-the-briefcase attacks. The diverse tactics demonstrate that this war is  a combination of Iranian-proxy war and local terror pick-up cells. The attacks  are also notable for their geographic dispersion and for the absence thus far of  suicide attacks.
For the public, the new tactics are not interesting and  the message they send is nothing new. With or without suicide bombers,  Israelis understand that we are entering a new period of unremitting fear, where  we understand that we are in danger no matter where we are. Whether we’re in bed  asleep, or our way to work or school, or sitting down on a park bench or at a  restaurant, whether we’re in Rishon Lezion, Sderot, Jerusalem, Itamar or  Beersheba, we are in the Palestinians’ crosshairs. All of us are  “settlers.” All of us are in danger.
The military innovations are  important for IDF commanders who need to figure out how to answer the public’s  demand for security. They will have to draw operational conclusions about the  challenges this mix of tactics and strategic architecture poses.
While  the military rationales of the various Palestinian terrorists are important,  like its two predecessors, the new Palestinian terror war is first and foremost  a political war. Like its two predecessors, which began in 1987 and 2000, the  new terror war’s primary purpose is not to murder Jews. Killing is just an added  perk. The new war’s primary purpose is to weaken Israel politically in order to  bring about its eventual collapse.
And it is in this political context  that the various terror armies’ refusal to take responsibility for Wednesday’s  attack in Jerusalem, and their moves to shroud in ambiguity much of the  responsibility for their recent terror activity is noteworthy. In the past,  Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad were quick to take credit for  massacres.
Initially it seemed as though that standard practice was being  continued in the newest round of murder. Fatah’s Aksa Martyrs Brigades, for  instance, were quick to take credit for the massacre of the Fogel family in  Itamar on March 12. Hamas seemed to be competing for credit when its forces held  a public celebration of the atrocity in Gaza City on March 13.
But then  Fatah withdrew its claim of responsibility, and Hamas never claimed  credit.
As for the rocket and missile barrages from Gaza, Hamas took  credit for the 58 projectiles shot off on southern Israel last Saturday. But  then it let Islamic Jihad take credit for the longer-range Katyusha attacks on  Rishon Lezion, Beersheba, Gedera and Ashdod this week.
And again, no one  took credit for the bombing in Jerusalem on Wednesday.
WHAT DOES this  sudden bout of modesty tell us about how the Palestinian terror masters view the  current onslaught against Israel? What does it teach us about their assessment  of their political challenges and goals?
In the two previous terror wars, the  terror groups had two motivations for taking credit for their attacks. The first  reason was to expand their popularity. In Palestinian society, the more Jews you  kill, the more popular you are.
The main reason Hamas won the 2006  Palestinian elections was that the Palestinians believed Hamas terror was  responsible for Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in August 2005. Even though Fatah  actually killed more Jews than Hamas did between 2000 and 2005, Hamas reaped  greater rewards for its attacks because its record was unblemished by political  engagement with Israel.
The second reason the various groups have always  been quick to take credit for attacks is that they wanted to show their state  sponsors that they were putting their arms, training and financial support to  good use. Saddam Hussein and the Saudi royals paid handsome rewards to the  families of killed and captured terrorists. Over the past several decades, Iran,  Syria and Hezbollah have spent hundreds of millions of dollars arming, training  and financing Palestinian terror cells from Fatah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad  alike.
The fact that today neither Hamas nor Fatah is interested in  taking credit for Wednesday’s bombing in Jerusalem or for the massacre of the  Fogel family is a signal that something fundamental is changing in the political  dynamic between the two factions. Before considering what the change may be, a  word of explanation about Islamic Jihad is in order.
Islamic Jihad was  founded by Iran in 1988. Unlike Hamas and Fatah, Islamic Jihad has no  political aspirations. It has no political operatives, and it is content to  limit its operations to terrorism.
After the much larger and more  powerful Hamas subordinated its command and control to Iran in 2005, Islamic  Jihad has served as nothing more than a Hamas sub-contractor. It carries out and  takes credit for attacks when Hamas doesn’t wish to do so.
There are two  plausible internal Palestinian explanations for Fatah’s and Hamas’s newfound  reticence, and they are not mutually exclusive. The first explanation of  their silence is that the recent talk about Fatah and Hamas forming a unity  government is serious. Fatah’s announcement Thursday that it had arrested two  Islamic Jihad terrorists in connection with the Jerusalem bombing is notable in  this vein. It signals that after four years of fighting Hamas forces in Judea  and Samaria, Fatah is looking for a more politically convenient group of usual  suspects.
The second reason Hamas and Fatah may be keeping mum about who  is responsible is that they both know who did it and they are using the terror  to gain leverage against one another at the negotiating table. If Hamas is  carrying out the attacks, its leaders may simply be using them to strengthen  their bargaining position in the unity talks. Fatah knows that if Hamas takes  credit for the attacks, its mass popularity in Judea and Samaria will grow. And  if Fatah is carrying them out, its leaders may be using them to show Hamas that  they are serious about burying the hatchet with the Palestinian branch of the  Muslim Brotherhood.
WHILE THE internal political dynamics of the various  Palestinian terror groups is interesting, it is not the main game in town. For  both Fatah and Hamas, the most important target audience is Europe. But before  we discuss how the Palestinians’ assessment of Europe is connected to their move  to obfuscate organizational responsibility for terrorism, it is necessary to  consider the concrete political goal of their new terror war.
Fatah is in  the midst of a global campaign to build international support for a unilateral  Palestinian declaration of independence in September. From Israel’s  perspective, the campaign is threatening for two reasons. First, a unilaterally  declared Palestinian state will be in a de facto state of war with Israel.  Second, if the Palestinians secure international recognition for their “state”  in Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and Gaza, the move will place 500,000 Jews who live  in these areas in the international crosshairs.
Much of the discussion  about this goal has centered on whether or not US President Barack Obama will  veto a UN Security Council resolution endorsing such a declaration. And based on  Obama’s behavior to date, the Palestinians have good reason to believe that he  may support their move. But in truth, the discussion about how the US will  respond to the planned Palestinian declaration is largely beside the point. The  point of the threatened declaration is not to get a UN Security Council  resolution supporting it. The point is to get the EU to enact further  sanctions against Israel.
And this brings us back to the new policy of  not taking credit for attacks on Israel, and to the decision to launch a new  terror war in general. On the face of it, at such a sensitive time for  the Palestinians diplomatically, it would seem that they would want to keep  their traditional good cop-Fatah, bad cop-Hamas routine going and have Hamas  take the credit for the recent attacks. Indeed, it would seem that the  Palestinians would want to hold off on attacks altogether until after they  declare independence.
The fact that Fatah and Hamas have neither waited  until after September to attack nor sought to differentiate themselves from one  another as the attacks coalesce into a new terror campaign indicates strongly  that the Palestinians no longer feel they need to pretend to oppose terror to  maintain European support for their war against Israel.
The Palestinians  assess that Europe is swiftly moving toward the point where it no longer needs  to pretend to be fair to Israel. The British, French and German votes in favor  of the Palestinians’ anti-Israel Security Council resolution last month were the  latest sign that the key European governments have adopted openly hostile  policies toward Israel.
More importantly, these policies are not the  consequence of Palestinian lobbying efforts, and so Israel cannot hope to change  them through counter-lobbying efforts. Europe’s abandonment of even the guise of  fairness toward Israel is the product of domestic political realities in Europe  itself. Between the rapidly expanding political power of Europe’s Muslim  communities and the virulently anti-Israel positions nearly universally adopted  by the European media, European governments are compelled to adopt ever more  hostile positions toward Israel to appease their Israel-hating publics and  Muslim communities.
Take British Prime Minister David Cameron, for  example. When Cameron called Gaza “an open air prison” last year, it wasn’t  because he had just spoken to Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas. And he  certainly wasn’t acting out of conviction. Cameron surely knew that his  statement was an utter lie. And he also surely knew that Hamas is a jihadist  terror group that shares the ideology of its fellow Muslim Brotherhood spin-off  al- Qaida.
But for Cameron, far more important than Gaza’s relative  prosperity and Hamas’s genocidal goals was the fact that in the last British  elections, the UK’s Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC-UK) successfully  ousted six members of parliament who expressed support for Israel.
The  Palestinians recognize that they don’t need to pretend to be good to get Europe  to support them. After the people of Europe have been brainwashed by their media  and intimidated by the Muslim communities, they have developed a Pavlovian  response regarding Israel whereby every mention of Israel makes them hate it  more. It doesn’t matter if the story is about the massacre of Israeli children  or the bombing of synagogues and nursery schools. They know that Israel  is the guilty party and expect the governments to punish it.
What the  Palestinian silence on who committed what atrocity tells us is that in this new  terror war, the Palestinians believe they cannot lose. With Europe in tow, Fatah  and Hamas feel free to join their forces and advance both militarily and  politically.
Caroline B. Glick
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
 
No comments:
Post a Comment