by Prof. Eyal Zisser
Such a deal, if one materializes, would be a direct result of Operation Protective Edge, the outbreak of which we marked the first anniversary of last month. Much criticism was heard about how the operation was being conducted and what it accomplished. However, in retrospect, we must admit the operation achieved its goals and led to Hamas' unprecedented commitment to maintaining quiet on the border.
On Monday, it was a
Turkish official. A few days earlier, it was a "knowledgeable source" in
the Israeli defense establishment. And before that, it was a U.S. State
Department official. All sang the same tune -- Israel and Hamas are
discussing a long-term cease-fire deal.
The deal, which would
be five to 10 years in length, would regulate relations between Israel
and Hamas in the Gaza Strip and anchor in writing the quiet that has
prevailed on the Israel-Gaza border over the past year.
Such a deal, if one
materializes, would be a direct result of Operation Protective Edge, the
outbreak of which we marked the first anniversary of last month. Much
criticism was heard about how the operation was being conducted and what
it accomplished. However, in retrospect, we must admit the operation
achieved its goals and led to Hamas' unprecedented commitment to
maintaining quiet on the border.
Hamas has lost its
appetite for rounds of escalation with Israel and it seems to have
realized, perhaps belatedly, that its main problem is not necessarily
Israel, but rather the Islamic State group, which has been trying to
undermine Hamas' rule in Gaza.
Hamas has learned that
its extreme anti-Israel position is not a redeemable asset, as Islamic
State will always be more extreme than it. Therefore, Hamas needs to
gain the support of Gaza residents by improving their living conditions
rather than by fighting Israel.
Unlike Hezbollah, which
has succeeded in establishing in Lebanon not only impressive military
capabilities but also a functioning economy and society, Hamas rule in
Gaza has been a complete failure.
Hamas has enough
military strength to deter Israel, as well as a strong enough grip to
prop up its dictatorial regime in Gaza, but it has not been able to
achieve anything regarding the welfare of the people under its rule.
Moreover, Egypt
considers Hamas to be an integral part of the terrorist network it is
fighting against both in Sinai Peninsula and deep inside Egypt itself.
Given the current state of affairs, it seems that reaching a truce with Israel is imperative for Hamas.
So, in light of the
recent quiet on the Gaza border and Hamas' shift in focus to internal
affairs, should Israel take a step forward toward clinching a
comprehensive, long-term agreement that would secure the loose
understandings reached with Hamas last summer?
If such a deal is
reached, it could potentially led to a change in the nature of the
Israel-Hamas relationship in the distant future.
Having said that,
reaching this type of deal would bring up a series of problems. First,
the connection between the Gaza Strip and Judea and Samaria -- how do we
make sure that the quiet in Gaza is not affected by incidents in Judea
and Samaria?
Second, what will the
implications of the deal be for Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud
Abbas? How do we keep him from being weakened? Abbas coordinates with
Israel to maintain quiet in Judea and Samaria and is still viewed by the
international community as the legitimate leader of the Palestinians.
Third, how do we leverage the deal to advance Israel's interests vis-a-vis Hamas' sponsors Turkey and Qatar?
And finally, how do we
ensure that an extended cease-fire in Gaza will not lead to the
establishment of a hostile frontline Iranian base right under Israel's
nose?
Without answers to these questions, a truce deal will not be worth the paper it is written on.
Prof. Eyal Zisser
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=13519
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment