BARAK: THIS IS ‘ALL OUT WAR’ ON HAMAS
JPost.com Staff, Jerusalem Post, December 29, 2008

   “If Hamas doesn’t immediately stop the criminal and intentional firing of rockets, will use all the legal resources and courses of action at its disposal to force the enemy to stop its aggressive and illegal action against its citizens,” Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Monday following a security assessment at the Defense Ministry. Barak also called on Palestinians to stay away from areas where Hamas was conducting its terrorist activity.

   Earlier, at a special Knesset session attended, among others, by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu, Barak said would expand its military operation in the Gaza Strip until all the goals were achieved.

   “This operation will be extended and deepened as we find necessary. Our goal is to strike Hamas and stop the attacks on . Hamas controls Gaza and is responsible for everything happening there and for all attacks carried out from within the Strip. The goals of this operation are to stop Hamas from attacking our citizens and soldiers,” said Barak.

   “I would like to remind the world that withdrew from the entire Gaza Strip more than three years ago. We gave a chance for a new reality, and all we’ve seen is Hamas firing rockets and missiles on our citizens and carrying out attacks against ,” he noted.

   Barak added that the IDF was targeting Hamas leadership and its allies in Gaza , asserting that the operation would be “all out war.” “We have nothing against the citizens of Gaza , but we must fight against the Hamas leadership. We are making great efforts to prevent civilian casualties… We are not preventing humanitarian aid from entering the Gaza Strip.”

   The defense minister told Knesset members that he was not sorry for ’s restraint in previous months and noted that Operation Cast Lead had been planned by the security establishment long ago. “I’m not sorry for the restraint we showed until the beginning of Operation Cast Lead…now is the time to act, we are not willing to let this situation continue,” the defense minister said.

   Barak stressed that was not interested in violence but would not allow a situation in which its citizens were under fire. “I never believed war was the best option…I’m the defense minister, not the war minister,” he said. “As a fighter and commander I know personally what it feels like to lose a fellow combatant. I’m not trigger happy, maybe even the opposite.”

   However, Barak added that although was not interested in war, it had come to the conclusion that a military operation was necessary. “I want to make it clear that we did not set out on this military operation because of revenge or rage… The security establishment has been preparing for such an operation for many months,” he said.

   Livni, who spoke after Barak, also stressed Hamas’s responsibility for the situation in Gaza and said that while wants peace and was interested in continuing the peace process, the Jewish state “must fight against those who want to prevent us from living in peace.”

   “To all those criticizing us we say that Hamas is an extremist terror group that does not represent the Palestinians…We have decided to hold a peace process with those who are truly committed to living in peace, side by side,” Livni said, referring to Israel’s negotiations with the Fatah leadership in the West Bank.

   Livni’s statements were somewhat dampened, however, by the Palestinian Authority’s top negotiator Ahmed Qurei, who said Monday that negotiations could not continue as long as Israel was attacking Gaza.

   Netanyahu, meanwhile, criticized the government’s policy of restraint and said that had taken too long to strike Hamas. “For firing at citizens, hiding behind citizens, causing suffering to our citizens to their own citizens, we will strike Hamas…No country in the world would do otherwise, and no nation would restrain itself for so long, for too long,” the opposition leader said at the meeting.

   He also noted that the military operation should also be aimed at toppling the Hamas regime in Gaza .

   “Our goal should be twofold—stopping the attacks on our cities and eliminating the threat of rocket attacks from the Gaza Strip,” said Netanyahu. “Stopping the attacks can be done within a short period of time, while eliminating the threat of rocket attacks from Gaza will entail toppling the Hamas rule over the Strip and uprooting the Iranian base there.”

   Netanyahu went on to call on all the citizens of , Arab and Jewish, to “remain loyal to the state of during this just war against our enemy.” “We stand united in this war. Not every citizen must automatically support every move the government makes, but it is unacceptable for Israeli citizens to support our enemies,” he said.

   The opposition leader urged Arab Israelis to condemn fundamentalism in their communities, and said that would act forcefully against Israeli Hamas supporters.

   Netanyahu also called on Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to dismiss Science, Culture and Sport Minister Ghaleb Majadle from the government for boycotting Sunday’s cabinet meeting in protest of the Gaza operation. “A minister must serve the state of and cannot boycott a cabinet meeting in a time of war,” said Netanyahu.

   During Netanyahu’s address, Knesset Speaker Dalia Itzik expelled two Arab Israeli MKs from the special meeting, after they repeatedly interrupted his speech. The first MK to be expelled from the meeting was Muhammad Barakei (Hadash), who called out, “How many wars are on your menu, Bibi?” as Netanyahu began his address to the Knesset. MK Gideon Sa’ar (Likud) told Barakei that he should go to Gaza to show his support, to which Barakei responded, “I would if only I could.” MK Taleb A-Sanaa (United Arab List) was also expelled from the meeting.

   Both MKs were warned three times before Itzik ordered that they be removed from the meeting.

PALESTINIANS NEED TO WIN
Michael B. Oren and

…Over the past two decades, a majority of Israelis have shifted from adamant opposition to Palestinian statehood to acknowledging the need for such a state. This transformation represented a historic victory for the Israeli left, which has long advocated Palestinian self-determination. The left’s victory, though, remained largely theoretical: The right won the practical argument that no amount of concessions would grant international legitimacy to ’s right to defend itself.

   That was the unavoidable lesson of the failure of the Oslo peace process, which ended in the fall of 2000 with ’s acceptance of President Bill Clinton’s proposal for near-total withdrawal from East Jerusalem and the territories. The Palestinians responded with five years of terror.

   Yet much of the international community blamed for the violence and repeatedly condemned its efforts at self-defense. The experience left a deep wound in the Israeli psyche. It intimidated Israeli leaders from taking security measures liable to be denounced by the United Nations and the European Union, or worse, result in sanctions against the Jewish state.

   One consequence was an Israeli reluctance to respond to periodic Hezbollah provocations following ’s unilateral withdrawal from in May 2000. This hesitancy allowed the Shiite terror organization to amass a rocket arsenal with the proclaimed intent of devastating ’s population centers.

   Finally, when Hezbollah unleashed its weapons in July 2006, was widely accused of responding disproportionately. It was pressured into prematurely ending its defensive operations in , and compelled to accept an international “peacekeeping” force that has permitted Hezbollah to rearm far beyond its prewar levels.

   Israelis are now asking themselves whether their nightmare is about to repeat itself in Gaza . The parallels are indeed striking. As in , in 2005 unilaterally withdrew to its international border with Gaza and received, instead of security, a regime dedicated to its destruction. The thousands of rockets and mortar shells subsequently fired on Israeli neighborhoods represented more than a crude attempt to kill and terrorize civilians—they were expressions of a genocidal intent.…

   Nearly 300 missiles landed in , paralyzing much of the southern part of the country. Yet Israeli leaders held their fire.… If was guilty of acting disproportionately, it was in its willingness to seek any means, even at the risk of its citizens’ lives, to resolve the crisis diplomatically.

   Yet the U.N. Security Council abstained from condemning Hamas and convened only after resolved to act. The U.N.’s hypocrisy, together with growing media criticism of , is reinforcing Israeli concerns that territorial concessions, whether unilateral or negotiated, will only compromise the country’s security and curtail its ability to respond to attack. This fear is compounded when Israelis consider withdrawals from the West Bank , which is within easy rocket range of its major population and industrial centers.

   Gaza is the test case. Much more is at stake than merely the military outcome of ’s operation. The issue, rather, is ’s ability to restore its deterrence power and uphold the principle that its citizens cannot be targeted with impunity.…

   The Gaza crisis also has implications for Israeli-Syrian negotiations. Here, too, Israelis will be unwilling to cede strategically vital territories—in this case on the Golan Heights —in an international environment in which any attempt to defend themselves will be denounced as unjustified aggression. ’s role in triggering the Gaza conflict only deepens Israeli mistrust.…

   In the coming days, the Gaza conflict is likely to intensify with a possible incursion of Israeli ground forces. must be allowed to conclude this operation with a decisive victory over Hamas…. This is an opportunity to redress ’s failure to humble Hezbollah in in 2006, and to deal a substantial setback to another jihadist proxy of .

   It may also be the last chance to reassure Israelis of the viability of a two-state solution. Given the unfortunate historical resonance, should refrain from calling its current operation, “Peace for Southern Israel .” But without Hamas’s defeat, there can be no serious progress toward a treaty that both satisfies Palestinian aspirations and allays ’s fears. At stake in Gaza is nothing less than the future of the peace process.

(Michael Oren is a fellow at the Shalem Center in Jerusalem and a professor
at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University . Yossi Klein Halevi
is a fellow at the Shalem Center’s Adelson Institute for Strategic Studies.)

HAMAS’S STRATEGY: THE ROCKETS OR THE MEDIA
Barry Rubin
Jerusalem Post, December 28, 2008

   Nothing is clearer than Hamas’s strategy. It gives the choice between rockets and media, and Hamas thinks it is a situation of “we win or you lose.”

The cease-fire

Hamas ends a cease-fire giving it the peace and quiet it needs to build up its army and consolidate its rule over the Gaza Strip. would deliver supplies as long as there weren’t attacks. From a Western-style pragmatic standpoint, this is a great situation.

   But Hamas isn’t a Western-style pragmatic organization. Peace and quiet is its enemy not only because of its ideology—the deity commands it to destroy —or its self-image as heroic martyrs, but also because battle is needed to recruit the masses for permanent war and unite the population around it.

   Hamas has no program of improving the well-being of the people or educating children to be doctors, teachers and engineers. Its platform has but one plank: war, war, endless war, sacrifice, heroism and martyrdom until total victory is achieved.

   Thus, it ends the cease-fire.

The rockets

And so Hamas ends the cease-fire and rains rockets down on , accompanied by mortars and the occasional attempt at a cross-border ground attack. does nothing.

   Hamas crows: You are weak, you are confused, you are helpless. Come, people, arise and destroy the paper tiger! And so more people are recruited, West Bank Palestinians look on with admiration at those fighting the enemy, and the Arabic-speaking world is impressed.

   Remember 2006, they say. It is just like Hizbullah.

   is helpless against the rockets. Why don’t our governments fight ? Let’s overthrow them and bring brave, fighting Islamist governments to power.

The media

But then does fight back. Its planes bomb military targets which have been deliberately put amid civilians. If there is a high danger of hitting civilians, doesn’t attack. But there is a line below which risk that will be taken, and rightly so.

   The smug smiles are wiped off the faces of Hamas leaders. Yet they have one more weapon, their reserves. They call up the media.

   Those arrogant, heroic, macho victors of yesterday—literally yesterday as the process takes only a few hours—are transformed into pitiful victims. Casualty figures are announced by Hamas, and accepted by reporters who are not on the spot. Everyone hit is, of course, a civilian. No soldiers here.

   And the casualties are disproportionate: Hamas has arranged it that way. If necessary, sympathetic photographers take pictures of children who pretend to be injured, and once they are published in Western newspapers these claims become fact.

   Yet there is a problem here. Rockets and mortars may win wars; newspaper articles really don’t. Of course, too, material damage is inflicted that sets back Gaza ’s material development.

   Hamas doesn’t care about that, but by acting in a way to ensure the destruction of its material base, Hamas does weaken itself. Precisely because Israeli attacks are focussed on military targets, Hamas is weakened.

Conclusion: The problem with no solution.

Of course, does not win a complete victory. Hamas does not fall. The problem is not gone. For Hamas will define survival as victory. Hamas, like the PLO before it, wins one “victory” after another and always ends up worse off.

   The conflict will be back, however it ends this round, on whatever day it ends. Quiet will return, the supplies will flow back into Gaza . And so many months in the future the process will be repeated.

   There is, however, an important difference. uses its time not only for military preparations but to educate its children, build its infrastructure, raise its living standards. Hamas doesn’t.

   “We believe in death,” Hamas says, “You believe in life.” Sometimes you get what you wish for.

(Barry Rubin is director of Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA).)