Israeli strategic thinkers are deeply divided over the implications of the truce between Israel and the Gaza-based Hamas fundamentalists.
• Dovish optimists hope the truce, or “tahadiyeh,” will create a new atmosphere in which genuine peacemaking with all Palestinian factions — moderates and fundamentalists alike — is possible.
• Pessimistic doves and most hawks criticize what they see as a strengthening of the Palestinian radicals at the expense of moderates. They fear this could make a peace deal more difficult, if not impossible, to attain.
• Centrists argue that because the conflict cannot be resolved, contained, long-term cease-fires with Hamas are more realistic than pipedreams of peace with the moderates.
The differences stem largely from the way the different schools perceive Hamas.
Some see the organization as unshakably wedded to the radical cause led by Iran. Others believe it can be co-opted against Iran.
Others hold that even if it cannot be won over, it is a more authentic representative of the Palestinians than the more moderate Fatah; therefore, Hamas must be part of any viable negotiating process.
The optimists maintain that once the Gaza economy picks up, the Palestinian-Israel equation will change dramatically.
The thinking is that when Palestinians in Gaza see that life can be very different, they won’t want to go back to struggle and hardship, and will press Hamas to extend the tahadiyeh indefinitely. In this scenario, Israel could be the beneficiary of a relatively long truce.
As for Hamas, if it stops attacking Israel, it could gain international recognition and finally have something to lose.
The combination of popular pressure and Hamas’ growing role on the international stage could lead the organization to inch its way toward a long-term accommodation with Israel.
Moreover, some of the optimists see in Hamas’ acceptance of a truce with Israel an attempt by the radical organization to distance itself from Iran.
Ran Edelist, a dovish commentator on strategic affairs, sees the six-month truce that went into effect June 19 as part of a wider move by Israel to remove Hamas, Syria and Lebanon from the Iranian orbit.
This, rather than a hypothetical strike against Iranian nuclear installations, “is the big and genuine move against the Iranian threat,” he says.
But others on the left — the pessimists — see serious dangers in the truce.
Matti Steinberg, a Hebrew University expert on Palestinian affairs, says that unless Israel neutralizes the deleterious effects of the truce, it will lead to the collapse of the moderate Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in the West Bank within six months.
Steinberg is a former top adviser to the Shin Bet security service. He argues that the truce strengthens the radicals and weakens the moderates because it suggests that the Gaza model of rocketing Israeli civilians is viable, whereas the West Bank model of negotiations is going nowhere.
This, he says, will soon be accentuated by the release of hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, presumably in exchange for the abducted Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit, for which Hamas will claim credit.
Hamas, he says, “will use the truce to strengthen its political position on the West Bank, to renew negotiations with Fatah on its terms and to infiltrate the [Palestine Liberation Organization] where it will set a new ideological tone. In short, it will hijack the Palestinian movement and drag Israel into a terrible one-state reality.”
Peace between Israel and the Palestinians will become impossible; and Israel will find itself losing international legitimacy as it rules over an increasingly turbulent Palestinian population demanding a single state comprised of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank, in which the Palestinians will soon become the majority.
Nevertheless, Steinberg favors the truce, partly because rejecting it would have led to tension with Egypt, which brokered the deal and wants quiet in Gaza to prevent unrest spreading among its own radicals.
But more important, he says, Israel could turn the truce to its advantage, neutralizing Hamas gains by accelerating genuine peacemaking with the moderates and enabling them to deliver statehood.
Steinberg believes this can be accomplished, beyond what has been possible with Mahmoud Abbas, with a major Israeli initiative.
It would involve concessions on land and Jerusalem in return for Palestinian concessions on refugees and reviving the 2002 Arab peace plan, which talks of normalization of Israel’s ties with all the Arab states after it returns to its pre-1967 Six-Day War borders.
Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu sees it as a major strategic blunder: It shows that terror pays, weakens Israeli deterrence and gives Hamas the time it needs to build up its military power for the next round.
“Israel,” Netanyahu told Israel Radio, “got absolutely nothing in return, not even Gilad Shalit.”
The fourth school, the so-called centrists, takes a totally different tack.
Its members — including former Mossad Chief Ephraim Halevy, Tel Aviv University’s Shaul Mishal and former Southern Command chief Doron Almog — argue that Israel should forget about trying to isolate Hamas and try to turn the truce into a long-term cease-fire.
The thinking is that Fatah is a declining force without the power to stand behind any agreements it might reach, whereas Hamas does.
Moreover, every time Israel has attempted to “engineer Palestinian society” — create or strengthen forces more amenable to it — it has failed.
This school argues that a cease-fire with Hamas is far more realistic than a full peace deal with Fatah precisely because it does not require making huge “end-of-conflict” concessions on both sides.
Most Hamas spokesmen reject the idea of accommodation with Israel and openly describe the tahadiyeh as a tactical move to gain time to prepare for an inevitable future showdown. But there are some different voices.
“Everyone on your side is saying that the truce is an opportunity for Hamas to narrow the military gap, but it’s actually an historic opportunity for Israel and for all the sides involved to live in peace and build a future for the coming generations,” Hamas official Salah al-Bardawil told Ha’aretz recently.
Take a moment to vote on the truce in The Chronicle’s reader poll located on the right side of our home page.
Loading ...