Middle East: Israel
See also Palestinian Territory of Gaza
Israel vows to crush Hamas as Gaza becomes the current flashpoint in the Middle East
On Christmas Eve, Dec. 24, 2008, Hamas militants fired approximately 60 rockets into Israeli territory. The act came a week after Hamas said it would not renew its truce with Israel. In response, Israel launched a massive military offensive against Hamas in Gaza days later. Israel made clear that it intended to take decisive action against the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement, otherwise known as Hamas. Indeed, Israeli officials said they intended to "crush Hamas."
Israel had warned that such a response was imminent if rocket attacks did not end. Foreign Minister and Kadima leader Tzipi Livni had warned that Israel would not tolerate Hamas targeting its people. She said, "Hamas needs to understand that our aspiration to live in peace doesn't mean that Israel is going to take this kind of situation any longer. Enough is enough."
Israel air raids pound the Gaza Strip; Israeli authorities say they seek to crush Hamas and not the people of Gaza
Israel's military response began with aerial bombardment on Gaza. The main targets included security compounds and government offices that make up Hamas infrastructure, as well as tunnels into Egypt. While the vast majority of the casualties on these early targets were Hamas personnel, such as policemen, there were nonetheless civilian casualties. Indeed, as the aerial bombardment raged on, reports emerged that it was the harshest military action against Gaza since the June 1967 Arab-Israeli war that led to Israel assuming control over the Gaza Strip, which was then under Egyptian administration.
Nevertheless, Israel appeared set on assuring the Palestinian people that its efforts were against Hamas and not them more broadly. In an address to the Palestinian people of Gaza, Israel's caretaker Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that Israel had no desire for ordinary Gazans to suffer, but that Hamas -- as Israel's enemy -- was Israel's intended target.
As anticipated, Olmert's address was received with great skepticism by Palestinians while Khaled Meshaal, the leader of Hamas' armed wing, called for the Palestinians to rebel in an uprising or "the third intifada." More moderate Palestinian voices from the West Bank, such as Chief Palestinian Negotiator, Saeb Erekat, condemned Israel's actions, characterizing it as "a savage Israeli assault."
On the third day of aerial bombardment, Gaza's Interior Ministry and Islamic University were the main targets. Defense Minister Ehud Barak echoed Prime Minister Olmert by noting that Israel was not in a fight with the people of Gaza but, rather, Israel was in "a war to the bitter end" with Hamas, which has held sway over Gaza since 2007. In a special parliamentary session, the defense minister said Israel was "taking all precautions" to avoid hurting Palestinian civilians, but warned that the militants were using the civilian population as human shield.
In this way, Defense Minister Barak's struck a hard line against Hamas, which he separated from the greater Palestinian population of Gaza. However, Deputy Prime Minister Haim Ramon made no mention of the Palestinian people, stating succinctly: "The goal of the operation is to topple Hamas."
Hamas continues to launch rocket attacks at Israel
Meanwhile, Hamas was not cowed by Israel's air assault and was stepping up its own attacks on Israelis. Several injuries and two deaths were reported at Nahal Oz close to the border with Gaza and in the southern city of Ashdod in a short period of time as a result of rocket attacks by Palestinian militants. But Hamas was not content to limit its rocket attacks to the boundary region.
On Dec. 31, 2008, Palestinians militants from Gaza fired long-range rockets that landed in the southern Israeli city of Beersheba -- as far as 30 miles away. As well, two rocket attacks by Palestinian militants left one person injured in the city of Ashkelon. While there were no deaths from those attacks, it was clear that Israel had not fully reduced the threat posed by Hamas, and that Palestinian militants had long-range weapons at their disposal.
With Hamas continuing its barrage of rocket attacks into Israeli territory, public support in Israel remained high for continued military action against Hamas in Gaza. On the other side of the equation, Hamas's military wing, the Izzedine al-Qassam Brigades -- the military wing of Hamas -- made clear that it would continue to fire at Israeli targets, and warned that they had the capacity to reach further into Israeli territory. In this way, both sides made it apparent that a ceasefire would not easily be achieved.
Israel rejects international calls for a truce
With no end to the violence in sight and the prospects of a humanitarian crisis looming ahead, the international community called for a 48-hour truce to allow for the passage of humanitarian aid. However, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected the notion of the 48-hour truce.
Following a meeting with his cabinet, Prime Minister Olmert said the necessary conditions could not be met for a ceasefire. Olmert made clear that any ceasefire with Hamas would have to be permanent. He did not, however, foreclose the possibility of such a prospect in the near future. He reportedly said, "If conditions will ripen, and we think there can be a diplomatic solution that will ensure a better security reality in the south, we will consider it. But at the moment, it's not there."
On the other side of the equation, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas registered his outrage over Israel's actions in Gaza by characterizing Israel's aerial bombardment of the Gaza Strip "barbaric and criminal aggression." Abbas also warned that he could potentially bring a halt to peace talks with Israel if he believed Palestinian interests were at stake.
Israel moves to ground assault
Almost a week after the air raids on Gaza began, Israel intensified its assault on Gaza as Palestinian militants fired more rockets into Israeli territory. In one air strike, a senior Hamas military leader, Nizar Rayyan, was killed. Further Israeli air strikes yielded other high value Hamas targets, including two commanders of Hamas's military wing -- Abu Zakaria al-Jamal and Mohammed Maaruf. Israel was also carrying out air raids on other targets, including a missile attack on mosque in Beit Lahiya.
Meanwhile, Israel amassed its military forces along the border and declared the area around the Gaza Strip to be a "closed military zone." Since Israel was also calling up thousands of reservists, anticipation was growing that ground operations were in the offing.
Indeed, by the start of January 2009, Israel and Hamas were ignoring international calls for a ceasefire even as the conflict between them in Gaza raged on. Israel had now deployed convoys of troops and tanks to the northern part of the Gaza Strip and, supported by helicopters in the air, was launching a strong artillery attack. As before, Palestinian militants continued to fire rockets into southern Israel.
By January 4, 2009, there was direct confrontation between Israeli ground forces and Palestinian fighters deep into the Gaza Strip. In fact, Israeli troops, tanks and helicopters had surrounded Gaza City and were engaging in clashes with Palestinian militants at close range. Both sides were engaged in a concomitant battle of words. Israel claimed that it had struck a massive blow against Hamas while the militant Palestinian body promised to turn Gaza into "an Israeli graveyard."
But Israeli forces had now reached the heart of Gaza City including areas used by Palestinian militants to launch rocket attacks into Israel. Moreover, Israeli forces had managed to thrust further south of Gaza City -- even past an Israeli settlement that had been abandoned years before. In this way, Israeli forces had now penetrated large swaths of Gaza, and in so doing, Gaza City was now cut off from the rest of the Gaza Strip to the south.
Israel prepared for "long campaign"
As the ground operation continued, Israeli forces would have to deal with the threat of house-to-house fighting, sniper fire, booby traps, and other elements of urban combat, not to mention approximately 20,000 militants entrenched in this high-risk landscape. Still, Israel appeared to be committed to its mission regardless of the difficulty of the endeavor, the international outcry, and the rising death toll.
For his part, Israeli President Shimon Peres said that his country's mission was not to either occupy Gaza or to "crush Hamas" as had been suggested by other Israeli authorities. Instead, the Israeli head of state said that the objective was to end the threat of terror. President Peres noted that there was no point to discussing a ceasefire without an end to rocket attacks by Hamas. To that end, in an interview with the United States media, President Peres said, "We shall not accept the idea that Hamas will continue to fire and we shall declare a ceasefire. It does not make any sense." As such, President Peres believed Israel had to press forward with its mission to end terror, the viability of such an ambitious goal notwithstanding. He went onto to note, "If there is somebody (who) can stop terror with a different strategy, we shall accept it."
In the West Bank and elsewhere in the Arab world, protests against Israel were gaining steam. Aware of the international condemnation and the public relations challenge, the Israeli military was interrupting broadcasts on the Hamas television channel, Al Aqsa, asking Palestinians not to serve as human shields for the militants, and publicizing the following message: "Israel is acting only against Hamas and has no interest in harming you."
Death toll and looming humanitarian crisis
Since the start of Israel's assault on Gaza, as of the first week of January 2009, the death toll in the Gaza Strip was more than 512, according to calculations from Palestinian health officials, the United Nations and various media outlets, including the Associated Press. Approximately 2,500 Palestinians were said to have been injured. While Israel has claimed that the vast majority of the deaths (80 percent) were Hamas militants, the United Nations has offered a slightly different estimate of 75 percent. On the other side of the equation, five Israelis were reported to have been killed and about 40 others were wounded.
The Red Cross described the situation in Gaza's hospitals as dire and warned that its medical facilities were utterly "stretched to the limit" and running out of resources. As well, the United Nations warned that a humanitarian crisis was at hand. The United Nations relief agency in Gaza said that about 1,200 people could be homeless due to damage to their houses, or, because they were forced to flee the violence. As well, some food and aid rations were running short.
International Outcry
During the first week of Israel's conflict with Hamas in Gaza, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called for an immediate ceasefire. The United Nations head said that he was "deeply alarmed" by the violence in Gaza. He urged both Israel and Hamas to "halt their acts of violence and take all necessary measures to avoid civilian casualties."
By the close of the first week of Israel's conflict with Hamas in Gaza, there was a rising chorus of calls for an immediate ceasefire among world leaders. European Union External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner declared, "The violence has to stop." The European Union also issues a statement calling for an "unconditional halt" to rocket attacks by Hamas. United States President George W. Bush also said that it was incumbent on Hamas to take the first step to ending the conflict by halting its rocket attacks on Israel.
But as Israel's efforts progressed toward ground operations, and amidst spiraling civilian casualties, officials from the Middle East and Europe issued condemnations for what they viewed as Israel's disproportionate response to Hamas in Gaza. This view was echoed by United Nations chief Ban Ki-moon, who acknowledged Israel's right to defend itself from rocket attacks by Palestinian militants, while also decrying Israel's "excessive use of force."
United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown struck a diplomatic tone by concentrating on the humanitarian crisis looming in Gaza and thusly, urging an "immediate and urgent ceasefire."
For its part, the United States issued a tacit approval of Israel's response to the threat posed by Hamas by urging Israel to try to avoid civilian casualties while also placing blame for the situation solely on Hamas. The United States also went further and blocked approval of a United Nations Security Council statement that demanded an immediate ceasefire.
Meanwhile, the European Union was expected to send a delegation to the region, while Russia said it would send an envoy, both for the purpose of trying to forge some sort of resolution. The Europen Union foreign policy chief, Javier Solana, said the Israel-Hamas crisis was emblematic of the failure of diplomacy and that every effort should be made to advance the peace process.
Editor's Note:
What is Israel's rationale?
Why has Israel decided that it should take such drastic action not simply to "crush Hamas" as some officials have purported, but to "crush terrorism" as suggested by the Israeli head of state? Why such a lofty goal at this particular time?
Some analysts have suggested that Israel seeks to quiet the ghosts of 2006 when Israel was ensconced in a bloody war with Hezbollah in Lebanese territory. In the summer of 2006, as in late 2008, Israel said that it was launching an operation intended to stop missile and rocket attacks into Israeli territory. But at the end of that conflict, Hezbollah as still able to launch missiles and, as such, it was that militant group who claimed victory, the civilian casualties notwithstanding. In late 2008 and early 2009, Israel may be seeking to vindicate itself after what some saw as its failure in 2006. Indeed, as Prime Minister Olmert leaves office, he may well wish to exit on a high note as opposed to the disgrace of the corruption charges that caused his resignation from power.
For its part, Hamas may be buoyed by Hezbollah's quasi-victory and may be seeking to achieve a similar outcome for itself, especially after being driven from power by Palestinian rivals in the West Bank. Indeed, Gaza is Hamas' last stand and it is unwilling that these Palestinian militants will go quietly away, regardless of Israel's expressed mission.
Despite President Peres' lofty claims of "crushing terror," it is also possible that Israel has a more tactical objective. Senior members of the Israeli military have acknowledged that it is hardly likely that they can end all rocket attacks by Hamas. Accordingly, they hope to diminish Hamas' ability to launch as many attacks and, certainly, to diminish the accuracy of the attacks that do take place. As well, a successful operation would favorably position Israel to be able to control the terms of a forthcoming ceasefire. Furthermore, a successful military operation would deliver a warning to enemies (such as Hezbollah in Lebanon) elsewhere in the region by acting as a deterrent.
There are other possible explanations for Israel's decision to respond forcefully to Hamas at this time. Among them is the political rationale. With parliamentary elections on the horizon, and with Israelis' dismal public opinion of the government's handling of Hamas in Gaza, augmented by the fact that hard-line Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu was leading in the polls, the Kadima-led administration likely believed that it needed to prove its security credentials. Indeed, as the new Kadima leader, Tzipi Livni, began to use stronger language against Hamas, her poll numbers against Netanyahu began to appear more competitive. Thus, while it is clear that Israel has a concrete and real desire to deal with its security challenges and the threat posed by Hamas, the particular timing of the assault into Gaza does appear to possess a political element worth considering.
If national politics are not influencing the timing of Israel's efforts against what Israelis call "Hamastan," then international politics may well be at play. With the Republican Bush administration about to leave office in the United States, and with the Democratic President Barack Obama about to be inaugurated into office, it is possible that Israel wants to take strong action now, while it has unquestioned support from its most important ally. While the Obama administration promises to be a stalwart of Israel, there are prevailing suspicions that President Obama may be more amenable to diplomatic solutions to geopolitical challenges.
-- Denise Youngblood Coleman Ph.D.
Houston, Texas
January 4, 2008
***
CountryWatch's coverage of global political events and developments is not intended to be an explicit endorsement of any country’s political priorities or any political interest group's agenda. CountryWatch takes a politics-neutral approach and encourages users to consider the complex range of parameters when studying the international spectrum.
***
For the most recent developments across the globe, see the CountryWatch News Wire.
For information and analysis about Election 2008 in the United States, including the historic election of Barack Obama as president, see the "Special Report: Road to the White House 2008," available from the "Special Reports" tab located on the front page of the Country Watch website.
***