War without rear and front
Gaza and South Lebanon today are more dangerous for Jerusalem than the states of the Islamic world
The confrontation of Israel and its non-state opponents (Islamist military-political terrorist structures controlling vast territories near the borders of the Jewish state) makes it possible to analyze a new type of war. They seem to be the stage of development of the “insurrection-wars” considered in their time by Evgeny Messner, within which there is no rear and front. The population of enclaves controlled by the Islamists in these wars not only acts as an active participant in hostilities, like during the Civil War in Russia, but also seizes military technologies and weapons that allow the enemy to cause significant and sometimes unacceptable damage.
The patriarchal clan-tribal structure of society, prevalent in the Near and Middle East (FAS) and in Africa, is ideally suited for this type of warfare. Any village in the mountains, a city block or a desert oasis can be turned into a fortified area in a relatively short time (which is currently done in Gaza and South Lebanon). Formed on the basis of a tribe or a large family - the Humuli militant group becomes a threat to any adversary, including professional special forces. In addition to Israel, the Western community has faced such type of warfare in Afghanistan and Iraq, Somalia and Sudan, Libya and Yemen, the countries of the Sahara and the Sahel.
Beneficiaries far from the line of fire
It must be noted that there is no adequate strategy for waging wars with an adversary of this type in the modern Western world. The army in modern conditions, as a rule, is constrained both in the methods of warfare, and among the victims of the civilian population - both their own and the opposing side. It can not afford to physically destroy the enemy, much less the local people supporting it, without relying on which the sabotage and partisan war, which has no external support (although the military actions of the Islamists against Israel have just such support), is inevitably exhausted. Her opponents have no such restrictions.
That is why Hamas and Hezbollah cover missile depots, launchers, underground bunkers and communications with civilian objects, including mosques, hospitals, schools and residential buildings. The more civilian casualties there are during the war, the more pressure the “world community” will have on Israel — a logic as reasonable as effective. Moreover, this pressure comes from not only the traditionally anti-Israeli United Nations, the countries of the Islamic world or the EU states that flirt with them (compared to which Russia's position is much more balanced and objective), but also from the White House and the US Department of State.
Israel, for its part, is forced, firstly, to protect its own population, regardless of the costs, which it still allows the “Iron Dome” missile defense system (in Hebrew, also called the “Lead Dome”), and, secondly, it significantly limits itself arsenal of funds used in Gaza. That is, carpet bombing, like America in Iraq Fallujah, Israel does not use and bunker bombs to open a multi-storey, layered underground defense system built under the sector over the past few years, does not use.
Especially for the Jewish state, the use of such means as agents and flamethrowers, which the Wehrmacht used in underground battles without hesitation in World War II, is excluded. This leaves the taking of Palestinian bunkers and tunnels to the discretion of the Israeli special forces, with the danger of a high level of casualties among personnel. That in itself is a winning situation for the opponents of Israel, who take into account and successfully use these features of its tactics.
The lack of modern weapons and military equipment (AME) for modern Western armies, including Israeli, necessary for a gentle but effective combat in urban areas and underground fortifications, with a mixed civilian and military component of manpower on the opposing side, requires the production of new types of non-lethal weapons. Those types that are currently in service, including stun grenades and other types, are designed for police actions, and not for use in combat against a well-armed and trained enemy with a high level of motivation, hiding behind the civilian population. As is always the case, new weapons and combat tactics are needed for a new type of war.
It should be borne in mind that the asymmetry in the costs of rocket attacks and an order of magnitude more expensive Israeli protection of the population from these attacks is an additional advantage of Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and other groups specializing in the confrontation with Israel. By shelling its territory, they significantly deplete the defense budget of this country. The cost of a single anti-missile is up to 50 thousand dollars, which explains why the Iron Dome installations are designed to be used only to protect built-up spaces.
According to experts, if Israel ultimately will be forced to expend some of the bunker bombs in its arsenals, this will reduce the threat to the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI), since its underground nuclear facilities can only be destroyed by them. Thus, Tehran remains the beneficiary of the Israeli-Hamas clashes, not directly participating in hostilities. Although the transformation of Gaza and South Lebanon into a springboard for rocket attacks on Israel is undoubtedly the merit and tactically correct move of Iran.
Curious is the foreign policy background of the operation “Unbreakable Rock”, which was reviewed in detail on the Russian-language television channel Eaton-TV by the former head of Israel’s “Nativ”, Yakov Kedmi. In defense of Hamas in the Islamic world, in addition to the Arab street, whose sympathies in any situation are on the side of the opponents of Israel, are Turkey and Qatar. In Ankara, the Islamist Justice and Development Party rules, and Prime Minister Erdogan is an active supporter of political Islam and has a negative attitude towards Israel. Official Doha not only supports, but patronizes the Muslim Brotherhood, to which Hamas belongs, using them as a tool to spread its military and political influence in the Arabic and in the whole Islamic world.
The role of Iran, which as the main instigator and organizer of the Hezbollah and Hamas conflicts with Israel, as a rule, is referred to by the world media, is secondary in this case. Iran has supplied and continues to supply Hamas with missiles used to fire at Israeli territory. The production technology in Gaza itself of medium-range missiles, as well as the construction of underground fortifications and tunnels to seize Iranian hostages. However, since Hamas betrayed Bashar Assad and spoke out against him during the civil war in Syria, the organization’s relations with Tehran have cooled considerably. In particular, Iran has ceased to supply Hamas with money.
In accordance with Mr. Kedmi’s point of view (to which, knowing him for a quarter of a century, the author is inclined to listen carefully) the conflict around Gaza is a reflection of the confrontation in the Arab world. Qatar is on one side, and the alliance of Saudi Arabia and Egypt is on the other. Moreover, since Israel and Hamas are firing at each other, neither Doha nor Riyadh and Cairo lose anything and risk nothing. The wars with the Islamists, which Israel fights along the perimeter of its borders, are “proxy wars”. Their real inspirers and sponsors are far from the line of fire.
The more Hamas militants in the course of hostilities are destroyed by the Israeli army, the better for Egyptian President Abdul-Fattah al-Sisi, who is waging a war against the Islamists for Sinai’s death, after the army of Egypt ’overthrew President Mohammed Mursi, who represented "Muslim Brotherhood", currently banned in this country. The same is true for the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf, fighting with political Islam on its territory: Bahrain, the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Their ultimatum to Qatar with the simultaneous recall of their ambassadors because of the support that Doha provided and renders to the Muslim Brotherhood, using the propaganda potential of Al-Jazeera TV channel, one of the main stars of which is the spiritual leader of the Brothers, Sheikh Yusef Kardawi, speaks for itself.
Cairo has its own diplomatic game. His requirements for Hamas include, among other things, restricting the presence of militants at border checkpoints and replacing them with Abu Mazen people, partial control of the PNA forces over the situation in Gaza itself, including in the border strip near the Israeli security wall, the elimination of Gaza tunnels to Egypt used for smuggling. And so on, that Egypt is interested in, having no relation to the goals of Israel declared at the moment. However, it is unacceptable for Hamas, which puts forward its own demands as an alternative, which are far beyond what Israel could even agree to under the most critical conditions.
The latter, in principle, is ready to limit itself to the elimination of the Hamas missile potential and tunnels used for terrorist attacks on Israeli territory, to return the status quo that existed after Operation Cast Lead. PNA Jerusalem is currently not ready to return to power in Gaza, not believing in the future of this education and its leaders. In the case of the actual unification of the territories controlled by the PNA and Hamas, Israel predicts not a normalization of relations with the Palestinians, but a radical Islamization of the West Bank. As a result, with such a development of events, it is inevitable that all of the Palestinian territories will become the center of a missile and terrorist threat, which the Jewish state cannot accept.
Israeli polygon
However, in the negotiations that are underway in Cairo, Israel plays a very indirect role. Not his proposals, but the conditions put forward by Egypt, are the basis of the requirements for Hamas. Not the Israeli, but the Egyptian schedule of negotiations is at the heart of this dialogue. And there is no place to hurry ARE - the rockets fall on Israeli, and not on its cities. As long as he destroys Hamas with the hands of Israel, all the image losses are borne by the Jewish state, all international pressure is put on him, and the Egyptian leadership has only certain advantages.
Saudi Arabia wins twice in this situation. It remains behind the scenes, allowing Israel to fight Hamas and Egypt to act on the diplomatic front. Paradoxically, Hamas also wins. The very fact of holding talks with him, in which the leaders of the Arab world and international mediators are trying to achieve something, raises his actions in the political arena. One of the consequences of the course adopted by him is reconciliation with Hezbollah, which may well be an intermediate step for restoring Hamas’s relations with Iran.
The leadership of the United States, the states of the European Union, and the United Nations are trying to force Israel to accept another humanitarian truce or seek a unilateral cease-fire from it. Washington and Brussels are putting increasing pressure on Jerusalem, which, with success, will effectively preserve the current situation, while retaining the potential that has been accumulated by Hamas. As a result, at any time Hamas will be able to attack Israel from the positions it currently has, including underground fortifications, medium-range missile production facilities and the remaining missile arsenal. And this is without taking into account the image strengthening in the Islamic world as a force capable of attacking Israel for a long time without a fatal result for itself.
The UN’s role in this is even more dubious than Western intermediaries. The de facto structures of this organization in Gaza operate at Hamas. The ambulances are used by militants as a vehicle that allows them to secretly navigate the sector. The buildings built by the UN are turned into military facilities, and the rockets that are stored in them are returned to the militants if found, and the destruction of any of these buildings by the Israelis provokes an international scandal. Needless to say, there are numerous instances of transport by customs bypassed by high-ranking UN functionaries in the baggage of large sums of money intended for the leadership of Hamas.
However, proposals by Western countries to transfer tens of millions of dollars to the organization “for the restoration of Gaza’s civil infrastructure” look no less doubtful, with the understanding that this money (at least that part which will not be looted) will go exclusively to the construction of new tunnels for terrorist activities and smuggling. Each tunnel destroyed by the IDF, depending on the length and level of arrangement costs from one to one and a half million dollars. Accordingly, the American 47 millions alone, proposed by Secretary of State John Kerry, will be enough to restore the 31 detected and the 11 tunnels destroyed by Israel.
It is no accident that Israel has rejected almost all the proposals put forward by the United States, considering them dangerous and unrelated to its interests, which theoretically America should protect. Characteristically, in discussing these proposals, the narrow cabinet of the Israeli government (the “security cabinet”), including the religious ministers, did not interrupt the meeting after Saturday. This is the first time since the Gulf War 1991, when the United States put Israel under fire with Iraqi missiles in order to keep Arab countries in a coalition against Saddam Hussein.
It should be understood that in the context of the confrontation with Hamas, Israel plays the role of a proving ground where non-state military-political structures will test new methods of waging an effective war, including a terrorist one, against a modern high-tech state. Some of these methods have already been used in the civil war in Syria. In particular, through a system of underground tunnels built under the Yarmuk Palestinian refugee camp, militants penetrated the center of the Syrian capital.
Opponents of President Assad are currently using pre-fabricated underground fortifications in most of the cities they have captured to counter government aviation and armored vehicles. Similarly, they are used against Israel. If the militants of the Islamic State in Iraq launch a large-scale attack on Baghdad or start a civil war between the Sunni and Shiite areas of the city, such tactics of warfare can be used with high probability. The same applies to underground urban communications, of which terrorist attacks on European or American cities are possible.
Israel’s political leadership’s lack of plans to regain control of Gaza and South Lebanon is the main reason for turning the organizations controlling these regions into the main opponents of Jerusalem, which are much more dangerous than the states of the Islamic world. The one-sided demarcation, which the authors of this concept from among the Israeli political consultants and Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon believed it was supposed to ensure peace for the border areas, put the whole country at risk.
Arguments about the preservation of the lives of military personnel proved to be untenable. In operations against Hamas in Gaza and in the Second Lebanon War, more soldiers were killed than in clashes with terrorists when the IDF controlled the above-mentioned territory. As, however, as well as peace citizens. Forty-five years of continuous wars before the era of the "peace process" in Israel at the hands of terrorists killed about a thousand people. Twenty years after the start of the "Oslo process" - one and a half thousand. After the “cessation of occupation”, including as a result of the civil war that began in 2007 between Fatah and Hamas, there is no need to say that there are a lot more human casualties on the Palestinian side.
The same turned out to be true with regard to the arguments of the financiers about the preservation of the costs of the army and the maintenance of the country's defense capability. Instead of saving significant funds, which justified the expediency of retreating the army from the security zones, Israel was forced to increase costs: the missile defense system ate the benefits obtained by the country at the first stage. Expected political dividends are also zero. Israel has not ceased to be an occupier in the eyes of the world community, which is increasing its demands exclusively for it, since it is practically useless to demand anything from the opposing side.
There are no mechanisms to influence Hamas, apart from the blockade and military actions. The Israeli idea, by definition, that Gazans’s population would be overthrown by Hamas’s rule is untenable. Ready to shoot at their opponents regime can not fall under pressure from the inside, only from the outside. As a consequence, Israel’s unwillingness to assume responsibility for Gaza preserves Hamas’s power over the sector. Even in the midst of hostilities, Jerusalem refrains from exterminating the political leaders of the Palestinian Islamists. Dot personal liquidations are applied only to the military wing of the Hamas leadership, more precisely, to its members directly responsible for the attacks and rocket attacks.
We note in this connection: Israel is not waging a war of annihilation against Hamas, which, like any war of this kind, can be won, but a half-war, reminiscent of Lenin's "step forward, two steps back." As a result, in a maximum of two or three years, his clash with Hamas will again be inevitable.
The confrontation of Israel and its non-state opponents (Islamist military-political terrorist structures controlling vast territories near the borders of the Jewish state) makes it possible to analyze a new type of war. They seem to be the stage of development of the “insurrection-wars” considered in their time by Evgeny Messner, within which there is no rear and front. The population of enclaves controlled by the Islamists in these wars not only acts as an active participant in hostilities, like during the Civil War in Russia, but also seizes military technologies and weapons that allow the enemy to cause significant and sometimes unacceptable damage.
The patriarchal clan-tribal structure of society, prevalent in the Near and Middle East (FAS) and in Africa, is ideally suited for this type of warfare. Any village in the mountains, a city block or a desert oasis can be turned into a fortified area in a relatively short time (which is currently done in Gaza and South Lebanon). Formed on the basis of a tribe or a large family - the Humuli militant group becomes a threat to any adversary, including professional special forces. In addition to Israel, the Western community has faced such type of warfare in Afghanistan and Iraq, Somalia and Sudan, Libya and Yemen, the countries of the Sahara and the Sahel.
Beneficiaries far from the line of fire
It must be noted that there is no adequate strategy for waging wars with an adversary of this type in the modern Western world. The army in modern conditions, as a rule, is constrained both in the methods of warfare, and among the victims of the civilian population - both their own and the opposing side. It can not afford to physically destroy the enemy, much less the local people supporting it, without relying on which the sabotage and partisan war, which has no external support (although the military actions of the Islamists against Israel have just such support), is inevitably exhausted. Her opponents have no such restrictions.
That is why Hamas and Hezbollah cover missile depots, launchers, underground bunkers and communications with civilian objects, including mosques, hospitals, schools and residential buildings. The more civilian casualties there are during the war, the more pressure the “world community” will have on Israel — a logic as reasonable as effective. Moreover, this pressure comes from not only the traditionally anti-Israeli United Nations, the countries of the Islamic world or the EU states that flirt with them (compared to which Russia's position is much more balanced and objective), but also from the White House and the US Department of State.
Israel, for its part, is forced, firstly, to protect its own population, regardless of the costs, which it still allows the “Iron Dome” missile defense system (in Hebrew, also called the “Lead Dome”), and, secondly, it significantly limits itself arsenal of funds used in Gaza. That is, carpet bombing, like America in Iraq Fallujah, Israel does not use and bunker bombs to open a multi-storey, layered underground defense system built under the sector over the past few years, does not use.
Especially for the Jewish state, the use of such means as agents and flamethrowers, which the Wehrmacht used in underground battles without hesitation in World War II, is excluded. This leaves the taking of Palestinian bunkers and tunnels to the discretion of the Israeli special forces, with the danger of a high level of casualties among personnel. That in itself is a winning situation for the opponents of Israel, who take into account and successfully use these features of its tactics.
The lack of modern weapons and military equipment (AME) for modern Western armies, including Israeli, necessary for a gentle but effective combat in urban areas and underground fortifications, with a mixed civilian and military component of manpower on the opposing side, requires the production of new types of non-lethal weapons. Those types that are currently in service, including stun grenades and other types, are designed for police actions, and not for use in combat against a well-armed and trained enemy with a high level of motivation, hiding behind the civilian population. As is always the case, new weapons and combat tactics are needed for a new type of war.
It should be borne in mind that the asymmetry in the costs of rocket attacks and an order of magnitude more expensive Israeli protection of the population from these attacks is an additional advantage of Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and other groups specializing in the confrontation with Israel. By shelling its territory, they significantly deplete the defense budget of this country. The cost of a single anti-missile is up to 50 thousand dollars, which explains why the Iron Dome installations are designed to be used only to protect built-up spaces.According to experts, if Israel ultimately will be forced to expend some of the bunker bombs in its arsenals, this will reduce the threat to the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI), since its underground nuclear facilities can only be destroyed by them. Thus, Tehran remains the beneficiary of the Israeli-Hamas clashes, not directly participating in hostilities. Although the transformation of Gaza and South Lebanon into a springboard for rocket attacks on Israel is undoubtedly the merit and tactically correct move of Iran.
Curious is the foreign policy background of the operation “Unbreakable Rock”, which was reviewed in detail on the Russian-language television channel Eaton-TV by the former head of Israel’s “Nativ”, Yakov Kedmi. In defense of Hamas in the Islamic world, in addition to the Arab street, whose sympathies in any situation are on the side of the opponents of Israel, are Turkey and Qatar. In Ankara, the Islamist Justice and Development Party rules, and Prime Minister Erdogan is an active supporter of political Islam and has a negative attitude towards Israel. Official Doha not only supports, but patronizes the Muslim Brotherhood, to which Hamas belongs, using them as a tool to spread its military and political influence in the Arabic and in the whole Islamic world.
The role of Iran, which as the main instigator and organizer of the Hezbollah and Hamas conflicts with Israel, as a rule, is referred to by the world media, is secondary in this case. Iran has supplied and continues to supply Hamas with missiles used to fire at Israeli territory. The production technology in Gaza itself of medium-range missiles, as well as the construction of underground fortifications and tunnels to seize Iranian hostages. However, since Hamas betrayed Bashar Assad and spoke out against him during the civil war in Syria, the organization’s relations with Tehran have cooled considerably. In particular, Iran has ceased to supply Hamas with money.
In accordance with Mr. Kedmi’s point of view (to which, knowing him for a quarter of a century, the author is inclined to listen carefully) the conflict around Gaza is a reflection of the confrontation in the Arab world. Qatar is on one side, and the alliance of Saudi Arabia and Egypt is on the other. Moreover, since Israel and Hamas are firing at each other, neither Doha nor Riyadh and Cairo lose anything and risk nothing. The wars with the Islamists, which Israel fights along the perimeter of its borders, are “proxy wars”. Their real inspirers and sponsors are far from the line of fire.
The more Hamas militants in the course of hostilities are destroyed by the Israeli army, the better for Egyptian President Abdul-Fattah al-Sisi, who is waging a war against the Islamists for Sinai’s death, after the army of Egypt ’overthrew President Mohammed Mursi, who represented "Muslim Brotherhood", currently banned in this country. The same is true for the Arab monarchies of the Persian Gulf, fighting with political Islam on its territory: Bahrain, the UAE and Saudi Arabia. Their ultimatum to Qatar with the simultaneous recall of their ambassadors because of the support that Doha provided and renders to the Muslim Brotherhood, using the propaganda potential of Al-Jazeera TV channel, one of the main stars of which is the spiritual leader of the Brothers, Sheikh Yusef Kardawi, speaks for itself.
Cairo has its own diplomatic game. His requirements for Hamas include, among other things, restricting the presence of militants at border checkpoints and replacing them with Abu Mazen people, partial control of the PNA forces over the situation in Gaza itself, including in the border strip near the Israeli security wall, the elimination of Gaza tunnels to Egypt used for smuggling. And so on, that Egypt is interested in, having no relation to the goals of Israel declared at the moment. However, it is unacceptable for Hamas, which puts forward its own demands as an alternative, which are far beyond what Israel could even agree to under the most critical conditions.
The latter, in principle, is ready to limit itself to the elimination of the Hamas missile potential and tunnels used for terrorist attacks on Israeli territory, to return the status quo that existed after Operation Cast Lead. PNA Jerusalem is currently not ready to return to power in Gaza, not believing in the future of this education and its leaders. In the case of the actual unification of the territories controlled by the PNA and Hamas, Israel predicts not a normalization of relations with the Palestinians, but a radical Islamization of the West Bank. As a result, with such a development of events, it is inevitable that all of the Palestinian territories will become the center of a missile and terrorist threat, which the Jewish state cannot accept.
Israeli polygon
However, in the negotiations that are underway in Cairo, Israel plays a very indirect role. Not his proposals, but the conditions put forward by Egypt, are the basis of the requirements for Hamas. Not the Israeli, but the Egyptian schedule of negotiations is at the heart of this dialogue. And there is no place to hurry ARE - the rockets fall on Israeli, and not on its cities. As long as he destroys Hamas with the hands of Israel, all the image losses are borne by the Jewish state, all international pressure is put on him, and the Egyptian leadership has only certain advantages.
Saudi Arabia wins twice in this situation. It remains behind the scenes, allowing Israel to fight Hamas and Egypt to act on the diplomatic front. Paradoxically, Hamas also wins. The very fact of holding talks with him, in which the leaders of the Arab world and international mediators are trying to achieve something, raises his actions in the political arena. One of the consequences of the course adopted by him is reconciliation with Hezbollah, which may well be an intermediate step for restoring Hamas’s relations with Iran.The leadership of the United States, the states of the European Union, and the United Nations are trying to force Israel to accept another humanitarian truce or seek a unilateral cease-fire from it. Washington and Brussels are putting increasing pressure on Jerusalem, which, with success, will effectively preserve the current situation, while retaining the potential that has been accumulated by Hamas. As a result, at any time Hamas will be able to attack Israel from the positions it currently has, including underground fortifications, medium-range missile production facilities and the remaining missile arsenal. And this is without taking into account the image strengthening in the Islamic world as a force capable of attacking Israel for a long time without a fatal result for itself.
The UN’s role in this is even more dubious than Western intermediaries. The de facto structures of this organization in Gaza operate at Hamas. The ambulances are used by militants as a vehicle that allows them to secretly navigate the sector. The buildings built by the UN are turned into military facilities, and the rockets that are stored in them are returned to the militants if found, and the destruction of any of these buildings by the Israelis provokes an international scandal. Needless to say, there are numerous instances of transport by customs bypassed by high-ranking UN functionaries in the baggage of large sums of money intended for the leadership of Hamas.
However, proposals by Western countries to transfer tens of millions of dollars to the organization “for the restoration of Gaza’s civil infrastructure” look no less doubtful, with the understanding that this money (at least that part which will not be looted) will go exclusively to the construction of new tunnels for terrorist activities and smuggling. Each tunnel destroyed by the IDF, depending on the length and level of arrangement costs from one to one and a half million dollars. Accordingly, the American 47 millions alone, proposed by Secretary of State John Kerry, will be enough to restore the 31 detected and the 11 tunnels destroyed by Israel.
It is no accident that Israel has rejected almost all the proposals put forward by the United States, considering them dangerous and unrelated to its interests, which theoretically America should protect. Characteristically, in discussing these proposals, the narrow cabinet of the Israeli government (the “security cabinet”), including the religious ministers, did not interrupt the meeting after Saturday. This is the first time since the Gulf War 1991, when the United States put Israel under fire with Iraqi missiles in order to keep Arab countries in a coalition against Saddam Hussein.
It should be understood that in the context of the confrontation with Hamas, Israel plays the role of a proving ground where non-state military-political structures will test new methods of waging an effective war, including a terrorist one, against a modern high-tech state. Some of these methods have already been used in the civil war in Syria. In particular, through a system of underground tunnels built under the Yarmuk Palestinian refugee camp, militants penetrated the center of the Syrian capital.
Opponents of President Assad are currently using pre-fabricated underground fortifications in most of the cities they have captured to counter government aviation and armored vehicles. Similarly, they are used against Israel. If the militants of the Islamic State in Iraq launch a large-scale attack on Baghdad or start a civil war between the Sunni and Shiite areas of the city, such tactics of warfare can be used with high probability. The same applies to underground urban communications, of which terrorist attacks on European or American cities are possible.
Israel’s political leadership’s lack of plans to regain control of Gaza and South Lebanon is the main reason for turning the organizations controlling these regions into the main opponents of Jerusalem, which are much more dangerous than the states of the Islamic world. The one-sided demarcation, which the authors of this concept from among the Israeli political consultants and Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon believed it was supposed to ensure peace for the border areas, put the whole country at risk.
Arguments about the preservation of the lives of military personnel proved to be untenable. In operations against Hamas in Gaza and in the Second Lebanon War, more soldiers were killed than in clashes with terrorists when the IDF controlled the above-mentioned territory. As, however, as well as peace citizens. Forty-five years of continuous wars before the era of the "peace process" in Israel at the hands of terrorists killed about a thousand people. Twenty years after the start of the "Oslo process" - one and a half thousand. After the “cessation of occupation”, including as a result of the civil war that began in 2007 between Fatah and Hamas, there is no need to say that there are a lot more human casualties on the Palestinian side.
The same turned out to be true with regard to the arguments of the financiers about the preservation of the costs of the army and the maintenance of the country's defense capability. Instead of saving significant funds, which justified the expediency of retreating the army from the security zones, Israel was forced to increase costs: the missile defense system ate the benefits obtained by the country at the first stage. Expected political dividends are also zero. Israel has not ceased to be an occupier in the eyes of the world community, which is increasing its demands exclusively for it, since it is practically useless to demand anything from the opposing side.
There are no mechanisms to influence Hamas, apart from the blockade and military actions. The Israeli idea, by definition, that Gazans’s population would be overthrown by Hamas’s rule is untenable. Ready to shoot at their opponents regime can not fall under pressure from the inside, only from the outside. As a consequence, Israel’s unwillingness to assume responsibility for Gaza preserves Hamas’s power over the sector. Even in the midst of hostilities, Jerusalem refrains from exterminating the political leaders of the Palestinian Islamists. Dot personal liquidations are applied only to the military wing of the Hamas leadership, more precisely, to its members directly responsible for the attacks and rocket attacks.
We note in this connection: Israel is not waging a war of annihilation against Hamas, which, like any war of this kind, can be won, but a half-war, reminiscent of Lenin's "step forward, two steps back." As a result, in a maximum of two or three years, his clash with Hamas will again be inevitable.
Information