It’s looking like Israel is intending to invade Gaza. This is a necessary escalation at this point. Negotiations having failed, violence must be tried. Either it will work to allow Israel to impose the peace it wants, or it won’t. I’m going to bet, heavily, that it won’t. However, as long as Israel thinks violence will get it what it wants, it will not seriously negotiate or be willing to make the necessary concessions, such as removing settlers from the West Bank and providing sufficient water to make Palestine a viable state (or, perhaps more realistically, ending the Jewish religious/ethnic state and moving to a one-state solution, since it is unlikely Palestine can be made viable anymore.)
Hamas has spent the last two years preparing for a ground incursion. According to Ha’aretz, there are about 15,000 armed Palestinians in Gaza, not all under Hamas’s control, though most are, at least nominally. The core of Hamas’s military is the 1,000 strong, Iz al-Din al-Qassam, which is trained in the Hezbollah fashion. There is a bunker and tunnel network, though how extensive it is remains to be seen. Because of Israeli snipers, Hamas has not been able to place as many open field defenses such as minefields and roadside bombs as it would doubtless like to. Hamas also has a primitive missile industry, and does not require outside aid to make more missiles.
Israel is talking about a full scale invasion intended to destroy Hamas so they can make peace with someone (I have no idea who they think that will be) on terms Hamas will not agree with. Because of the bombing, and in the event of the invasion, this will not be Fatah. It’s doubtful Fatah could enforce a peace in any case, but they will be forced to back Hamas against Israel, unless they want to be killed by their own population. They will gain legitimacy in Palestinian eyes to the extent that they do back Hamas and other fighters against Israel, actually. Israel is forcing Fatah to side with Hamas, which is an impressive bit of unintentional peacemaking, given how much Fatah and Hamas hate each other.
I had originally assumed they would do a limited incursion, intending to find and take out the missile manufacturing sites and to look for tunnels leading from Gaza to Egypt, which have been used for limited military resupply by Hamas and Islamic Jihad. While I think that would be messy and success is uncertain, it’s at least remotely sane from a military standpoint.
Instead what we have is an eerie echo of the invasion of Lebanon, when Israel declared its victory condition was the destruction of Hezbollah. Not only did that not happen, but Hezbollah proved it could go toe to toe with the Israeli army. For all practical purposes it was Israel’s first major military loss in war since Israel’s creation.
Hamas is not Hezbollah, and Gaza is not Lebanon. Hezbollah had its own communications infrastructure, a lot of space to move in, a deep logistical supply chain, and years to build up a network of defenses without any real interference. Hamas has had none of those things. At the same time, the lessons from the Lebanon war have been passed on to Hamas. They know how to take out Israeli tanks. Israeli soldiers note that Hamas’s fire discipline has tightened considerably in the last couple years. These are no longer just militia forces, they are a small but professional military organization and they have reasonable light infantry equipment.
They cannot win a stand up fight with Israel, in the way that Hezbollah did. There aren’t enough of them, they aren’t well enough equipped, and the area of Gaza is too small to allow for enough maneuver.
But they don’t need to. What they need to do is to inflict enough casualties to make it clear that Israel can’t just slap Hamas around whenever it feels like. Then, if Israel looks likely to occupy Gaza they need to go guerilla. Fade into the population, and start harassing the Israeli military with roadside bombs, mortar attacks, kidnappings and all the sort of actions we’ve seen in Iraq and Afghanistan. The job is to make the Israeli military bleed and for Hamas to accept high losses. As with Hezbollah, Hamas has an advantage in this regard. No one signs up to fight for Hamas with any illusions: they know it’s probably going to cost them their lives. They are willing to die. Despite years of idiocy about "your job is to make the other guy die for his side", in fact it’s often useful to be willing to die. Some operations entail significant losses, Hamas can undertake them because its troops don’t have that much regard for their own lives.
The wild card in this is Hezbollah. Hezbollah has said it will take action, but not said what that action is. To point out the obvious, Hezbollah cannot invade Israel, it has a defensive force, not an offensive military. It could launch its missiles, and Israel would not be able to stop that from occurring (the missiles disarmed earlier this week were, I am informed, called in by Hezbollah itself). It could supply Palestinian forces in the West bank with weaponry, intelligence or even some cadre forces. It could strike at Israeli interests overseas through its extensive terror network (Hezbollah doesn’t do a lot of terrorism, but they may be the most capable terrorists in the world).
From an Israeli point of view the big fear has to be that they actually declare war and start raining missiles down on Israel. While those missiles won’t do a great deal of damage absent fluking out and hitting a fuel storage depot or some such, they will put pressure on Israel to respond. The operation in Gaza, to be done properly, requires a lot of troops. Moving troops into Lebanon will weaken both efforts. Air power alone, as was proved in the last war, won’t stop the missiles. On the other hand, Israel’s response will surely be a widespread bombing campaign which will kill a lot of Lebanese and do a lot of infrastructure damage. Hezbollah may not want to put the Lebanese through that again.
This is going to be a brutal war, and Gazans and Hamas are going to get the worse of it in terms of casualties. But, harsh as it is to say, sometimes a war is necessary and this is one of those times. The idea that Israel can impose a better peace through violence or starving Palestinians into submission needs to be defeated and the only way it will be defeated is, ironically, by trying and failing at violence. If there is to be a peace, it will be dictated by facts on the ground, and those facts are about to be created.
Israel just declared it’s going to kick the Palestinians in the ribs until they give up. We’ll see how much blood Gazans are willing to spit up rather than give in.



32 Comments












Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Thank you for this objective analysis.
And how many of them will be used as cover for Hamas because they can’t get out.
Thanks Ian. digg
The Israeli policies over the last several years have been both foolish and counterproductive. The keep doing the same thing over and over and assuming that somehow it will have a different outcome. Short of outright genocide (which I suspect some Israeli leaders are considering and certainly some of their allies in this country are supporting), you simply cannot starve or bomb the Palestinians into submission. At this point far too many of them see themselves as having nothing left to lose. It is also clear that the current Israeli government and other conservative Israeli leaders have no intention of allowing the creation of a viable, independent Palestinian state, but rather intend to annex all of Palestine. Until there is a new Israeli leadership which will negotiate in good faith, Palestinians will consistently turn to Hamas, Hezbollah, and other more militant and radical groups for leadership.
Israel Masses Troops, Tanks For Possible Ground Invasion
This is going to get much, much worse and should easily make the Intifada look like a Sunday School picinic.
Referring to the article in general, rather than to a comment, I want to point out that an Israeli invasion of Gaza is absolutely NOT NECESSARY, despite your excellent political and strategic reasoning. All it ever takes for war to NOT HAPPEN is for one leader to say NO!
That can happen, even if it’s not likely. Never, Ian, give in to the reasoning and rationalizations of those willing to spill blood, and you, yourself, never cry “necessary” escalation, or invasion or war!
Necessary is not necessary.
It was an analysis not a proposal.
The point of Ian’s post is that this action was necessary to put an end to the Israeli belief that they can impose their will on the Palestinians through the use of disproportionate violence. I am not sure that he is correct, but something or someone needs to disabuse them of this insanity.
GW Clusterfuck now ending his eight year battle to fuck up the middle east. His successor appears to have similar policies…
Don’t see this changing anytime soon.
Would proportionate violence be better? What would that look like?
The history of symetrical warfare where one party has air cover and the other does not is unambiguous.
London protest over raids on Gaza
The ‘trick’ will be to confine the ‘combatants’ to those whom Ian has described, realizing that Israel’s response will not be measured and may well include the use of ‘certain weapons’, should the Israeli government become totally unhinged by Hezbollah’s ‘participation’. Bearing in mind that Israeli ’solutions’ seem to be deliberately self-limited, and premised, essentially on continuing escalation and the assumption that Uncle Sugar will support any and all ‘tactics’ whom God’s other ‘chosen people’ might employ.
The Israelis may remain sanquine regarding old Uncle, but it is a truism that war has very unpredictable outcomes, most of which are ‘unpleasant’ and some of which might prove quite fatal to the assumption of ’success’ and the belief of ’supremacy’ …
As to the Palestinians, I do not know what they could do or could have done ‘differently’, but they too, must consider … for they may well be facing extermination … and, certainly, whatever happens, a very dire ‘future’ …
No, violence is not the answer. The vastly disproportionate scale of Israeli responses, however, make the situation far worse. The central problem is that the current Israeli government has no intention of allowing the creation of a viable, independent Palestinian state and the Palestinians know it. There is no incentive for them to negotiate peacefully. Unfortunately the Israeli government believes there is no reason for them to negotiate either, since they believe that they can impose their will owing to their overwhelming military advantage. Some of us here remember how well that worked out in SE Asia.
Nothing will change until the Israelis decide they must change. Throughout all of the negotiations after Carter brought together Israel and Egypt, Israel has refused to do the things they agreed to do. Like stopping the settlements. Always the excuse is that the Palestinians are not doing what they have agreed to do to maintain Israel’s security.
But when you deliberately shell police stations where new recruits are graduating (and this is not the first time the police have been targeted), who do you expect to keep people in line? Why should they? The number of settlements that have grown, with the checkpoints, and the Israeli only roads, has increased beyond what I had thought possible.
But there is never talk about that part. There is never talk about the land that is constantly being stolen or the housing that is constantly demolished. Why should anyone think that the Palestinians would be different from any other people?
The world has changed so much since even 2006 when the IDF and Hezbollah went to war. Now Americans can see much of what is happening because of YouTube and Al Jazeera. Living in Europe, I got a much better glimpse of the war but now we are all (and I mean the whole world) seeing the same images.
I don’t think this action will bring peace to Israel. I think it will just ratchet up the stakes a little higher. And to think that while they were paying lip service to the cease fire, they were planning this attack! If it had been Hamas planning this type of attack while negotiating with Israel we wouldn’t hear the end of it.
But this too, unfortunately, shall pass.
As an American, I can only hope the next administration will be willing to learn from these mistakes and make some corrective changes for all of our sakes.
roger that
The most dangerous person is the one who has nothing left to lose.
War is often used for internal political reasons—any elections goin on in Israel?
What I keep saying is that most people fail to realize how stupid the Israeli political leadership is, both those in power and those waiting in the wings. I mean Bush looks like Einstein in comparison to them. So I think we can safely put away the idea that the Israelis have thought this through. In fact, it is pretty clear they haven’t. This isn’t about a few missiles or destroying Hamas. It’s about Israeli election politics so that the news in Israel will run stories that look like ads for Kadima. That’s why the Israelis are shooting up Gaza. It makes good copy. There isn’t a shred of a strategic rationale in any of this.
February. Right wing vs ultra right wing.
And the most dangerous moment occurs when there are too many people with nothing to lose, confronting those who have no notion of what ‘losing’ actually means.
It is hard to imagine that much ‘good’ will arise from the ashes, at least in the short term … and violence begets violence just as surely as warfare destroys humanity … and an appreciation for life.
And then, as was mentioned on an earlier thread, there will be some who will do very ‘well’ … by ‘banking’ on destruction and despair. The hounds of war, the money folk and the politiians …
A great many influential leaders in the Bushco administration have on or two dog in this fight.
!. Dual citizenships with Isreal and the USA
@. The weapons industry/lobby needs more conflicts to sell weapons…the whitehouse and defense department is loaded with war profiteers.
An escaltion of tensions in the world will mean profits.
Isreal and the USA are in the ghetto business.
Stirling is upstairs with the next exciting chapter in this age old story …
Ab-so-fucking-lute-ly and the Israeli government is doing everything in their power to push all of the Palestinians into that position.
Actually, I would say that the events of 1945-1949 in the region provide a good analog.
Israelis=Bushian monsters
Except that Isreal’s capacity and appetite for destruction might be a tad bit greater now, and the ‘leadership’ is even more of the uber mensch persuasion, these days, Dr. Dick (not to mention the proclivities of the current occupant of our own “People’s House” and his ‘interested’ friends).
Gotta say, Ian, unless I’m seriously missing some level of irony in this post, I find your characterization of an Israeli invasion of Gaza as “necessary” to be staggeringly cavalier at best, and grandly insensitive to the massive loss of life that is potentially about to take place. But even leaving aside questions of taste, the idea that an invasion might convince Isreal that violence will not resolve the conflict with the Palestinians seems flawed; haven’t we already witnessed much greater acts of violence towards the Palestinians, such as the Six-Day War, or the massacres at Sabra and Shatila? Those didn’t seem to deter the Israeli propensity toward violence against Palestinians one iota; why do we think this will?
I find pronouncing the death and/or suffering of civilians to be “necessary” to be akin to placing oneself on severely shaky moral ground. It’s very easy for us in our safe homes to play God and tut-tut over what we give the attributes of an inevitable act of nature. Much harder to speak up against a powerful country with a strong lobby and the atrocities, both past and future, they bear responsibility for.
Thanks, Raven.
But it doesn’t matter if Ian is analyzing or proposing. Israel does NOT need to re-learn the lesson that invasions don’t get the results they want. They learned this again most recently in Lebanon. That excuse for an invasion (listen up, Ian) is dead. To lend it back to Israel is to accidentally give them TACIT PERMISSION to invade. Think about it.
Get it? What’s NECESSARY is for a Rabin-like leader to say NO INVASION, WE ALREADY LEARNED THAT LESSON.
What is NOT NECESSARY is to pretend Israel has to re-learn a lesson that the whole world already knows it long-ago internalized. And what is NOT NECESSARY is for Israel to invade Gaza, or anybody else.
Also NECESSARY is for progressives and liberals and peace people to quit making excuses for warmongers, even if they think they are merely analyzing the situation. We don’t need to study war any more. We need to NOT INVADE GAZA OR ANYWHERE ELSE.
Thanks, Raven.
But it doesn’t matter if Ian is analyzing or proposing. Israel does NOT need to re-learn the lesson that invasions don’t get the results they want. They learned this again most recently in Lebanon. That excuse for an invasion (listen up, Ian) is dead. To lend it back to Israel is to accidentally give them TACIT PERMISSION to invade. Think about it.
Get it? What’s NECESSARY is for a Rabin-like leader to say NO INVASION, WE ALREADY LEARNED THAT LESSON.
What is NOT NECESSARY is to pretend Israel has to re-learn a lesson that the whole world already knows it long-ago internalized. And what is NOT NECESSARY is for Israel to invade Gaza, or anybody else.
Quit making excuses for warmongers, even if they think they are merely analyzing the situation. We don’t need to study war any more. We need to NOT INVADE GAZA OR ANYWHERE ELSE.