Global Insight Perspective | |
Significance | Israel, which has been holding off from a surge into the heart of Gaza city, is now believed to be entering stage three of operations which will involve sending in troops deeper into urban areas, increasing the risks of Israeli military casualties. The clear absence of an exit strategy is also becoming a concern. |
Implications | Preparations for this new stage take place against a backdrop of frenzied diplomatic activity with the aim of pushing both sides to accept a ceasefire as called for by the UN Security Council. Such efforts are likely to be futile, given that only Israel’s security cabinet will have the decisive say in determining the timing and conditions of the ceasefire. |
Outlook | The war in Gaza is unlikely to come to a halt anytime soon although Israel may find itself under public pressure if military causalities were to increase and rocket attacks against Israeli towns were to continue. Hamas has been weakened by the operation but is still dangerous. The potential for the emergence of power vacuum, which could be filled by other radical elements, also poses considerable medium and long-term risks to Israel. |
The Next Stage
Tensions are set to remain high as Israel prepares to extend its 19-day offensive into built up areas on the outskirts of Gaza City knowing that the cost both in terms of civilian and military casualties could prove extremely high. With the Palestinian death toll now nearing 1,000 and the number of injured surpassing 4,500, the international community along with humanitarian agencies has expressed increasing concern over the speed and ferocity with which the offensive is continuing. Both sides however remain stubbornly defiant with international calls for a ceasefire as called for by a UN Security Council resolution continuing to go unheeded. Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni declared on Monday (12 January) that the military offensive had "restored Israel’s deterrence" adding that Hamas now understands that when you fire rockets on Israel it responds by "going wild", according to the U.K.’s Independent. However, this deterrence strategy has been criticised by experts for being both irresponsible and ineffective with many arguing that it is pushing Hamas to respond with even more determination. UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon arrived in Cairo this morning on the first stop of a whirlwind regional tour which will also take him to Israel, Jordan, the West Bank, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, and Kuwait, with the aim of increasing momentum for a ceasefire. Ban slammed the rising number of civilian casualties as "unacceptable" adding that "my message is simple, direct and to the point: the fighting must stop". Egypt which brokered a six-month-long truce last summer has once again been spearheading efforts to see an end to the fighting
Hamas, which has ruled Gaza since June 2007, is sticking to a hard diplomatic line, suggesting that it would consider the current Egyptian ceasefire proposal but only with serious revisions. The fact that its leadership feels as if it is still in a position to bargain is inductive of the fact that despite the pressure of the assault, the political leadership (believed to be hiding underground) is still intact and is strategically calculating the costs and benefits of every potential move it makes.
Outlook and Implications
Experts maintain that Israeli troops are likely to face many more difficulties if they bring their fight to Hamas in urban areas like Gaza city, where their enemy are inherently more familiar with the territory.
Hamas may therefore prove able to neutralise some of Israel’s strategic advantages. Hamas’s leader and former Palestinian prime minister suggested on Monday that the groups would be able to withstand more hits, adding that the resistance of the citizens of Gaza was a "miracle". Reports have confirmed that Hamas’ ranks have swelled since the offensive. The group is also believed to joined alliances with all of the major militant groups in the territory including the radical Islamic Jihad and the PFLP. The movement also appears to be preparing for a long, drawn-out operation and will lie low until the time is right. Hamas also now sees it as a battle for its very survival thereby ensuring that it will remain dangerous. The disciplined structure of the movement is such that it could survive the assassination of a number of its leaders; this has been the case in the past. Hamas fighters are believed to be divided up into six groups, each with its own segment of territory. It is believed that each of these will be able to operate and fight independently should the central leadership collapse. According to older Israeli intelligence estimates, Hamas and other groups have between 10,000-15,000 fighters. They remain relatively well armed with assault rifles, mortars, and vast quantities of smuggled explosives.
It seems clear however, that Israel remains determined to push head with the offensive at all costs and the international community will continue to lack the sufficient leverage to induce a change in the Jewish state’s military policy in Gaza. The transition to phase three and extension of operations into urban areas could prove costly for Israel and risks undermining public support for the operation which has thus far remained surprisingly high. The declaration of a unilateral ceasefire by Israel does however seem inevitable at some point, although when this will be remains uncertain. Reports are continuing to emerge over a split within Israel’s security cabinet, a development which has been taken as a sign of the increasing pressure on the leadership to come up with a credible exit-strategy. Livni along with Labour leader and Defence Minister Ehud Barak are reportedly considering an early end to the offensive while Prime Minister Ehud Olmert along with key figures within the military establishment are pushing for an extended campaign. Israeli leaders are now being faced with a number of dilemmas over the future of Gaza. Namely, the potential for the emergence of power vacuum which could be filled by other radical and criminal elements. This would pose considerable medium and long-term risks to Israel.