clear

Creating new perspectives since 2009

The attack on Gaza is one political blunder too many by Netanyahu

May 5, 2014 at 12:49 am

On 12 October we referred to an alert by the Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, that his people will pay the price for Israel’s early elections. Even then, the daily attacks on the Gaza Strip had already started. They were viewed as an attempt to instigate an all-out confrontation with Hamas. Nineteen Palestinians were killed in the enclave before Israel decided, yesterday, to raise the stakes with the assassination of Ahmad Al-Jabari, the field commander of the Ezz Al Din Al Qassam Brigades.

This dramatic escalation will prove to be a political blunder by the Israeli prime minister. There were two overarching objectives for the attack: first, to reassert Israel’s ‘deterrence’ capability; and second, to impose a new reality on the ground, in light of the changing regional dynamics. Israel is now no closer to attaining either. On the contrary, the Israelis have set themselves back.

 


In his first press conference after the attack, defence minister Ehud Barak claimed that they had destroyed most, if not all, of the missile launch pads in Gaza. If this was meant to reassure the Israeli public he was quickly proved wrong by a barrage of retaliatory missiles on towns and cities, including, for the first time, Tel Aviv.

 

The overhyped Iron Dome defence system funded and built with $250 million of American taxpayers’ money intercepted only 27 missiles, according to Israeli military sources. Hamas claims that the ‘Fajr 5’ rocket which landed in Tel Aviv was home-made. Inevitably, this development will have a telling psychological effect on the Israeli public, for if the Palestinians could do this on the first day of the encounter, they may have the capability to do more.

In the same vein, if the Israeli operation was meant to be an election ploy, as many observers point out, it could well backfire on its planners. The longer it continues the sooner that the Israeli electorate will hold Netanyahu and Barak responsible for causing distress and inconvenience.

Since the last Israeli war on civilians in Gaza in 2008-09, the region has undergone seismic changes. For example, Operation Cast Lead was announced from Cairo by Israel’s former foreign minister. Today, the new leadership in Egypt has made it clear that Palestinian blood is Egyptian blood and Israel will have no political support from Cairo for aggression against Gaza. Indeed, it will be met with opposition.

President Morsi demonstrated this swiftly by recalling his country’s ambassador from Tel Aviv hours after the attack began. The move has won resounding cross-party support, even from his staunchest critics, but he is under pressure to do more.

The anger in Egypt is particularly acute because only two days prior to Israel’s move they brokered a truce between the protagonists. While the forces in Gaza adhered to the agreement, Israel did not. Its breach of the truce was a carbon-copy of what occurred in 2008 when then Prime Minister Ehud Olmert gave an undertaking to Turkey’s Prime Minister Erdogan that he would observe the peace. The Egyptians, like the Turks, feel betrayed.

Important as they are, the changes in Egypt are by no means isolated. In Syria, attempts to wrest authority from the Assad regime is slowly spreading to the Israeli occupied Golan Heights. From neighbouring Lebanon, an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) breached Israel’s air space in recent weeks. In Jordan, the growing clamour for reform suggests that it’s not a matter of if, but when, the King will accede to popular demands. Such democratic changes would not be in Israel’s favour.

The killing of Ahmad Al Jarbari was no military novelty. Israel has a shameful record of carrying out such operations, almost to perfection. Captured in real time on camera, it will no doubt be an effective advertisement for its armaments industry.

As for Hamas, the loss of any military commander is a dreadful blow, but Al Jabari was more than a military leader; he was also a member of the movement’s politburo. This makes his demise all the more painful. Accordingly, the Israelis can claim some credit and enjoy its hubris.

Meanwhile, Israel’s leaders are hoping that the fires they have ignited will remain confined to Gaza. As usual, they expect the help of their American and European allies. None of them will be able to stem the tide of regional support for the Palestinians. As long as their rights are denied, the region will remain a powder-keg of instability.

By raising tensions at this time Netanyahu seeks to gain votes internally and impose a new reality on the region. He opted for Gaza thinking that is the weakest link in geo-strategic terms. The cross-party political support given to him must be met with a similar cross-regional response, such as the withdrawal of the 2002 Arab Initiative. As for Mahmoud Abbas, the onus is on him to play his role internally by expediting reconciliation with Hamas and ending all forms of security collaboration with the Israeli occupation. With these two steps, Netanyahu will get the message that the days of Israeli hegemony are nearing their end. His brutal aggression against Gaza will be one political blunder too many.