Ian Blackconsiders the balance of forces at play and Israel's political and military options, six days into its operation against Hamas in Gaza
SIX DAYS into Operation Cast Lead against Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Israeli leaders are considering a range of military and political options that depend on what happens in a fast-moving situation with many variables they do not control.
Developments on the ground, international diplomatic activity and Arab reactions will determine what happens next. Echoing the 2006 war against Hizbullah in Lebanon, there is Israeli confusion and disagreement over tactics, strategy and what will constitute a victory. But Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, said yesterday he did not want a long war.
After more than 500 bombing missions by aircraft and helicopters with a claimed 95 per cent success rate, high-value Palestinian targets are running out. Israeli claims of "surgical strikes" will be measured against credible reports of civilian casualties.
The killing of Nizar Rayan, a senior Hamas figure (with members of his family), suggests an effort to eliminate Hamas political leaders as well as military ones, although the distinction is fuzzy. Israel's critics and experts are adamant that air power alone cannot win this war.
Israel insists it does not wish to reoccupy the Gaza Strip. But ground operations on some scale remain likely. Ehud Barak, the defence minister, spoke yesterday of "widening and deepening" the offensive. The usually well-informed Haaretz newspaper reported that officers of the army's southern command have been given orders to move - although such reports could be part of deception plans.
The army wants to avoid entering built-up areas such as refugee camps where Hamas fighters would have the advantage of defending home territory. Hamas would place a premium on capturing Israeli soldiers - as well as bodies and body parts - to use for prisoner exchanges. Israel wants to destroy the Izzedin al-Qassam Brigades, the Hamas military wing.
But the risks, of both casualties and unintended escalation, are clear. "It seems inevitable that the tanks will go in," said Ma'ariv commentator Ofer Shelah. "And when the tanks start moving, who knows better than Barak, and who should know better than Olmert, that a lot of what you thought beforehand is no longer relevant."
Israel could conclude it has dealt a heavy enough blow to Hamas to unilaterally announce an end to attacks and then respond only if missile fire continues.
This view is attributed to foreign minister Tzipi Livni, for whom such an approach would dovetail with diplomatic moves.
This option might win Israel some plaudits internationally, but it risks allowing Hamas to claim that its resistance has triumphed.
The example Israel is desperate to avoid is Lebanon in 2006, when Hizbullah's Hassan Nasrallah claimed "divine victory" even though he suffered heavy losses in men and missiles.
Israeli defence officials favour a clear agreement with Hamas even if it is not enshrined in a written document. That would follow the pre-2006 situation with Hizbullah, when formal "rules of the game" established the scope of fighting and "permissible" retaliation.
A return to Egyptian mediation alone may not be enough because of bad blood between Cairo and Gaza.
Olmert wants an international "supervision and enforcement mechanism" for a ceasefire to measure whether Hamas meets its commitments. Britain and the EU want Arab League backing for these proposals. Diplomats see a role for countries such as Jordan, Morocco and the Gulf states.
Crucially, Hamas would have to accept a role for the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority - still recognised internationally as the legitimate Palestinian government - at Gaza's borders: that would require Hamas-Fatah reconciliation - a tall order in current circumstances.
These sworn enemies will find it extremely hard to negotiate directly. Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh demanded on Wednesday not only that Israeli attacks stop before any truce could be considered but also that "the siege must be lifted and all the crossings opened because the siege is the source of all of Gaza's problems".
Israel says Hamas has been weakened and is facing popular discontent, but does not claim it is about to be overthrown. Barring such a drastic development, the most likely scenario to end this crisis is a more sustainable ceasefire than the one that ended on December 19th.
But as Ma'ariv's Shelah put it: "Each side wants the other to reach that point on their knees." - (Guardian service)