THE WELCOME relief for Gazan and southern Israeli resdents following the weekend ceasefire must be tempered by grave worries that it is too incoherent to survive for very long. Israel’s unilateral decision to halt its offensive in Gaza has been accompanied by a partial withdrawal, but with no end to the occupation and blockade of the territory which underlies its inhabitants’ deep hostility to the Jewish state.
And the declaration of a weeklong truce in the rocket attacks on Israeli communities by Hamas and other militants is conditional on a complete Israeli departure. Either of these commitments could easily unravel by accident or design. It is now imperative that the intense diplomatic activity should be further built upon in coming days. Otherwise this limited relief from civilian suffering will be in vain. The highly disproportionate death and destruction visited on Gaza by the Israeli offensive is graphically revealed in statistics showing there were some 1,300 Palestinians killed (698 civilians and 410 of them children) and 5,300 wounded during these 23 days of conflict, compared to 13 Israelis killed, including four by rockets. The cost of rebuilding Gazan infrastructure is put at $1.6 billion.
The loose ends from this dreadful engagement are difficult to negotiate but relatively easy to identify. Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert claims a military victory in degrading Hamas’s rocket-launching ability; but he cannot be sure it is destroyed without preventing arms smuggling through tunnels from Egypt. That can only be done by an international presence on the border with Egyptian approval and co-operation. Hamas demands that the inhumane blockade of Gaza be lifted in return for any such agreement. But the Israelis refuse to budge on that without the release of a captured soldier Gilad Shalit, especially ahead of their February general election.
Underlying these issues is the deeper one of whether and how other Palestinians, the Israelis, the Arab states and the wider international community deal with Hamas. The organisation may well have been weakened by these attacks, but it has not been undermined, is still capable of running Gaza and has probably gained as much as it has lost in representative capacity. That political reality should now be recognised and tested by a more imaginative and searching diplomatic effort on the Israeli-Palestinian question, including on Gaza’s future.
Excluding Hamas from any political engagement until it recognises Israel’s right to exist and renounces terrorism is a misguided and self-defeating strategy. Rather should these be clearcut objectives of an eventual agreement. That would provide an incentive for the organisation to develop its pragmatic, political character, including its willingness to participate in a national Palestinian government following fresh elections. The recent international involvement by the UN secretary general and by Arab and European states can now be joined by the Obama administration in a fresh search for peace. Like it or not, Hamas should be part of that.