National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s call to fire Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for his refusal to establish military rule in Gaza has revealed two critical factors that will determine the course of this war.
First, Israel must find an internal consensus on how to shape the post-war landscape.
Equally important is to devise a scenario that can truly put an end to Hamas terror in Gaza. Another crucial factor is the United States’ attitude toward Hamas. According to Israeli media reports, citing a senior official privy to the dialogue with the US, Biden’s team has concluded that Hamas is unlikely to disappear from Gaza altogether. Washington is convinced that Hamas will remain in the Gaza Strip in some form after the war. Thus, the main goal has shifted to weakening and marginalizing Hamas. Biden’s plan envisions a hampered, encircled Hamas balanced by a strengthened Palestinian alternative.
Regional peace
The official reiterated the US’s goal of seriously weakening Hamas’ capabilities and preventing a repeat of the October 7 attack, saying a complete eradication of the movement was a pipe dream. America’s strategic vision involves a multi-pronged approach.
In addition to the operational weakening of Hamas, attempts are being made to strengthen Israel’s Arab relations, above all the normalization of relations with Saudi Arabia and a regional defense pact that integrates Israel. At the same time, the Palestinian Authority (PA) is to be reorganized in order to govern the Gaza Strip in a transitional phase under a United Nations or a joint Arab military umbrella.
Biden’s calculation for the defeat of Hamas is undoubtedly based on the US’s experience fighting insurgencies and terrorist militias in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia. But this judgment goes beyond that experience.
For the US, time is of the essence, fearing that the Israeli army will fight indefinitely, given the threat to Biden’s re-election prospects, not to mention the strategic damage to America. The discussions about the course of the Gaza war are inextricably linked to the fate of the Gaza Strip.
Any coherent operational vision hinges on fundamental issues such as a strategy for war management, Israel’s post-war military role, and determining the next governors of Gaza. Significantly, many Israeli offensives seem more concerned with paving ways and creating corridors to balkanize Gaza than with the ostensible goal of defeating terrorist Hamas.
These divergent positions have driven a wedge between Israel, on the one hand, and the US and Arab countries on the other. Even if their positions are not diametrically opposed, they are clearly clashing at the moment. No Arab state wants to be branded as a supporter of Israeli military rule over Gaza, regardless of its contempt for the terror dogma and the actions of Hamas.
Arab fears are high that Netanyahu is only playing for time instead of resolving the crisis and eliminating Hamas’ terrorist leadership inside and outside Gaza. After all, the reverberations are shaking Arab societies to the core and risk a resurgence of terror and radicalism, jeopardizing the hard-won progress made in the fight against the terrorist threat before the Gaza war.
Should the war continue without tangible breakthroughs in the realization of core objectives, exacerbated by an Israeli operational crisis, Hamas will only become more emboldened. Each day that its leader Yahya Sinwar escapes demise – while retaining his ability to threaten – strengthens Hamas’s interests, at least psychologically and visually.
The swift neutralization of Hamas’s terrorist resources and brain trust is therefore central to the revival of regional rapprochement and peace initiatives.
The writer is a UAE political analyst and former Federal National Council candidate.