National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir’s call for Defense Minister Yoav Galant to be fired for refusing to establish a military government in Gaza revealed two key factors that will determine the outcome of this war.
First, Israel must find a domestic consensus on how to shape the post-war situation.
Equally important is devising a scenario that could really put an end to Hamas terrorism in Gaza. Another key factor is the US stance towards Hamas. According to Israeli media reports citing senior officials familiar with the US talks, Biden’s team has concluded that Hamas is unlikely to disappear completely from Gaza. Washington is convinced that Hamas will remain in the Gaza Strip in some form after the war. The main goal has therefore shifted to weakening and marginalizing Hamas. Biden’s plan envisages a balance between a thwarted and besieged Hamas and a strengthened Palestinian alternative.
Regional peace
The official reiterated the U.S. goal of significantly degrading Hamas’ capabilities and preventing a repeat of the Oct. 7 attacks, and said the complete eradication of the Hamas movement is a pipe dream. The U.S. strategic vision includes a multi-pronged approach.
In addition to operationally weakening Hamas, efforts are also underway to strengthen Israel’s ties with Arab countries, notably normalizing ties with Saudi Arabia and forging a regional defense pact that would unite Israel. At the same time, the Palestinian Authority (PA) would be reconstituted to govern the Gaza Strip in a transitional period under the umbrella of a UN or Arab coalition force. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed bin Salman in Riyadh last month. (Photo by Evelyn Hochstein/Reuters)
Biden’s outlook for defeating Hamas is no doubt based on America’s experience fighting insurgents and terrorist militias in Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia, but this judgment goes beyond that experience.
Time is of the essence for the US, given the fears that Israeli forces will continue fighting indefinitely, the threat to President Biden’s reelection chances, and the strategic damage to the US. The debate over the course of the Gaza war is inextricably linked to the fate of the Gaza Strip.
A coherent operational vision hinges on fundamental issues such as the war management strategy, Israel’s military role after the war, and the determination of Gaza’s next governor. Importantly, many of the Israeli attacks seem more interested in clearing paths and creating corridors to balkanize Gaza than the ostensible goal of defeating terrorist Hamas.
These opposing positions have created a rift between Israel and the United States and the Arab countries, whose positions, if not polar opposites, are clearly at odds at the moment. Despite their contempt for the terrorist doctrine and actions of Hamas, the Arab countries do not want to be labeled as supporters of Israel’s military rule over Gaza.
Arab countries are concerned that Netanyahu is simply biding his time rather than resolving the crisis and eliminating Hamas’ terrorist leadership inside and outside Gaza. Ultimately, this reaction shakes Arab societies to their core, risks a resurgence of terrorism and extremism, and jeopardizes hard-won progress in combating the terrorist threat before the Gaza war.
Exacerbated by Israel’s operational crisis, the continuation of the war without any visible progress in achieving its core objectives will only embolden Hamas, and the fact that its leader, Yahya Sinwar, remains mortal yet capable of threatening, at least psychologically and visually, will strengthen Hamas’ gains.
Therefore, swiftly neutralizing Hamas’ terrorist resources and brain trust is critical to reviving regional reconciliation and peace efforts.
The author is a UAE political analyst and former Federal National Council candidate.
