Negotiation Not Escalation

Israel is teetering between a cease-fire arrangement and an escalation of its ground offensive in Gaza. The politicians deciding on the war's course-Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert-are divided about when to withdraw. Barak has been calling for the adoption of the French-Egyptian cease-fire proposal while Livni prefers a unilateral end-declare victory and withdraw.

Olmert, the only one of the three who will not be running in upcoming elections, wants to continue as long as Israel is ahead. "We have had excellent achievements in the fighting, we've given them unparalleled blows," he said.

When the war was launched on December 27, Israeli leaders kept their objectives vague. They wanted to end Hamas' imminent threat and stop its ability to barrage Israeli towns with rockets and missiles. Although rocket and missile fire has continued to barrage Israeli towns-long range missiles are now being employed-Israeli military leaders boast of a major strike to Hamas' terror capabilities (including some  300 Hamas fighters killed).

As long as we are already fighting, some Israeli military leaders maintain, we should continue until our next goals are achieved, and hopefully avoid having to return to fight in Gaza again. Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi put it this way at a meeting of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee today: "We are working to deepen the blow to its military arm, reduce [Hamas] fire, strengthen [Israeli] deterrence and improve the security situation for residents of southern Israel living under the threat of attacks."

Others cite different reasons to continue: international mediation has yet to get Hamas' leaders to accept a deal; the Israeli public is overwhelmingly behind the war; and even Arab leaders have been muted in their condemnations (e.g., in Lebanon, Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah announced that he intends to stay out of the fighting).

So why stop now?

The military plan is to enter deep inside Gaza City, where Hamas' leaders have been hiding, to "smoke them out," secure a white flag surrender, and gain the advantage on the deal on Gaza's borders. But security officials contend that this is an escalation with great danger-to the lives of Israeli soldiers now preparing for battle, as well as, Palestinian civilians who have no way out.   

Steve Erlanger of the New York Times cited Israeli intelligence officials on the dangers they expect to face: "Hamas, with training from Iran and Hezbollah, has used the last two years to turn Gaza into a deadly maze of tunnels, booby traps and sophisticated roadside bombs. Weapons are hidden in mosques, schoolyards and civilian houses, and the leadership's war room is a bunker beneath Gaza's largest hospital."

Today, one Israeli soldier was critically wounded from such a booby trap when a bomb exploded in a house he was searching.

Israeli military officials believe that if its soldiers get trapped in urban warfare, their casualties will skyrocket and their forces could be left without an exit route.

But the deadliest trap is for Gaza's civilians. Of the over 900 that have already been killed, approximately 50 percent of them are believed to be civilians-men, women, and children. That number continues to rise. This is the first war fought within sealed borders. Refugees are caught in the crossfire with no way to escape.

Of course, Israel is not the sole party to blame for this. Hamas has embedded itself among civilians. It has refused to stop its rocket fire and it has rejected previous international efforts to secure a cease-fire.

A change in Hamas' posture came yesterday, however. Speaking from an underground bunker, Hamas' leader in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, said he would "cooperate with any initiative aimed at ending the Israeli aggression and bringing about the enemy's withdrawal and the reopening of the crossings." This reversed his previous position that the borders would have to be opened before a deal is made.

The international community has been clamoring to broker an end to the war since it began. On Thursday, the UN Security Council voted 14-0 for a resolution calling for an immediate cease-fire. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is reported to have been a lead drafter of the resolution, but according to Olmert's comments in Ashkelon yesterday, he sabotaged her efforts by going over her head. "When the Secretary of State thought that she was bringing the cease-fire resolution to a Security Council vote . . .  I said 'get me President Bush on the phone.' . . . I told him the United States could not vote in favor. It cannot vote in favor of such a resolution. He immediately called the Secretary of State and told her not to vote in favor. She was left shamed."

Securing America's blessing, Olmert suggested, provided Israel with the cover it needed to continue its offensive. That is a mixed blessing, at best.

An editorial in the Israeli daily Ha'aretz warned of the danger of euphoria, "Yesterday Israel announced . . . that it plans to escalate its military operation. This stirs concerns that, similar to what occurred during the Second Lebanon War, the reason for going to war has been forgotten and replaced by an unrealistic desire to topple the Hamas regime in the Strip."

The editorial concluded: "Israel's justified rationale in acting against rocket launchers has been increasingly damaged over two weeks. The legitimacy and understanding extended to Israel melt away amid the pictures of killing and ruin. . . . This war needs to move immediately to the diplomatic track and agreements that will end the fantasies and delusions of both sides."

Olmert does not want endless war, and he is not interested in an Israeli occupation of Gaza. He would like to provide Israelis with a victory, and more importantly, with the secure knowledge that the situation will not return to what it was before. However, Barak and Livni's reluctance to send Israeli troops deeper into Gaza reflect the concern of a number of intelligence officials who believe that escalation means more dead, but not necessarily a victory over Hamas.

International actors are in Cairo now trying to broker a deal that will end the current violence, and find a mechanism to both stop rockets and missiles from hitting Israel and end the closure of Gaza's borders.

All of the mediators trying to end this conflict are critical, but perhaps none more than the United States. Speaking before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee today, Hillary Clinton signaled the new administration's resolve to get involved in diplomacy, "We cannot give up on peace. The President-elect and I understand and are deeply sympathetic to Israel's desire to defend itself under the current conditions, and to be free of shelling by Hamas by rockets. However, we have also been reminded of the tragic humanitarian costs of conflict in the Middle East, and pained by the suffering of Palestinian and Israeli civilians. This must only increase our determination to seek a just and lasting peace agreement that brings real security to Israel, normal and positive relations with its neighbors; independence, economic progress and security to the Palestinians in their own state."

President-elect Obama and Secretary of State-designate Clinton are ready to get involved come January 20. That is still a week away. How many more, on both sides, will be killed during this interregnum?