Israel and Gaza Aftermath: Interview with Dr. Bruce Maddy-Weitzman

Dr. Bruce Maddy-Weitzman is an Associate Scholar at the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He is also the Senior Research Fellow at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies at Tel Aviv University and editor of its Tel Aviv Notes. He is an author and editor who has specialized in the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Dan Shvartsman: What are the big themes you take out of the Gaza conflict, and the initial days of the aftermath?

Dr. Bruce Maddy-Weitzman: This latest round is over. Just the way the (2nd) Lebanon War ended in summer of 2006, and since then the ceasefire has held almost perfectly, so too in this case I think that it’s fairly likely that we won’t see another round like we just saw any time soon.

What did each side achieve from this? Israel went into this determined not only to end the rocket fire, but to also change the “rules of the game”. That “Hamas shoots rockets, we shoot back,” and this tit-for-tat doesn’t change Hamas’s behavior. Beyond that, I think there was also a general desire for Israel to strengthen its deterrent posture. There was a feeling here that Israel’s deterrent posture over the last years has weakened.

I think a central goal of this operation was to send a clear message to the rest of the region and the world that it wasn’t going to allow an Iranian client-state to develop on its borders.

Hamas turned out to be far weaker than anticipated. In that regard, Israel has significantly improved its deterrent posture. It’s not just that they hit them hard, but also the incorporation of the diplomatic elements. At least on paper, the support for a change in the strategic parameters governing the Gaza area, the support for Israel’s desires is considerable. The French are patrolling off the shores of Gaza, the Americans signed a memorandum of understanding, they’re training Egyptian troops dealing with smuggling, they’re talking about interdicting Iranian ships in the Gulf of Aden.

The Egyptian participation in this sort of Western framework is a gain for Israel as well. It remains to be seen whether this framework will have real teeth and do what it’s supposed to do. So from that regard, one can say that Israel’s achievements in this operation were considerable.

They came at costs, obviously. Israel’s image has been damaged to a considerable extent among public opinion. There’s no question that more hate towards Israel will have been generated by this operation, which doesn’t bode well if you talk about the need for a long-term reconciliation.

You can even suggest the possibility that radical forces might become even stronger, particularly among Palestinians; there’s a possibility of splintering off from Hamas to represent even more Islamist, jihadi, Bin Laden-type radical views, which would make Hamas look like a positively moderate force in comparison.

Dan: How does Hamas come out of this? Read More »

Size Matters: Why Arab Parties in Israel Were Banned, and More

Israel is small. An obvious statement to make, a resoundingly reductive one from an American fresh out of the states, and perhaps an unnecessary reiteration of basic fact, but a statement I have just made. And a pervasive reality in the way Israel operates.

Israel is small in size of course, which is why the intractable conflict between Palestinians and Jews drags so long. But it’s also small in the way things work, as if the sort of soundstages from which America has exported its slick culture haven’t quite been built up as smoothly in Israel, so that you can see the wires from which the angels fly, the cameramen behind the screen, and the clumsy movements of the actors on and off screen.

It is inevitable that a population of 7.3 million will feel compact, as if you might run into Defense Minister Ehud Barak on the street someday and not blink. In fact, one drives by Barak’s high-rise apartment in North Tel Aviv on main highways. Without tremendous pull and with a little bit of patience and luck, a high school senior can get an interview with President Shimon Peres.

But then there is the smallness of the way the government and political parties operate. The way the war, while launched in response to the ending of a cease-fire set up long before President Obama was an inevitability, wrapped itself up tidily just before his inauguration, down to the targeting of his swearing-in ceremony as the deadline to pull out the troops. Read More »

Gaza Going Off the Rails: Why Israelis Need to Stop and Think

Entering the third week of war, the problems with the Israeli-Gaza conflict have surpassed questions of justification or objectives. Leaving aside who’s right (nobody), or when and how this war will end, or whether there will be a winner (no), or whether the achievement of Israel’s goals will outweigh the damage done to their international reputation or the shift in regional alliances and moods, the essential problems with this war have begun to scream in my ear.

The problems strike me when I drive in the north and see the Russian language campaign ads for Tzipi Livni. Livni, the centrist, supposedly noble candidate of Kadima, has responded to snide comments and allaying Russian-immigrant fears about her gender by advertising her “manhood to change the country.” In Hebrew, the ad substitutes “manhood” for “guts.” Either way, she has something to prove in this war.

They strike me when I read editorials from international news sources or take comments from friends back home, who think this war was calculated to take advantage of the last space before Barack Obama comes to power, or of the run-up to the February elections, or the Christmas season lull. It has nothing to do with that, I insist: When Israel and Hamas made their truce last summer, Obama’s presence was hardly inevitable, and Hamas was the one firing rockets in the week after the ceasefire ended. At the very least, Israel is fighting for their own security reasons and not out of bald-faced political opportunism, I contest. But the longer the war drags on, the more I doubt. Read More »

Gaza and the Road to Israel’s February Election

Really, if it weren’t so tragic, if it didn’t have to do with war, the sequence of events that led to the Israel-Gaza conflict would be comical.

In the days leading up to the Israeli Air Force air strike, as Palestinian militants launched more and more rockets in an effort to induce a new cease-fire from Israel, under better terms than the one that expired December 19th, Israeli politicians wavered between preaching patience and calling for attacks, with both sides appearing to have the February elections in mind.

On Christmas, it appeared the calm might extend a little longer: Ehud Barak appeared on a comedy show in Israel (something akin to SNL, and he did a fine job ribbing himself, by all reports), and a news story floated in national newspapers that soldiers were instructed to use up their vacation days this year, because they wouldn’t transfer over to the next year.

Perhaps thinking themselves so clever, Barak and co. then ordered the air strike last Saturday that indeed shocked the Gazans and has lit up the world. And things haven’t slowed down yet.

It should be said that political considerations appear to be out of the picture so far, as Ahron Bregman pointed out in his interview. War in any case will benefit the right wing, and hence the opposition leader and election front runner Benjamin Netanyahu. Read More »