Page 5 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 275

Thread: Hamas in Gaza (merged thread)

  1. #81
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    WINEP, 21 Dec 07: The Palestinians: Between State Failure and Civil War
    The Palestinian Authority (PA), though lacking certain key attributes of sovereignty, has largely functioned as a de facto state since its creation in 1994. Almost from the outset, however, the process of Palestinian state formation was accompanied by a parallel process of economic decline and institutional, territorial, and political fragmentation. The latter process was greatly accelerated by the second intifada (2000–2004), the formation of a Hamas government following January 2006 legislative elections (leading to international sanctions on the PA) and then a short-lived national-unity government, and the June 2007 Hamas takeover of Gaza. Today, the PA—hovering between survival and collapse—displays many of the traits of a failed state.....
    Complete 56 page paper at the link.

  2. #82
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default latest World Bank report

    Both the ICG and WINEP reports are excellent pieces.

    The World Bank's recent report on Investing in Palestinian Economic Reform and Development, prepared for the December 17 international donor pledging conference in Paris, can be found here, or via the World Bank WBG website.


    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    The course of the Palestinian economy since the Second Intifadah has
    left per capita GDP in 2006 ($1,130) at 40% less than in 1999, and has altered an already-fragile economy from one driven by investment and private sector productivity, to one sustained by government and private consumption, and donor aid.

    Reversing this downward cycle requires parallel actions by the
    Palestinian Authority (PA), Israel and the donors. Reform and development of the Palestinian economy and its institutions must proceed immediately. To succeed, these reforms must be implemented with determination by the PA, underwritten by donors and supported by Israeli actions. In the same vein, Israeli policies that impact the Palestinian economy and Palestinian actions on security to reinforce these policies must proceed in parallel.

    ...

    An economic scenario analysis shows that the successful implementation of
    Palestinian commitments alone, with partial donor funding and continued
    movement and trade restrictions, will fall well short of the intended targets. Achieving 5% growth rates will depend critically on the commitment of the international community to fill the total fiscal gap over the next three years, as well as on the revival in the private sector as a result of concrete steps by Israel on settlement growth, and movement and access restrictions. Even with full funding but no relaxation in the closure regime, growth will be slightly negative, at around -2% per year.

    ...

    Under every foreseeable scenario, the short-term viability of the Palestinian economy will be driven by aid. Even under the most optimistic scenarios significant aid will continue to be required for the medium-term. Clearly, the ability of the private sector to resume its place as a driver for growth will have a major bearing on the sustained health of the Palestinian economy and thus its aid requirements, which will therefore be even larger in the absence of improvements in movements and access restrictions.
    The actual French MFA pledging conference website is here.

  3. #83
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    CEIP, 15 Feb 08: The Road out of Gaza
    On January 18, 2008, Israel imposed a total blockade on movement in and out of the Gaza Strip in retaliation for rockets that Hamas had fired on the Israeli town of Sderot. In explaining the move, an Israeli defense ministry spokesman stated frankly: “It’s unacceptable that people in Sderot are living in fear every day and people in the Gaza Strip are living life as usual.” What he failed to note is that what has emerged as “life as usual” in Gaza is stunningly bleak. And indeed, what is most remarkable about the current Palestinian situation at all levels—economic, social, humanitarian, diplomatic, and political—is what now passes for normal.

    The blockade clearly backfired, leading Hamas not to end rocket fire but instead to destroy portions of the wall dividing Gaza from Egypt. The move—expected by almost nobody but retrospectively an obvious step—led all major actors scrambling to understand the implications. The Israeli leadership ultimately reacted by threatening military action, hinting at the possibilities of assassinating Hamas’s leaders or invading Gaza. While sympathy is in short supply in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, it is easy to understand how Israel’s desperate measures, while almost certainly counterproductive, come largely because of the feebleness of the alternatives.....
    Complete 18 page paper at the link.

  4. #84
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default IDF, Gaza, and a multinational force?

    Oh, this could be a disaster:

    Israel is considering a large-scale incursion into the Gaza Strip during which it would present an ultimatum to the international community for the deployment of a multinational force as the only condition under which it would withdraw, defense officials have told The Jerusalem Post.
    Jerusalem Post, 18 February 2008.

    As I see it, the most probable outcomes would be:

    1a) IDF invades, no forth is forthcoming, they get stuck there for a while, Palestinian casualties mount, killing Israeli-PA peace negotiations in the process.

    1b) IDF invades, no force forthcoming, they start they leave, Hamas claims victory.

    2a) IDF invades, multinational force deploys, rockets get fired over their heads, UN/multinational force gets blamed, IDF fires back over their heads. Think UNIFIL 1979-81.

    2b) IDF invades, multinational force deploys, rockets get fired over their head, UN/multinational force goes after armed groups, and either takes serious casualties from irate locals, and/or comes to be seen in Palestinian and Arab eyes as willing auxiliary participants in occupation of Palestinian territory. Major setback in GWoT.

    What is by far the least likely is what I presume to be the intention of all this, namely:

    3) IDF invades, fatally wounds Hamas, multinational force deploys, Fateh regains control, rockets stop.

  5. #85
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    203

    Default Gaza and the Rafah crossing

    The linked article looks at the agreements governing the Rafah crossing and how they are being interpreted and implemented.

    How the EU helps Israel to strangle Gaza

  6. #86
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    203

    Default Get someone else to fight for you

    With reference to Rex's post, is it just me or is this now becoming the norm.

    Lebanon, Somalia, Gaza etc. As seen in Iraq and elsewhere the kinetic phase - when you are a well equipped modern arm and they are not your equal - is the relatively easy bit. It is the staying on when your are not popular with the locals that is the problem. No problem invade, displace Hezbollah/UIC/Hamas and then hope a friend on the security council can get someone else, AU/UN, to come in and enforce your newly created status quo for you. Nice plan - if you ignore the suffering you cause for the civilians in your AO.

  7. #87
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default IDF ordered to tone down Gaza ops

    State orders IDF to curb strikes against Hamas, Haaretz, 10 March 2008.

    The government recently ordered the Israel Defense Forces to exercise restraint in operations in the Gaza Strip, pursuant to what a senior government official termed new rules of the game forged in the aftermath of last week's military operation in Gaza.

    ...

    The senior government official said that in effect, the unofficial ground rules covered three possible scenarios:

    * If the rocket fire stops completely, so will IDF operations in Gaza.

    * If Palestinians fire only at Sderot and other communities near Gaza, Israel will respond primarily with aerial assaults.

    * If rockets hit Ashkelon, Israel will respond with ground operations like last week's, which killed over 100 Palestinians.

    However, the official warned, "beyond the temporary lull, the new tacit arrangement does not advance Israel toward its goals." This arrangement, he added, "completely contradicts the cabinet's decision [of last week], without proper procedure or cabinet approval."
    That having been said, one has to be a bit careful about the accuracy of such leaks, especially in Israel where they are an especially well-honed tool of policy struggles within the government.

  8. #88
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    ICG, 19 Mar 08: Ruling Palestine I: Gaza Under HAMAS
    ....The recent tragic and dangerous escalation in violence demonstrates once more that Gaza’s future remains locked in several competing and to date irreconcilable hands – those of Hamas, Fatah, Israel and the international community. If current trends continue, the worst is imaginable: increased firing of rockets against Israeli towns and cities, which risks killing civilians and jeopardising the safety of tens of thousands, as well as the resumption of bombings and attacks inside Israel, such as was seen in the 6 March 2008 murder of eight students at a Jerusalem religious seminary; intensified Israeli military incursions, targeted assassinations and attacks on key installations that, along with militants, inevitably kill many Palestinian civilians; the collapse of the peace process, discrediting of more pragmatic leaders and, as the vicious cycle continues, potentially the conflict’s spread to other arenas, including the West Bank and Lebanon.

    Meanwhile, as this report shows, the purported goal of weakening Hamas’s hold on Gaza is nowhere near fulfilment. To the contrary: as is often the case with sanctions, the population’s suffering increases its dependence on its rulers. An official in Fayyad’s government acknowledged: “Sanctions never achieved their political objective. Hamas gets what it wants through the tunnels and is not hurt politically or materially”.

    The most catastrophic scenarios may not yet be likely, but they are becoming increasingly imaginable. Avoiding them ultimately will depend on whether Fatah and Hamas can find a path to reconciliation that reunites Gaza and the West Bank; whether Hamas and Israel can agree on a ceasefire that lifts the siege on Gaza and allows Gazans and Israelis near the border to pursue normal lives; and whether the international community at long last plays a constructive part in encouraging the parties to achieve these goals.....
    Complete 45 page report at the link.

  9. #89
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    northeast
    Posts
    9

    Default Stopping Hamas rocket attacks

    How does Israel stop Hamas rocket attacks? A massive ground invasion into the strip to flatten Hamas? Target Hamas leadership? Economic strangulation of the strip? Would any of these work? Any creative ideas?

  10. #90
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Default I've been of the opinion

    Quote Originally Posted by cobot View Post
    How does Israel stop Hamas rocket attacks? A massive ground invasion into the strip to flatten Hamas? Target Hamas leadership? Economic strangulation of the strip? Would any of these work? Any creative ideas?
    How about Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iran, heck just about any of the Middle East power broker countries actually lead and rather than obfuscating about everything instead Tell Hamas to stop or else. And mean it. Got news for those guys, If you don't want the Palestinians in your countries then put your money where your mouth is and get the circumstances right for some kind of real agreements. You won't get any major change whichever changes your looking for as long as folks are still shooting.

    Almost everyone involved in that region wants Israel to be the bad guy so no matter what they do thats not changing.
    Last edited by Ron Humphrey; 04-27-2008 at 04:32 AM. Reason: fix
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  11. #91
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Best way?

    Probably invade the whole place and occupy it. and destroy the Hamas, political military infrastructure in Gaza.

    So far they're not going to stop by killing the leaders because they just get replaced faster than you can say hamas.

    The other countries aound Israel will not stop it since its not to their best interest(they want to portray the Israelis as bad guys to distract their populations, the Gaza strip is an open sore wound in Israel, name your pick).

    Unfortunately if you invade you will:

    1. Be involved in one of the worse street to street fighting since Beirut 1982, heavy casualties for Israel(worse for the Palestenians)

    2. Israel will get the usual round of condemnations(as usual from the UN etc.)

    3. You will not completely crush Hamas(though it will be badly mauled) since they will probably continue to exist in other countries(namely Lebanon, Iran, Syria etc.).

  12. #92
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    Physicians for Human Rights - Israel, 4 Aug 08:

    Holding Health to Ransom: GSS Interrogation and Extortion of Palestinian Patients at Erez Crossing
    The increasing restrictions imposed by the State of Israel on entry and exit of money, goods, services and persons via Gaza crossings and the closure of Rafah Crossing into Egypt since June 2007 have led to a sharp decline in the ability of Gaza’s healthcare system to provide services to patients.

    The results have been a sharp increase in the number of patients referred to external medical centers (in Israel, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Jordan) via Israeli-controlled Erez Crossing, and a much sharper increase in the proportion of patients denied exit permits: from 10% in the first half of 2007 to 35% in the first half of 2008.

    Whereas this process raises urgent questions regarding the responsibility of the State of Israel, as Occupying Power, to ensure the health and welfare of the civilian population of Gaza, the present report focuses rather on the mechanisms of denial of access to medical care, on the increasingly central role played by the Israeli General Security Service within this mechanism, and on the coercion of patients in the course of this process.

    The report first provides a detailed description of the permits mechanism instituted by Israel at Erez Crossing and of the growing restrictions placed by this mechanism on the access of patients to medical care unavailable in Gaza. Statistical data is provided, based on Physicians for Human Rights-Israel (PHR-Israel)’s casework with Gaza patients between January 2007 and April 2008.

    The central part of the report describes the policy employed over the past year by the GSS, whereby patients are detained for interrogation at Erez Crossing, and requested either to provide information or to act as collaborators on a regular basis as a condition for permission to exit Gaza for medical treatment. Over the past year, more than 30 patients’ testimonies have been received by PHR-Israel, demonstrating this procedure. The methods of coercion employed by the GSS are examined in detail and a description of the growing formalization of the interrogation process is provided, including an attempt by the GSS to coerce PHR-Israel into cooperation with the mechanism described.....
    Complete 85-page report at the link.

  13. #93
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default Hamas in Gaza

    INTERNATIONAL CRISIS GROUP - NEW BRIEFING

    Round Two in Gaza

    Gaza City/Ramallah/Brussels, 11 September 2008: The most recent confrontation in the Gaza Strip has left Hamas in firmer control than ever and prospects for inter-Palestinian reconciliation and a sustainable peace process increasingly elusive, as the West Bank and Gaza go separate ways.

    Round Two in Gaza,* the latest briefing from the International Crisis Group, describes the events that saw Hamas battle and bring to heel one of Gaza’s most potent families. It also shows how the Islamist movement has been turning the territory into a model of internal security and bureaucratic consolidation.

    “Hamas’s takeover of Gaza is increasingly complete, and both it and Fatah seem intent on consolidating their gains. The crisis of the Palestinian national movement is only worsening”, says Robert Blecher, Crisis Group’s Senior Analyst for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. “Palestinians are fed up with the feuding and many are looking for a way out. But they find none”.

    After an explosion on 25 July that killed five of its military leaders and a young girl, Hamas launched a broad campaign against the Hillis family, one of Gaza’s most powerful. It also carried out hundreds of arrests and raids on organisations. This has intimidated families and smaller factions and crippled Fatah’s capacity to mobilise.

    The downside for Hamas is that it has alienated other Palestinian factions, deepened the chasm with Egypt and reinforced perceptions that it would be an inflexible negotiating partner. But the Islamist movement is wagering that greater internal security and improved governance eventually will bolster domestic popularity; that the peace process with Israel on which its rivals’ fortunes depend will flounder; and that, in light of new realities, international isolation ultimately will peter out.

    “A divided Palestinian movement is unlikely to be in a position to make bold decisions”, warns Robert Malley, Crisis Group’s Middle East and North Africa Program Director. “A weak Palestinian counterpart is unlikely to gain Israel’s trust or encourage it to compromise. A segregated Palestinian entity is unlikely to become a viable state. Prospects for a genuine and sustainable peace process are bad and getting worse”.

  14. #94
    Council Member sullygoarmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Fort Stewart
    Posts
    224

    Default

    One of the bigger mistakes I think we made in past dealing with Hamas was not recognizing them when they won their election. To me, it is a case of "be careful what you wish for". They wanted to be the leaders of an "elected" government and got it. We immediately reacted by refusing to recognize the legitimacy of their election because of their terrorist ties.

    I wonder what would have happened if we had recognized the results and gave Hamas enough rope to try and run a legitimate government? The way I see it one of two things would have happened: 1) they would have been successful and possibly made the Palestinian state into a more efficient entity or 2) fallen flat on their faces and voted out of power by the people, creating more long-term damage against Hamas then we could have ever hoped for.
    "But the bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet withstanding, go out to meet it."

    -Thucydides

  15. #95
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sullygoarmy View Post
    We immediately reacted by refusing to recognize the legitimacy of their election because of their terrorist ties.
    ...and why is that a problem? Hitler died the democratically elected, by IIRC some 19 million Germans. If a National Socialist Party was elected in Austria, with deeply racist views, should the US recognise it, just because of the will of the Austrian people?

    IMO, internationally acceptable behaviour and norms should not be subservient to the democratic process. If Hamas can accept the norms of the international community, then they should be recognised. If not, no dice.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  16. #96
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1,457

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    ...and why is that a problem? Hitler died the democratically elected, by IIRC some 19 million Germans. If a National Socialist Party was elected in Austria, with deeply racist views, should the US recognise it, just because of the will of the Austrian people?

    IMO, internationally acceptable behaviour and norms should not be subservient to the democratic process. If Hamas can accept the norms of the international community, then they should be recognised. If not, no dice.
    Of course, we recognize and deal with many governments who do not accept our view of international norms.

    In my view the US tendency to delegitimize enemies has pretty much failed. While I agree with you from a strictly moral point of view, as a practical matter, I don't think our policy has served US interests. The simple reality is that Hamas, Hezbollah and others will have to be dealt with sooner or later - US & Israeli efforts to marginalize them having pretty much backfired across the board. They have morphed to become more than terrorists now and, like it or not, they represent real constituencies. Any political solution will therefore have to include them on some level.

  17. #97
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Entropy View Post
    @ Of course, we recognize and deal with many governments who do not accept our view of international norms.

    @ The simple reality is that Hamas, Hezbollah and others will have to be dealt with sooner or later - US & Israeli efforts to marginalize them having pretty much backfired across the board. They have morphed to become more than terrorists now and, like it or not, they represent real constituencies. Any political solution will therefore have to include them on some level.
    @ Of course you do and that recognition is based on selective self interest and pragmatism - not the supposed moral imperative that being popularly elected gets you recognised. Israel's democratically elected government is not recognised by many regimes - nor even it's right to exist.

    @ I have no doubt they will have to be dealt with. In the real world Israel deals/talks to both of them on an almost daily basis, both directly and indirectly out of practical necessity.

    What never seems to be ventured into the discussion is how is it reasonable to suggest Israel should "recognise" entities - in terms of negotiation - that believe Israel should cease to exist as the result of an armed struggle.

    Even if Israel withdrew from 100% of the Trans-Jordan, ceded Jerusalem, to the 67 line and gave back to Golan heights, Hezbollah and Hamas would not cease to exist, or choose to pursue peaceful means. They would merely continue with violent means. They will do so, until forced to give up. Who forces them to give up is of no interest to me.

    What people with no physical or cultural stake in the game don't seem to realise is that a fight to the death of your enemy is an acceptable outcome to many of the people, with stake in the game, and on both sides.

    Life in the middle east is about no rapid movements of big changes. Un-rewarded and unilateral recognition of Hamas does not conform to that model.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  18. #98
    Council Member Hacksaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Lansing, KS
    Posts
    361

    Default "Elizabeth... I'm coming to join ya"

    (homage to Fred Stanford)

    Amen brother Wilf

    As a caveat, I'm neither a jew or an apologist, but I've never been able to understand how the US political left came to convince themselves that israel was the anchovey on this political pizza pie.

    Plenty of unsavory actors on both sides, and true suffering and sadness for the majority of Palestinians...

    but walk a mile in their shoes and you might find a real change of heart
    Hacksaw
    Say hello to my 2 x 4

  19. #99
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    Even if Israel withdrew from 100% of the Trans-Jordan, ceded Jerusalem, to the 67 line and gave back to Golan heights, Hezbollah and Hamas would not cease to exist, or choose to pursue peaceful means.
    Certainly, many Hamas armed cadres would continue "the struggle."

    Hamas, would, however, wither significantly, and no longer pose the degree of threat that it poses at the moment. Only a relatively small percentage of Hamas supporters/voters are really dedicated to "liberating Palestine from the river to the sea." Indeed, it didn't even campaign on that issue in 2006.

    I think the policy of undermining earlier efforts at a Hamas-Fateh national unity government were a complete disaster, and left Hamas stronger (and Fateh as a weaker) as a consequence. This isn't to say that it should have been business-as-usual after the 2006 elections—personally, I don't believe Hamas can be engaged in any conceivable peace deal at any point in the near future.

  20. #100
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post

    @ Certainly, many Hamas armed cadres would continue "the struggle."

    @ Hamas, would, however, wither significantly, and no longer pose the degree of threat that it poses at the moment.
    @ Not only Hamas, but also any Palestinian, Lebanese, Syrian or Egyptian element reduced in standing or relevance as the result a peace deal.

    @ Concur, but I'm not that worried about Hamas. It's all the other clowns that concern me. The Government in power on the day the Palestinian State is created, will probably not be there a year later. Whatever they agreed to on day one, will not be what they want on day two. I guess someone just has to have the courage to trust them.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

Similar Threads

  1. Terrorism in Russia (merged thread)
    By bismark17 in forum Europe
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 04-21-2018, 12:38 PM
  2. Colombia, FARC & insurgency (merged thread)
    By Wildcat in forum Americas
    Replies: 174
    Last Post: 02-09-2017, 03:49 PM
  3. Terrorism in the USA:threat & response
    By SWJED in forum Law Enforcement
    Replies: 486
    Last Post: 11-27-2016, 02:35 PM
  4. Pakistani politics (catch all)
    By SWJED in forum South Asia
    Replies: 279
    Last Post: 01-22-2014, 05:29 AM
  5. Replies: 69
    Last Post: 05-23-2012, 11:51 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •