Hamas seeks a ceasefire to maintain control in Gaza, paralleling Hezbollah’s model in Lebanon. Proposals for governance in Gaza may inadvertently empower Hamas, which is reportedly amenable to such arrangements. Israel must neutralize Hamas completely to prevent the establishment of a terror state, ensuring its operational freedom for counter-terrorism efforts.
Currently, Hamas aims to secure a ceasefire to preserve its existence, rebuild its military, and sustain its political control in Gaza. The group is contemplating a governance model similar to Hezbollah’s past dominion over Lebanon, establishing an internationally recognized front while maintaining its military control, thereby enabling it to rearm and reinitiate warfare against Israel at its convenience.
Proposals from Egypt and other regional players, suggesting alternatives for governing Gaza, could inadvertently lead to a scenario akin to what has occurred in Lebanon. Israel’s military operations against Hamas remain incomplete, undermining any plans for a stable governmental transition in Gaza.
During a recent Cairo summit, Egyptian President Fateh El-Sisi expressed opposition to the eviction of Palestinians and emphasized support for their right to self-determination, advocating for an independent Palestinian state governed by technocrats until the Palestinian Authority can later assume control.
Moreover, Egypt has formulated a strategy for Gaza involving a temporary ruling coalition of Arab, Muslim, and Western nations, but lacks detailed plans regarding how to neutralize Hamas, oversee Gaza’s reconstruction, or define governance mechanisms. Reports suggest Hamas is accepting these frameworks, indicating its intent to maintain authority and control over Gaza regardless of any proposed political arrangements.
Hamas’ willingness to adopt a model inspired by Hezbollah involves retaining military supremacy despite the existence of a civilian government. Historically, Hezbollah established a shadow state in Lebanon, dominating its security policies, which enabled it to hoard extensive weaponry under the guise of a sovereign government, utilizing it to shield its military actions from international scrutiny.
Should Hamas succeed in implementing such a governance arrangement, it could effectively rearm while deterring Israeli interventions through diplomatic fallout. Any Israeli actions to neutralize Hamas in this construct may provoke global condemnation, further complicating the regional dynamics.
In such a scenario, the implications for regional security are dire. Hamas could exploit the ceasefire to enhance its military infrastructure, emulating Hezbollah’s tactics in Lebanon, where the terrorist organization amassed armaments while utilizing its government as a protective buffer against international action.
Thus, for Israel, re-engaging in conflict within Gaza is crucial to dismantle Hamas comprehensively. Strategic military and political control is vital to prevent Hamas from redeveloping its war capabilities, as any remaining command structure would ensure its continued dominance in the region.
Israel must ensure its forces retain operational freedom to conduct anti-terrorism operations at any time, preventing the group’s rearmament and preserving regional security. Only once Hamas has been dismantled and conditions for stability are met, can considerations for a moderate governance framework, supported by international allies, become viable, albeit while ensuring Israel’s security operations remain intact.
In conclusion, the urgent need for Israel to confront Hamas is paramount to prevent the establishment of a Lebanon-like terror state in Gaza. The current scenario, influenced by proposals for governance, risks enabling Hamas to reinforce its military foothold while claiming political legitimacy. Dismantling Hamas along with ensuring a robust Israeli presence in Gaza is essential to achieving long-term regional security and stability, thus averting similar situations witnessed in Lebanon with Hezbollah.
Original Source: www.algemeiner.com
