Gaza and Hamas, Condi and Clouseau

U.S. law prohibits the State Department from negotiating with Hamas, but apparently does not prohibit it from helping others do it:

Parallel to the fighting, there has been a diplomatic effort between Egypt and Israel, aided by the European Union and the United States, to negotiate a deal with Hamas.

The idea, European and Israeli diplomats say, is to offer to reopen the Gaza-Egyptian border at Rafah under renewed European monitoring, allow Gazan exports through Rafah, push the Egyptians to patrol the border better, release a captured Israeli soldier, Cpl. Gilad Shalit, and arrange a cease-fire in Gaza, if Hamas promises to stop the rocket attacks.

Even a cease-fire would allow Hamas to continue to build up what is essentially a Palestinian Army on the Hezbollah model.

Such a deal:  renewed European “monitoring” (remind me again why it stopped and must be “renewed”); “pushing” the Egyptians to patrol the border “better” (remind me again why they haven’t effectively patrolled it so far, and why they must be “pushed”); and a Hamas “promise” (BFD) to stop rocket attacks — for the time being. And for this they would get a cease-fire, analyzed by an Israeli commenter (Ginzy) at The Spine:

What do you think Hamas would do during a cease fire?  Figure out better ways to take out the garbage & beautify Gaza City?  Look what Hezbollah did during the 6 years of "quiet" along the northern border and guess what they have been doing since Lebanon 2. . . .

A common theme I have heard from a number Sderot residents is that they understand that if the IDF goes into Gaza in a big way (having learned the lessons from Lebanon 2) there will be a veritable fire storm of rocket fire . . . But they are willing to put up with that IF the IDF does the job that it is supposed to do and end the capability to launch rockets at them. . . .

Yes it’s going to be messy and yes it’s going to be bloody.  But this is the price that is paid for a policy that was steeped in well meaning naivete from do-gooders here and especially abroad.  And this is the price that is being paid for not responding forcefully to the first post-"disengagement" rocket that was fired from Gaza . . .

Over at MESH (Middle East Strategy at Harvard), Chuck Freilich notes what will eventually emerge from the Olmert-Rice-Livni “cease-fire” in the north:

[A]nother round [of war] is highly likely, sooner or later, if only because the battle against Israel is Hezbollah’s raison d’etre. . . .   Hezbollah is first and foremost a jihadist organization, an Iranian proxy, committed to Israel’s destruction. So another round is a matter of timing and the pretext will be found.

One of the possibilities that worries me is that the next round may take place a few years from now when Iran already has a nuclear capability, which will be an entirely different ballgame. . . .

Hezbollah has fully redeployed north of the Litani and is gradually doing so in the south as well. It appears to have fully restored its capabilities within the towns in the south — actually, far more than restored — but is limited in its ability to redeploy and build up its positions in the open areas in between, where UNIFIL patrols. Moreover, there are already signs that the contributing countries are getting tired and may reduce their forces.

No one in Israel wants a war now, but it is better than losing a war later, when there are fully-armed Iranian satellites on both Israel’s southern and northern borders, when Iran possesses nuclear weapons, and when President Obama is off meeting with Iran and Syria to negotiate his disengagement from Iraq. 

If there is a cease-fire that simply puts off the fight until a later day, Israel will have lost another war even before fighting it.  The consequences will extend far beyond the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” as Dan Diker convincingly argues in his important post at Power Line:

The West must understand that the ongoing rocket war Hamas has been waging against Israel and a possible major escalation now appears to be the Gaza chapter of Iran’s ongoing war against the West. . . .

Igniting Gaza focuses international attention away from Iran’s nuclear program at a critical time.  Tehran can now buy many valuable months as it races to complete its atomic program while the international community . . . will be busy trying to broker an agreement between Israel and the Palestinians . . . . 

If Hamas is allowed to survive an Israeli counteroffensive militarily or politically, the results will be far reaching for US led war on terror both in and beyond the region in Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan , Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Gulf, and Saudi Arabia for starters. . . .   

The United States and the Western Alliance would be best served by lending full support to Israel as it may now be forced to send its mostly reserve army into battle to defeat Iranian proxies Hamas and Palestinian Jihad . . .

This week, Condoleezza Rice arrives in the Middle East for her umpteenth trip to create a legacy.   Like Inspector Clouseau focusing on the illegal “minkey” while behind him the bank is being robbed, she will be focusing on getting a cease fire so she can renew her increasingly ludicrous "peace process."