The near end of the truce in Gaza is likely to see a sharp escalation in direct Palestinian-Israeli confrontation, writes Saleh Al-Naami The booms of explosions and the whistle of bullets can be heard in the military camp of the Ezzeddin Al-Qassam Brigades, the military arm of Hamas. It lies north of the Al-Maghazi Refugee Camp in the central Gaza Strip, and scores of new recruits are being trained there around the clock. Hamas has stepped up its training of members recently, and plans to end this military training with the current truce's end, scheduled for Friday, 19 December. Hamas has communicated with all of the Palestinian factions about the fate of the truce, and it is clear that there is a Palestinian consensus on not extending it. Khalil Al-Hayya, a prominent Hamas leader, says that the intention is to reject extension of the truce and to blame Israel for having "torn it up". "Israel is trying through the truce to gain security and maintain the siege imposed on the Gaza Strip, and we won't agree to this. We won't ever accept for this situation to continue, and there will never be a truce as long as there is a siege," he told Al-Ahram Weekly. "I don't expect that the Palestinian factions will extend the truce when the occupation insists on not adhering to its conditions. We won't grant a truce out of weakness or fear -- we've taken this decision from a position of power and in order to protect the rights of our Palestinian people and to get its feet on the ground. If the interests of our people are not met, the truce will not be extended," he added. Islamic Jihad leader Nafiz Azzam says that discussions with the Palestinian factions have not resulted in a final position towards the truce, even though the factions lean towards rejecting its extension under the same conditions. "All the facts on the ground have confirmed that the truce is not in the interest of the Palestinians, and that Israel has benefited from the truce and exploited it in its interests without offering anything in return to the Palestinians," he told the Weekly. "Israel has been completely comfortable with the context in which the truce has taken place until now, and the Palestinians have been the only ones to comply with it. Tel Aviv intends for matters to continue in this vein," he added. Azzam warns that Israel intends to benefit from the current division between Palestinians, and says that Israel is currently at ease and free of any pressure while the world's attention is diverted from the Palestinian cause. Yet Azzam also realises that should the end of the truce be announced, Israel will immediately resume its operations in the Gaza Strip. Researcher Nehad Al-Sheikh Khalil holds that the truce has resulted in Palestinians losing, for Israel hasn't complied with most of its clauses. He says that the truce was the "fruit of misassumptions and inaccurate calculations that the Palestinian resistance factions relied upon". He adds: "With regard to principles, reaching the truce wasn't logical in that the right of the Palestinian people to resist the occupation is absolute and should not be restricted. And when the party that is pushed towards reaching a truce is a resistance movement like Hamas, that makes matters even more problematic." Khalil criticises the way that Hamas has dealt with the truce, saying that there were numerous shortcomings, and that contrary to what Hamas announced after reaching the truce, Israel had not approved some of its most fundamental clauses. "During the truce, not one road was paved and not one classroom was built. The Palestinian public did not benefit much from the truce. And at the same time, the truce can't be considered to have even been put into place, for Israel considered it its right to conduct invasions into the heart of the Gaza Strip and to assassinate resistance fighters without the resistance having the right to respond. When the resistance did respond, it became the right of Tel Aviv to tighten the siege in an unprecedented manner," Khalil told the Weekly. Khalil adds that although tunnels connecting the Gaza Strip to Egypt have allowed the smuggling of many goods, in general they have not changed the economic circumstances. Prices have remained high and unemployment rates have continued to grow. Khalil also notes that the truce has weakened Hamas politically, for the Palestinian factions have exploited Hamas's promise to adhere to the truce in order to blackmail it. Fatah and President Mahmoud Abbas have used the truce in the media war against Hamas. Khalil further criticises the mediating role of Egypt, since it failed to get Israel to commit to anything that did not fall in line with its policies. For its part, Israel has already prepared for the day the truce ends. The Israeli army has announced that it has increased its state of readiness in the area around Gaza, and some Israeli officials have issued fiery statements against Hamas. Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, who heads the ruling Kadima Party, has promised to use military means against the Gaza Strip, saying that the Israeli goal is to put an end to Hamas rule in Gaza. In statements to Hebrew radio, Livni said that "any firing from Gaza will force us to respond for the sake of protecting the settlers... and should Hamas continue to launch missiles from Gaza, Israel will use all the means it has." Yet Israel is trying to keep the matter vague, for while Livni was issuing these charged statements, her colleague, Defence Minister Ehud Barak, sent the head of his ministry's Political Security Department, Amos Gilad, to Egypt to discuss the future of the truce. Yediot Aharonot newspaper confirmed that Gilad would transmit to Hamas -- via Egypt -- a final warning that "continuing to fire missiles on Israeli settlements would bring a harsh Israeli response." Overall, the truce agreement has served Israel, and this explains why the current government led by resigned premier Ehud Olmert is so attached to it. As Haaretz military correspondent Amos Hariel says, Olmert's government is betting that the truce agreement will allow the application of a "strangling without killing" strategy on Hamas. It would do so by severely weakening Hamas, but without leading to its collapse, as the current situation is in reality ideal for Israel. This would allow Israel to deepen the Palestinian domestic rift and isolate the West Bank while Tel Aviv manoeuvres with the Palestinian Authority. Hariel also says that the presence of a weak Hamas government in Gaza would strengthen Israel's ability to manoeuvre internationally. International legitimacy is granted to the siege whereby the International Quartet has demanded that Hamas recognise Israel, disavow resistance, and recognise the agreements that the Palestine Liberation Organisation reached, before it itself can be dealt with. Hariel adds that the truce has allowed Israel to provide security to settlements near the Gaza Strip without needing to conduct major military operations that might lead to a reoccupation of Gaza. He further notes that as part of this strategy, Israel is preparing to resort to a number of military alternatives to respond to the firing of rockets from the Gaza Strip under the truce and without having to reoccupy the Strip. Yet Ron Ben-Yishai, military commentator for Yediot Aharonot, holds that there are numerous dangers to the strategy employed by the Olmert government. It is possible that it may lead to entangling Israel in a Gazan quagmire without any planning having been done for that possibility. Economic pressures have not affected Hamas's desire to continue expanding and strengthening its forces, and this means that the next confrontation with Hamas will be under circumstances that will be difficult for Israel. Hamas has been able to acquire weapons that have tilted the current power balance. Meanwhile, the right-wing opposition led by Likud, which is expected to win the Israeli elections in two months' time, holds that the truce was a mistake. Spokespersons for the Israeli right say that Hamas holding power in Gaza, whether it is strong or weak, is a strategic threat to Israel. Former chief of General Staff General Moshe Yaalon, a leader in the right-wing Likud Party, says that he doesn't believe in the effectiveness of economic pressures or in their ability to tame Hamas. He adds that it is possible that Palestinian, regional and international developments may take place that would make it impossible for Israel to continue its siege in the current manner and calls for putting an end to Hamas rule by reoccupying Gaza. Yet the military commentator for Israeli television Channel 10, Alon Ben- David, says that this scenario would be very dangerous, as after reoccupying the Gaza Strip Israel would have to hand it over to a third party. Ben- David says that there are three possible parties the Gaza Strip could be given to after the Israeli army occupies it: Egypt, NATO or President Abbas. Ben-David says that Israel prefers for Egypt to assume control over the Gaza Strip, but that it also realises that Egypt doesn't intend to do so. Tel Aviv further doubts Cairo's ability to run the Strip even if it wanted to. With regards to NATO, it places conditions for accepting responsibility for the Gaza Strip that Israel would find impossible to agree to. And as for Abbas, until now he has seemed unprepared to take responsibility for Gaza, and there are also doubts about his ability to take control of the Strip. Israel wanted the truce agreement to guarantee the containment of Hamas and to keep its rule weak. Neither Hamas nor the other Palestinian factions are prepared to accept that, and thus all indications show that the Palestinian people and Israel are standing at the threshold of a new stage of confrontation.
