Why Hamas has been Quiet in 2009

By Aaron Mannes

The Jewish Policy Center's Palestinian Rocket Report has just published an article I wrote with my boss about why Hamas has kept the cease-fire since Operation Cast Lead. In it we to apply some of our work modeling terrorist group behavior, our models strongly suggest that internal Palestinian politics plays an important role in Hamas' strategic calculations.

The piece is below.

Why Hamas Has Been Quiet In 2009
by Aaron Mannes and V.S. Subrahmanian
Palestinian Rocket Report
September 15, 2009

Since Israel ended Operation Cast Lead―a massive incursion into the Gaza strip intended to suppress rocket fire into Israel―in January 2009, Hamas has largely held to a ceasefire on rocket and mortar attacks on Israel. The obvious explanation for this change in behavior is that Israel's incursion into Gaza and Hamas' corresponding heavy losses have re-established Israeli deterrence. Another explanation is that this unprecedented period of quiet is proof that Hamas has changed politically, and that Western nations and ultimately Israel should negotiate with it directly. There is also substantial countervailing evidence that HAMAS remains committed to its campaign against Israel and that the cease-fire is strictly tactical.

Models of organizational behavior built at the University of Maryland's Laboratory for Computational Cultural Dynamics suggest all of these explanations may be wrong. Indeed, intra-Palestinian politics may be playing an important yet overlooked role in Hamas' calculations.

Read the full post here.

Gaza Conflict Provokes Anti-Jewish Violence in Europe

By Victor Comras

Since the beginning of the war in Gaza there has been a dramatic upsurge in anti-semitic activities in Europe, perhaps the most violent since post World War II reconstruction days. Jews, synagogues, and Jewish schools and institutions across the continent, from Sweden to Turkey, have been attacked or threatened. And several non Muslim organizations have joined with Islamist groups in blending an intensified anti-semitism with their anti-Israel rhetoric.

While some of this virulence against Jews in Europe stems directly from the violence in Gaza, its roots run far deeper. For there is a strong anti-Jewish current that has long been fed by organized Islamic groups across Europe, and particularly by the Muslim Brotherhood. As acknowledged in Leiken and Brooke's well researched Foreign Affairs Article, "The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood," the Brotherhood's claim that it is not "anti-Jewish," but only "anti-Zionist," is belied by its own actions, and the literature and preachings of its leaders and theologians.

It is somewhat ironic that as Sunni Muslim Government Leaders from Egypt to Saudi Arabia seek to mute their, and the local popular response, to the Gaza events, the contrary seems to be the mood in Europe. European cities have seen some of the largest anti-Israel demonstrations in history. Earlier this month, over 100,000 protesters marched in Madrid, convinced that Israel’s military incursion into Gaza to stop rockets being fired into Israel, was unjustified.

The Brussel’s Journal, published by the Society for the Advancement of Freedom in Europe (SAFE), a Swiss non-profit organization, reports a dramatic upsurge in “anti-Semitic violence.” Synagogues and Jewish centers have been firebombed in Belgium, Britain, France, Germany, Sweden and Denmark. More than 100 anti-Semitic motivated attacks have taken place in France alone since the opening of the Gaza conflict on December 27th. Jewish schools have also been targeted for attack, and, in some cases, Jewish students expelled from local public schools. Death threats have also been directed against Europe’s Jewish Community leaders. Police in Sweden, France, Britain and Germany advised prominent Jews to redouble their security arrangements after several of their names were found on “Jewish Hit Lists.”

The Muslim Brotherhood has long manifested an anti-Jewish sentiment, dating back to its founding and the close association of many of its early and most senior leaders with Nazi Germany. Muslim Brotherhood literature, and teaching material, remains replete with anti-Jewish rhetoric, and the Gaza war has brought many of these tendencies back to the fore. Building on popular sympathy for the Gaza Palestinians as the misperceived underdog, it has provided the Muslim Brotherhood and other even more radical European Islamic groups a new rallying cry and recruitment tool. The anti-Israel popular sentiment along with European government fears of setting off a new series of Muslim riots in the streets of Europe, has also caused several governments to largely ignore, or give these Muslim organization a pass concerning their “violent outrage.”

While most European journalists attribute this surge in anti-Jewish violence to the events in Gaza, and downplay the notion of a resurgence of anti-semitism in Europe, considerable reason for concern remains that the problem runs far deeper. Europe’s media has played Israel’s actions against Gaza, and its causes, nature, and conduct, much differently than the American media. European journalists have generally portrayed a greater sympathy for Hamas, largely ignoring Hamas' sworn commitment to the destruction of Israel and to their conduct that gave rise to the present conflict. In one of the more outrageous examples of an anti-Israel bias, the France 2 TV network used graphic, but outdated video footage dating back to an accidental truck explosion in 2005 as current footage demonstrating current violence in Gaza. In Greece, the center-right Avriani daily newspaper The Brussels Journal reports ran a story charging that a Jewish plutocracy, was preparing to put in motion “war machines” in various hot spots around the world in order to control the price of oil, redistribute the world’s natural resources and start a new cycle of weapons production.

Many of the same concerns I raise here are also expressed in a poignant article by Daniel Schwammenthal, titled “Europe Re-Imports Jewish Hatred” that appeared last week in the Wall Street Journal. Schwammenthal writes:

Hamas and other Islamists are not even trying to hide their ideology. Just read the Hamas charter or check out Hamas TV, including children's programs, for a nauseating dose of murderous anti-Semitism. .... Muslims in Europe, watching Hamas and Hezbollah TV with their satellite dishes, are being fed the same diet of anti-Semitism and jihadi ideology that Palestinians and much of the Middle East consume. *** … Anti-Semitism… is not alien to Europe's culture -- to the contrary, the Continent once excelled at it and many still share the feeling. A Pew study from September shows 25% of Germans and 20% of French are still affected by this virus. In Spain, 46% have unfavorable views of Jews. Is there really no connection between this statistic and the fact that the Spanish media and government are among Europe's most hostile toward the Jewish state? Is it just a coincidence that Europe's largest anti-Israel demonstration took place Sunday in Spain, with more than 100,000 protesters? *** With little hope that the media coverage will become more balanced and the incitement of the growing Muslim community will abate, the Jews in Europe are facing uncertain times.

This new wave of anti-semitism in Europe is likely to continue long after the violence in Gaza subsides. It is incumbent on European governments to recognize this factor, and equally apply and enforce its anti-preaching of hate legislation and programs, and to insist on a equal level of civil behavior from all its citizens and residents. One should also expect that Europe's mainstream media will again live up to its pledge to fight discrimination, racism and xenophobia from whatever source. This means restoring a semblance of objectivity and balance in its reporting concerning Israel-Palestinian relations, the Middle East Peace Process, and other matters impacting Islamic - Jewish relations.

Discussion about the feasibility of a Gaza demilitarization

By Walid Phares

As the Israeli Government has decided to commit to a unilateral cease fire in Gaza, and in light of the US-Israeli agreement on blocking the flow of weapons to Hamas; also in light of a NATO exploration of a possible high sea control of arms shipments to the pro-Iranian organization and as news of Arab financial grants to the enclave, components of the internationalization of the strip are now being taken into consideration. But at the same time, Hamas and its supporters in the region, Iran and Syria, are adamantly opposed to any form of UN or international role in the enclave. At the same time, Egypt rejected the deployment of any international force on its side of the border with Gaza. In this context, I conducted the following media discussion with military expert Thomas Smith published in the International Analysts Network and on the Family Security Matters site.

Read More »

Who was Said Mohammad Siyam?

By Matthew Levitt

Sheikh Said Mohammad Siyam, killed in an Israeli airstrike this week, was one of the most senior political and military leaders of Hamas in the Gaza Strip. His death is a significant loss to Hamas, both politically and militarily. Indeed, he offers a telling case study of the types of leaders now running Hamas in Gaza.

Born in the Shati refugee camp in Gaza , Siyam became a former protégé of Sheik Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi, co-founder of Hamas, and was a former teacher at an UNWRA school. An early member of Hamas, he was first arrested during the First Intifada, in 1988, by Israel for security offenses and for his membership to the organization. Four years later, in 1992, he was one of the hundreds of Hamas members deported to southern Lebanon. He emerged as a spokesman of Hamas in early 2004. In the 2006 elections, Siyam won a seat in the Palestinian Parliament, representing Gaza City. Shortly after, he was appointed Interior Minister, where he established Hamas’s Executive Force. In a 2007 interview with Ma’an News Agency, he stated that the Executive Force was one of his achievements “which I felt proud of.” The Executive Force, under Siyam’s direction, played a significant role in armed confrontation with Fatah. Considered a hardline leader, Siyam lost his cabinet posts when Fatah and Hamas formed a short-lived national unity government in March 2007. He was soon appointed as the head of Hamas’s Parliamentary Bloc by the Shura Council. Siyam’s influence in the Gaza Strip continued to grow, as he was a leader of the Executive Force, and he was instrumental in Hamas’s take over of the Gaza Strip in June 2007. In the Hamas government, Siyam was considered to have the role of Defense Minister. He was killed on January 15, 2009 by a bomb dropped by the Israeli Air Force. His assassination is the second, after Nizar Rayyan, of Hamas’s top leadership in the Gaza Strip.

For the Hamas, politics and terrorism are just two equally legitimate and viable tactics to reach their desired goals. It should therefore not surprise that Hamas seeks to muddy the waters between its political, social and military activities.

Nor should anyone have been shocked when Hamas took pages straight from the Hezbollah playbook and developed a coherent strategy leveraging parallel and complementary political, social, military and terrorist activities.

As the international community presses the parties to conclude a ceasefire agreement, one critical yardstick by which any agreement must be measured is not only its focus on preventing Hamas from rearming through the Rafah tunnels but also the extent to which it denies Hamas political victories for its recent military adventurism. Said Siyam school of Hamas leadership -- effortlessly merging terrorsim and politics -- must not be allowed to carry the day.

NEFA Foundation: New Bin Laden Audio - “A Call for Jihad to Stop the Gaza Assault”

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained and translated a new Arabic-language audio recording of Al-Qaida leader Usama Bin Laden titled, "A Call for Jihad to Stop the Gaza Assault." During the recording, Bin Laden called upon Muslims around the world "to mobilize the youth into jihadi fighting units in the cause of Allah against the Zionist-Crusader alliance and their agents in the region—and not to waste the energy of the youth in street demonstrations without carrying any weapons." Bin Laden blamed the Israeli invasion of Gaza on the sagging U.S. economy: "Today, the U.S. is staggering under the attacks of the mujahideen and their consequences. [It is suffering from] a human, political, and financial drain. It is drowning in a financial crisis, so much so that it is begging from big and small countries alike. Now, its enemies are no longer in fear of it and its friends have no respect for it... The dramatic and rapid decline of U.S. power was one of the important motivations for the Israelis to launch this brutal attack on Gaza, in a desperate attempt to make use of the last days of the two terms of Bush and the neoconservatives."

During his address, Bin Laden also demanded that faithful Muslims contribute financing to help support jihadi operations: "the religious donations of a single prominent Muslim businessman are enough to cover the entire expenses of jihad on all active frontlines with our enemies today… I know that greed does not prevent many of the Muslim merchants from spending money in the cause of Allah, but rather they are prevented by their fear of the United States and its agents in the region... Can one not find a place to hide somewhere? Is the land of Allah not vast enough to carry out the religious duty of financial jihad?"

An English translation of Bin Laden's address can be downloaded from the NEFA Foundation website.

The Real Connection between Iran and Hamas

By Matthew Levitt

Iran’s active state sponsorship of Middle East terrorist groups is well documented, from terrorist
and insurgent groups in Iraq and Afghanistan to Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas and PIJ in the West Bank and Gaza. The Iranian regime has been described by U.S. officials as the “central banker of terrorism” and has a nine-digit line item in its budget to support terrorism, sending hundreds of millions of dollars to terrorist groups annually. Illustrating how the support
for terrorism is part of an official government policy, Iran has used its state-owned financial institutions to dole out these funds.

For most, this is not news. Even the technocratic Financial Action Task Force (FATF), a multilateral body that operates by consensus and includes Russia and China, has issued a series of warnings about Iran’s deceptive financial practices, including its money laundering and terror financing. That’s why I was surprised when NPR asked me to talk about "The Real Connection between Iran and Hamas" for a point-counterpoint style piece debating whether Iran really does finance Hamas. The story, on this weekend’s NPR Weekend Edition, featured me highlighting Iranian financial and material support for Hamas and Hillary Mann Leverett, a former Foreign Service officer who is CEO of Stratega, a political risk consulting firm, arguing that while Iran would surely like to support Hamas it does not.

That’s right. According to Mann Leverett in all her time in government she came across no hard evidence of Iran financial or material support for Hamas. Since U.S. officials regularly cite evidence to the contrary, one wonders how Mann Leverett missed the memo. She proceeds to suggest that the idea that Iran could get arms to Hamas is “implausible,” suggesting she is unaware of such well documented examples as the Iranian-funded Karine-A weapons smuggling ship, the traditional weapons smuggling routes that cut across Yemen into East Africa and up through Sudan and Egypt, and alternative means of moving funds through trade-based and other money laundering schemes.

Read More »

Will Hezbollah take part in the Gaza war?

By Olivier Guitta

I just wrote an article for The Middle East Times analyzing the possibility of Hezbollah opening a second front against Israel.
You can read it in full here.
Here is an excerpt:

While the Gaza war enters its third week, the question of a second front remains very accurate. Even though lots of experts have asserted that Hezbollah would not enter the war at this point, some troubling elements are questioning this assertion. Just last week northern Israel was hit by a few Katushya rockets just like in the summer 2006. The paternity of this act remains a question but it proves Hezbollah's ambivalence when it comes to facing off with Israel again.
The most logical culprit for last Thursday's attacks on Israel is the Syrian-backed Palestinian extremist group PFLP-GC. Ahmed Jibril, its leader, is based in Damascus and was behind the June 2007 Katushya rockets - modified in Iran - attacks against Israel.

The PFLP-GC has allegedly prepared more than 80 rockets of this type to bomb Israel.

Even if Jibril's group is behind this latest attack, there is no way he did not get the nod from Hezbollah. In fact, nothing happens in southern Lebanon without the knowledge and blessing of Hezbollah. What does Hezbollah have in mind? Is it testing the waters? Is Hezbollah using PFLP's action as a dry run to see how UNIFIL forces and Israel would react?

A Plan for Gaza: Demilitarization and Internationalization

By Walid Phares

As the UN Security Council was voting for Resolution 1860 calling for a cease fire in Gaza, for the stopping of the flow of weapons to Hamas and for the withdrawal of Israeli forces, I had sent a memo to the members of the Council advising for a more comprehensive plan based on Chapter 7. In 2004, I wrote an identical memo also remitted to the UN Security Council calling for Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon. The memo was part of an NGO process leading eventually to the issuing of UNSCR 1559 in September of that year. The memo sent this week is not part of a formal NGO process but is signed by the secretariat of a newly formed Trans Atlantic Legislative Group (US and European legislators) and published in several outlets. It was remitted to several missions including the US, France, UK, Russia, the European Union, the Arab League, the Palestinian and Israeli delegations.

The central idea is to have the UN seizing the actual control of the Gaza strip but only under Chapter 7, that is with the massive deployment of a multinational force, the disarming of Hamas and other militias, and the rehabilitation of a reformed Palestinian Authority. Evidently my memo-article received different types of reactions. The Hamas and "Iranian axis" players definitively rejects the idea of any UN sponsored security measures in Gaza. They feel this will take away the only card they have: military pressure on Israel. But many on the other side are skeptical about any UN role. However diplomats are now discussing what seems to be some forms of international role and PA presence. The Cairo discussions are going in that direction. I am projecting that unless a wider conflict smashes all initiatives, the diplomatic resolution cannot evolve outside an international security system in Gaza.

I made several of these remarks on BBC TV and Radio, al Hurra TV, France 24, and I summarized the Ten Points Plan in a You Tube Posting. (Link at the end of the article).

Read More »

Modeling Terrorist Group Behavior: Hamas & Hezbollah

By Aaron Mannes

In my day job at the University of Maryland’s Laboratory for Computational Cultural Dynamics I work with a team of computer scientists and socials scientists to build models of terrorist group behavior. As the in-house TerrorWonk my role is to “interpret” the results and see if they yield any useful insights. I’ve co-authored papers on both Hezbollah and Hamas ( only the abstract is posted online).

The models use a system called SOMA (Stochastic Opponent Modeling Agents) that calculates probabilities of a group acting in a given way in a given situation.

Obviously, we hope that our models can achieve a high level of prediction accuracy. But, regardless they can often reveal facets of an organization’s behavior that were not previously evident. Just as military experts say, “Plans are nothing, planning is everything,” I heard one speaker at a conference say, “All models are wrong, but some are useful.”

Following are short summaries of the findings.

Read the full post here.

NEFA Foundation: Zawahiri Issues Orders to “Strike Everywhere” in Revenge For Gaza

By Evan Kohlmann

The NEFA Foundation has obtained and translated a new audio recording from Al-Qaida Deputy Commander Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri released on January 6 and titled, “The Massacre of Gaza and the Siege of the Traitors.” During his address, Dr. al-Zawahiri condemned the ongoing Israeli raids in Gaza and blamed the actions of Israel on Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and incoming U.S. President Barack Obama: “These attacks are the gift of Obama to you, before he shall receive his position… this is Obama, whom the American machinery of lies attempted to portray before the world as the deliverer, who would change the policy of the U.S. He is killing your brothers and sisters in Gaza without any mercy or compassion.” As a consequence of the U.S. role in the events in Gaza, al-Zawahiri called upon Al-Qaida supporters around the world to carry out indiscriminate revenge attacks on American and Israeli interests: “O’ Muslims everywhere, fight against the Zionist-Christian campaign, and strike its interests wherever you encounter them… attack the Zionist-Christian alliance and its interests. O’ lions of Islam everywhere, the leaders of the Muslim lands are the protectors of the interests of the Americans and Zionists… so thwart the efforts of these traitors by striking the interests of the enemies of Islam—namely, the Christians and the Jews—wherever and by whatever means you can.”

An English transcript of Zawahiri's remarks can be downloaded from the NEFA Foundation website.

The Role of the Muslim Brotherhood With Hamas and Iran

By Douglas Farah

Former CIA analyst Reuel Marc Gerecht has an important piece in the Wall Street Journal on Iran's Hamas strategy. The Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report (free subscription required) fleshes out the picture even further.

The fundamental truth is that Hamas' road to Iran runs through the international Muslim Brotherhood, and has for two decades.

What is often missing in the discussion of the Muslim Brotherhood is that Hamas, according to its own founding charter, is an integral and armed part of the Ikwhan, not separate from it.

According to Article Two of the Hamas Charter:

“The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a universal organization which constitutes the largest Islamic movement of modern times. It is characterized by its deep understanding, accurate comprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all aspects of life, culture, creed, politics, economics, education, society, justice and
judgment ,the spreading of Islam, education, art, information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam.”

The most open analysis of the relationship of the Brotherhood to Iran comes from the public interviews of Yousef Nada, the self-described foreign minister of international Muslim Brotherhood. Unfortunately, there is no English language link to the extraordinary series of statements he gave.

In a series of interviews he gave to al Jazeera in late 2001 and 2002, Nada described how the Ikhwan sent a delegation to Tehran immediately after Khommeini assumed power in 1979. He states that the MB delegation was the third plane to land in Tehran after the revolution-the first was Khommeni's, then security from the PLO, and then his.

As the Brother in charge of relations with Iran, he tells how his group worked with the Iranian revolutionary regime, and how he personally tried to mediate an end to the Iran-Iraq war. My full blog is here.

Israel Attacked from the North

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

My colleague Josh Goodman and I published a Center for Terrorism Research Intelligence Briefing this morning that examines today's Katyusha rocket attacks into Israel from Lebanon. An excerpt:

* ROCKETS LAUNCHED FROM LEBANON. According to reports, at least three Katyusha rockets were fired today from Southern Lebanon into Northern Israel. One landed in the kitchen of an old age home in Nahariya, wounding two elderly Israelis. Israel immediately responded by firing artillery shells at the location from which the Katyushas were fired. An Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) spokesman told Haaretz that the retaliation was intended as a "pinpoint response at the source of fire."

* LEBANON'S RESPONSE. The Lebanese government was quick to condemn the rocket attacks into Israel. According to a statement released by Prime Minister Fouad Siniora's office: "Prime Minister Siniora regards what happened in the south as a violation of the international resolution 1701 and something he does not accept and Siniora called for an investigation into the incident."

* WHO BEARS RESPONSIBILITY? No group or individual has, to this point, claimed responsibility for the Katyusha attacks. Lebanese Information Minister Tarek Mitri was swift to deny Hizballah's role, saying that the group "assured the Lebanese government that it remains engaged in preserving the stability in Lebanon and respects Security Council resolution 1701." Israel blamed Palestinian factions in Lebanon, and does not believe this signals a broader escalation. Minister Rafi Eitan said, "I think these are isolated incidents. We expected this." FDD research fellow Tony Badran writes that the Damascus-based PFLP-GC is believed responsible for the rocket attacks, and that Hizballah "naturally knew about it and turned a blind eye, in order to conveniently maintain deniability."

You can read the full intelligence briefing here.

Strategic Reading in the Gaza Conflict (Part 2): An Eight Points Assessment

By Walid Phares

After having advanced ten questions about the ongoing conflict in Gaza, at the onset of the Israeli military operations against Hamas (December 28, 2008 on CTB) and as Israel chose to commit ground forces inside the enclave, here is a working reading of the main strategic developments and indicators at this time:

1. Israel’s land thrust in Gaza indicates that the long range goal of the campaign is to create changes on the ground, which are supposed to stop Hamas’ future rocket launches inside Israel. Many critics of Israel’s action, particularly the Jihadi propaganda machine, claim the ground operation didn't silence the shooting. But the counter arguments here are that a) the operation didn't end yet and b) Hamas’ ability to launch is linked to its ability to resupply its batteries or to build new missiles. Hence, the final military outcome of the operation, if indeed this is a silence-the-rockets campaign, will only show its success or failure at the end of the operation, or even after the supplies of Hamas are depleted.

Read More »

Political Hardball Within Hamas: Hardline Militants Calling Shots in Gaza

By Matthew Levitt

Despite its myopic focus on promoting violent conflict rather than peaceful negotiations with Israel, Hamas is by no means a monolithic movement. Divisions within the Hamas leadership were evident, for instance, when the recent six-month ceasefire came to a close and varying Hamas leaders issued conflicting statements that both terminated the ceasefire and called for its extension. With Israeli forces currently deployed in Gaza targeting Hamas's military and political leadership, untangling the fissures within the organization is critically important to understanding the group's decisionmaking process.

With its electoral victory in January 2006, and even more so after it defeated Fatah and forcibly took over Gaza in June 2007, the external leadership of Hamas based in Damascus lost some control to the group's Gaza leaders. While the Damascus leadership remained dominant, in large part because it still controlled the organization's purse strings and oversaw relationships with Hizballah, Iran, and other foreign entities, Hamas leaders in Gaza were making the day-to-day decisions. Then, in August 2008, Hamas hardliners dominated the secret ballot election for Gaza's Shura council. Less-extreme Hamas leaders like reportedly did not even bother to run when they saw the electoral slate dominated by young Hamas members affiliated with the Qassam Brigades. The election reportedly brought hardline Hamas military officials into the movement's Gaza political bureau, and chief among them was Ahmed Jabari, Hamas's "chief of staff," who oversaw the group's military wing.

The emergence of Gaza's hardline Hamas leadership, one that is closely affiliated with the movement's military wing, provides critical background to understanding recent events. It provides context not only for Hamas's decision to terminate the ceasefire and resume rocket attacks against Israeli civilian communities, but also for the Israeli decision to strike back hard -- first from the air and then on the ground -- at the group's military and political infrastructure in Gaza. It also clearly indicates that as the international community attempts to craft an enforceable ceasefire -- one that presumably protects Israeli civilians against indiscriminate Hamas rocket attacks -- a key prerequisite for success will be to weaken the militant Hamas leadership currently calling the shots in Gaza.

The full article is available here.

The other dangerous actors in Gaza

By Olivier Guitta

I just wrote an analysis for the Middle East Times looking at the other dangerous radical Palestinian groups present in Gaza. Indeed Hamas is far from the only one on the ground.
You can read the full article here.

Ehud Barak, Israel's defense minister, told the French daily Le Monde six months ago, regarding the ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza: "It is unclear how long it might hold, two days or two months. Historically, we are in a curve of a collision with Hamas."
And he was right: the ineluctable military conflict is unfolding in front of our eyes. After a week of aerial strikes, Israel has implemented its plan with a dangerous ground incursion. Where do we go from here?

Did Israel fall into the Hamas/Syrian/Iranian trap? Possibly. Syria thinks that Israel is getting into a messy quagmire. Hamas and Hezbollah clamor that the only reason Hamas broke the ceasefire is that they are now totally ready to face Israel militarily.

In fact, in the past few months, Hamas put in place a war cabinet headed by Ahmad al-Jabari, one of the leaders of its Ezzedine al-Qassam branch, and Said Siam, its former interior minister in the Palestinian government.

While Hamas is no Hezbollah as far as firepower, sophistication and know-how, it seems that they have greatly improved and learned a lot from the summer 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah.

First, hundreds of Hamas members went to training camps in both Syria and Iran. Second, Hamas has built an extensive network of tunnels and bunkers where its most prized leaders are hiding. Third, like Hezbollah, Hamas has at its disposal very mobile small units that communicate via hand-held radios.

Muslim Brotherhood Reacts Defensively As Israel Takes On Hamas

By Victor Comras

Muslim Brotherhood leaders are already engaging in something akin to “damage control” as they rationalize Hamas' breach of the ceasefire with Israel, and condemn Israel, Egypt and the West for Israel’s incursion into Gaza. The Brotherhood is also trying to tell its members and followers that Israel’s defeat of Hamas in Gaza, and the possible re-establishment of Fatah control in that Palestinian territory, is a reversible set-back, and that it will provide the Muslim Brotherhood a golden opportunity to strengthen their movement in Egypt, the Middle East, Europe, and around the Muslim world. The Brotherhood is already busy turning these events into a major recruitment tool, and for proselytizing and broadening its support base. They have targeted Egypt and other moderate Arab leadership as well as the Israelis. But, it is also clear that they were caught short by Europe's reaction to the conflict and to the degree of understanding and sympathy expressed by European leaders with regard to Israel’s actions. This represents a real setback for them.

Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader, Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradawi publicly and loudly castigated Egyptian and Arab leaders last Friday (January 2nd) for their lack of support. Like Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah, he called for a popular uprising throughout the Middle East against Israel. "Supporting the Palestinian people in Gaza,” he said, “is a religious duty on every Muslim individual according to his capabilities, and no one is exempted from that duty." At the same time Muslim Brotherhood General Guide Muhammad Mahdi 'Akef, called on Muslims everywhere to wage Jihad against Israel in support of Hamas. He charged also that Israel's operation in Gaza was planned and coordinated with Fatah’s leadership and with Egypt and the United States. While demonstrators filled the streets of several Arab capitals, the response from Arab countries to Israel's actions will likely remain modestly muted.

European Muslim Brotherhood leaders, who continues to portray the Brotherhood there as a moderate and peaceful Islamic organization, shied away from calls for violent Jihad against Israel. Nevertheless, they strongly criticized European leaders for their placid responses, and actively organized a number of protests across Europe. Israel would not have hit Gaza like this without western complicity, complained Hamdi Hassan, a Muslim Brotherhood member of the Egyptian parliament.

The Federation of Islamic Organizations in Europe (FIOE), the umbrella group representing the European Muslim Brotherhood, issued a statement December 28th calling on the European Union “to take action to control the Israeli military machine which is continuing its bloody massacres…. (and) for the ending of all the assistance and privileges granted to invading Israel.” The Union of Islamic Organizations of France (UOIF), a Muslim Brotherhood group, condemned France and Europe’s failure to react strongly "to the bloody massacre just committed by the Israeli occupation army against the people of Gaza.” The British Muslim Initiative, another Brotherhood group, condemned “the shameless silence of Western and Arab Governments towards the continued violations and crimes committed by Israel.” Ahmed Al-Rawi, MAB President and former FIOE President, went further insisting on action by the International Criminal Court and referring to Israeli leaders as “Zionist war criminals.” None of these Muslim Brotherhood statements made any mention of the Hamas rocket attacks against Israel that precipitated the Israeli response, nor the refusal of Hamas to renew the six month truce with Israel when it expired on December 19th. (see "Global Muslim Brotherhood Reaction to Israeli Airstrikes in Gaza" Global Muslim Brotherhood Daily Report)

Despite the rhetoric, Muslim Brotherhood leaders are evidently quite concerned that Hamas overplayed its hand in Gaza, and by the muted responses of Arab governments that appear perfectly willing to allow Hamas to be ejected from its position of control in Gaza. They were also caught offguard by European government and popular sympathy for Israel's reaction - a rare occurrence these days. A curious editorial by noted Palestinian journalist Khalid Amayreh, just posted on the Muslim Brotherhood’s website sums up some of these concerns, and goes on to state that Israel’s attack against Hamas in Gaza may yet be a blessing in disguise for the Muslim Brotherhood. After hyperbolically comparing Israel's attack to Nazi atrocities and the WWII Allied bombing of Dresden, he writes: “the contemplated elimination of the Hamas government by Israel would eventually be proven to be one of the stupidest Israeli misdeeds ever. First of all, it would free the resistance group from the burden of government and allow it anew to carry out more ferocious attacks against Israel without having to worry about the bombing by Israel of buildings and security headquarters and hospitals.” He maintains that Hamas never really wanted to be in the government anyway. It had desired only to be in a position of influence in Palestinian affairs, he says. So, he writes “the disappearance of the Hamas government in Gaza would be a blessing in disguise for Hamas.”

Whatever the case, Muslim Brotherhood leaders are already actively working the street in Egypt and elsewhere in the Middle East and Europe, to make hay out of the Israeli attack, and the 'so-called' lack of action by "Western corrupted" Arab leaders, to respond. This, they hope, will serve to swell their ranks and their coffers.

Holding Hamas Accountable

By Matthew Levitt

Operation Cast Lead, initiated in response to resumed Hamas rocket attacks on communities in southern Israel, represents Israel's most furious attack on Hamas since the terrorist group assumed control of Gaza. For the past six months, an Egyptian-brokered cease-fire maintained an uneasy status quo, during which time Hamas smuggled some 80 tons of explosives, roadside bombs and longer-range rockets into Gaza. While Israel's military operation may succeed in weakening the heavily armed Islamist group, the Gaza crisis also highlights a vexing challenge awaiting the new Obama administration: the question of how to deal with Hamas.

Some will recommend that Obama approve direct talks with Hamas. Since Hamas controls Gaza, the theory goes, it must be brought into the political process, engaged not isolated, or else there is no hope for peace. But Hamas is dead set against a two-state solution, whether it joins a unity government or remains in the opposition. Indeed, Hamas deploys suicide bombers specifically aimed at derailing progress toward peace. Engaging Hamas will not help the peace process, but it will legitimize the group most violently opposed to such progress.

Meanwhile, as renewed rocket attacks make clear, Hamas remains committed to the use of violence targeting civilians. Engaging in direct diplomacy with Hamas while it targets civilian population centers would empower a movement designated as a terrorist group by both the United States and the European Union. It would also pull the carpet out from under Palestinian moderates who are truly interested in pursuing peace and are vying with Hamas for popular support.

There are a few concrete things the Obama administration could, and should, do. The full article is available here.

Shadow of Iran Looms Large Over Gaza

By Walid Phares

The Israeli air raids on Hamas’s infrastructure along with troop movements around Gaza’s enclave and the shelling of Israel by the jihadist organization are both troubling developments in the Middle East but they are certainly neither new nor surprising. Dramatic images of bloody Palestinian civilians fleeing from attacks and pictures of Israelis rushing to the shelters while under fire will always bring chills to observers and depress the entire international community.

Sadly, it’s hardly the first time we’ve seen these images and tragically seven years after 9/11 they seem to connect with similar bloodshed in Mosul, Kabul and Mumbai. Even if both sides in the current Gaza conflict insist that their confrontation is at the center of the world, in reality it isn’t anymore. Car bombs and missiles in Beirut, Baghdad and Islamabad are all horrifying. There is no “top horror” anymore, even in the never- ending cycle of Gaza’s turmoil. It has all become part of the so-called “War on Terror” even though the Palestinian-Israeli quarrel is a conflict all its own. Still, why is this escalation so dramatic, why did it happen, who triggered it at this particular moment and what can we expect going forward? It’s too grandiose to claim that anyone has all the answers, but here is my take:

Read More »

Gaza and Hizballah

By David Schenker

Israel completed its fifth day of air operations against Hamas in Gaza today. Meanwhile, throughout the Middle East, battle lines are being drawn between “moderate” Arab regimes like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Egypt and the militant camp, led by Syria, Iran, and their Lebanese ally Hizballah. Recent days have seen a flurry of verbal attacks launched against the “moderates,” accusing these states of not being supportive enough of Hamas.

The war of words reached a fever pitch earlier this week after Hizballah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah essentially called for civil insurrection in Cairo to compel the Egyptian Government to open the Rafah border with Israel ala August 2008 when Hamas destroyed the border fence allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to enter the Sinai.

These are some excerpts from Nasrallah’s December 28 speech:

“We are facing a partnership by some Arab states, and a complicity by some other Arab states concerning events in our region…These Arabs are asking Israel to wipe out Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the rest of the resistance factions…they are demanding this and helping in this regard…

“…we address the Egyptian regime, saying, O Egyptian officials, if you do not open the Rafah crossing, if you do not come to the rescue of your brothers in Gaza, then you will be partners to a crime, partners to the murders, partners to the siege, and partners to creating the Palestinian tragedy…

“O people of Egypt, you should open this crossing with your bare chests…I am not calling for a coup in Egypt, nor am I in a position to do so. However, I am for the generals and officers to go to the political leadership and address it, saying the honour of our military uniform….do[es] not allow us to see our kinfolk in Gaza slain while we guard the borders with Israel.”

Egypt, not surprisingly, has responded harshly to Nasrallah’s calls. During a press conference on December 29, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmad Abu al-Gheit said: "If you do not know, let me tell you that the Egyptian Armed Forces are there to defend Egypt. If need be, they will also protect Egypt against people like you.” During the same press conference, Abu al-Gheit described Nasrallah’s statement as “a declaration of war against the Egyptian people.”

Despite Nasrallah’s outspoken rhetorical stance on Gaza, it’s unlikely that Hizballah will open a second front against Israel ala summer 2006. I wrote an article about Hizballah and Gaza published yesterday by the Washington Institute. It can be found here.

Iran activating its proxies

By Olivier Guitta

Iran is smartly playing its cards, using its main Sunni and Shiite proxy to create havoc in the region and de facto making it stronger. At this point, Iran’s next step is uncertain. But it is quite possible that Hezbollah will decide to open a second front against Israel. Also the destabilization operations against the Sunni regimes in the region hostile to the Islamic Republic are likely to continue unabated. At this point when it comes to terror, all roads lead to Tehran.
I wrote an article for the Middle East Times analyzing the current situation.
You can read it in full here.

Here is an excerpt:
After the six-month truce with Israel expired on Dec. 19, Hamas decided, or perhaps was urged, to resume its attacks on Israel. Thus Hamas went on a rampage campaign, firing rockets at Israel to create terror and death among Israeli civilians.
As could be expected, Israel reacted the way most countries would when attacked, and to protect its population against a group it considers to be a terrorist organization.

A new war in the region is likely to benefit only one country: Iran.

Indeed, following the model of the summer 2006 war against Israel triggered by the capture of two Israeli soldiers by the Lebanese Shiite organization, Hezbollah, Iran would benefit with a new front opening up.

This time Iran is turning to using its Sunni arm, Hamas. Contrary to what a number of experts in the region profess, Sunni extremists and Shiite extremists have no problem joining forces against a common enemy and putting aside their age-old rivalries.

While Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the founder of the Palestinian Resistance Movement, also known as Hamas, was still alive, he refused to Iran's advances time and again. Yassin was adamant not to engage the Shiites. After his death, Hamas became much more open to Tehran's advances. Recently, Iran has become Hamas' main bankroller and as such wants to have a say in what Hamas should or should not do.

Managing Gaza

By Aaron Mannes

Israel’s operation in Gaza is reaching a critical point. While talking heads will debate grand strategy, the options are limited. Behind the headlines is the crucial issue of how Israel’s national security process works (or doesn’t - in light of the weaknesses revealed in the 2006 Lebanon war). The next moves will demonstrate whether or not Israel has successfully incorporated the lessons from the failures of the 2006 Lebanon War. This is crucial to re-establishing Israeli deterrence.

Strategic Limitations

A true peace agreement with Hamas is not realistic. A quick scan of clips from Hamas’ al-Aqsa network or of statements by Hamas leaders from the Middle East Media Research Institute - particularly horrible are these scenes from Hamas produced children’s television - should disabuse all but the most useful idiots of any notions of a moderate Hamas.

Fatah is theoretically an alternative to Hamas, but has been eliminated from Gaza and has little credibility or capability.

Military options also do not offer definite solutions. Re-occupying Gaza would require tens of thousands of Israeli troops and likely lead to hundreds of Israeli and thousands of Palestinian casualties. The Israelis do not want to pay this price. It also might not work. Hamas might be able to maintain an ongoing, costly insurgency against the Israelis, which would be perceived as a victory. (Hamas has taken lessons from Hezbollah’s 2006 war with Israel and has prepared and is hoping for an IDF ground campaign.)

Hamas’ supply lines are the tunnels into Egypt. The tunnels themselves are only the endpoint of a vast smuggling network that extends throughout the Sinai and into the heart of Egypt. Egypt is a poor country, the smuggling opportunities are lucrative, and law enforcement is weak. In Kashmir, criminal networks in an impoverished environment have fostered a self-sustaining insurgency. The same situation could occur Gaza.

Ultimately, there are no solutions in Gaza on the immediate horizon. This is a problem Israel will have to manage.

Read the complete post here.

Ten Top Questions about the ongoing Israel-Hamas confrontation

By Walid Phares

Following are ten top questions needed to engage in strategic discussion of the ongoing Israel-Hamas confrontation in Gaza. These items can be altered if ground developments would take different directions in the next days or weeks.

1. What is Israel's strategy and goals regarding the ongoing campaign in Gaza. Will it be mostly an air campaign with limited ground action or will it include a vast land campaign as well? What are the tangible goals?

2. Who is winning the propaganda war: Israel or Hamas? How is Arab and international media covering the clashes and to whose advantage?

3. How are Arab Governments reacting to the confrontation? Egypt, Saudi, Qatar, Jordan, Morocco, others. Are the demonstrations putting significant pressure on these Governments?

Read More »