When Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu met recently with President Biden, former President Trump, and Vice President Harris, all of them were reported to have told Israel to “end” its war with Hamas. A Wall Street Journal headline summed it up this way, “Netanyahu Receives Clear Message on Gaza War: Wrap It Up.”
What does it mean when Trump says Israel must end the war in Gaza “and get it done quickly.” Does that mean do nothing about the inevitable return of the thousands of determined Hamas terrorists still hiding in the hundreds of miles of tunnels not yet uncovered?
When Harris says, “It is time for this war to end and end in a way where Israel is secure, all the hostages are released, the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can exercise their right to freedom, dignity, and self-determination…Israel has a right to defend itself. And how it does so matters.” Does that mean she will support Israel’s right to self-defense if it needs to target terrorists in Gaza during a ceasefire, and will she place the primary onus for civilian deaths on Hamas?
Everyone wants all the hostages returned, but Hamas won’t consider that unless Israel completely leaves Gaza, which guarantees the return of Hamas control with their promise to repeat Oct. 7 again and again. And how many terrorists will Israel have to release with blood on their hands who, based on the history of previous trades with Hamas, will go on to kill as many Israelis as possible?
In a starry-eyed vision 6,000 miles away, it sounds so simple: stop fighting. End the war, return the hostages, and wish away the reality of dealing with jihadist adversaries who live in a culture of death, yearning for Israel’s destruction instead of helping Palestinians build a better life.
At the end of the day, if Hamas is not destroyed as a military and governing force, the “day after” will be a victory for Iran, jihad, terror and extorsion by the taking, torturing and killing of hostages.
Ambiguity may work in a negotiation between two democratic nations, but when one negotiating partner is a U.S.-designated terror organization, vagueness is the enemy of a constructive outcome. The collateral damage will be the U.S.-Israel relationship, creating the daylight Iran and its proxy network want to make to drive a wedge between the two.
Defining what “ending the war” means is imperative.
Would the war or ceasefire be considered at an end if Israel continues to dismantle the hundreds of miles of underground tunnels where terrorists and their weapons are still hidden under noncombatant structures with civilian human shields? Hamas knows it can perpetually manipulate American media and politicians by showing the world the suffering of the human shields they throw into the line of fire.
The presidential talking points about ending the war lack clarity. So here is the reality, if you can handle the truth.
Suppose Israel completely stops its military campaign, ending all kinetic actions. In that case, Hamas will remain in power, and no would-be alternative Palestinian governing authority will emerge, as they know they would be hunted down.
If Israel moves to a lower intensity phase of the war, it will take years, not weeks or months, to weaken Hamas to a point where an alternative Palestinian entity can rise. Only then will people risk their lives to govern in Hamas’s place. It will take generations to reform and implement an educational system like those of the Emirates and Saudis, which do not demonize Jews or call terrorists martyrs and accept living in peace next to a Jewish state.
If Israel leaves the border crossing between the Egyptian Sinai and Gaza, the Philadelphi corridor, the weapons supply line for Hamas will open wide again. Israel needs a year to build an underground tunnel barrier system, and America needs to find a security solution in conjunction with Israel and Egypt that stops future arms flows into Gaza. Easier said than done if you want to end the hostilities.
The war against the Iranian tentacle named Hamas does not end with a ceasefire or with the signing of a piece of paper. They will ignore it at the first opportunity. Just look at the Taliban, who are back torturing opponents, mistreating women and gays, who, like all jihadists, i.e., Iran and Hamas, practice a form of misogyny that should offend every American.
I will be returning to Israel for my sixth visit since Oct. 7. I know firsthand that what is being asked of Israel and what is demanded of the U.S.-designated terrorist entity Hamas are incompatible in the long term. I also know, after years in the Middle East, that behind closed doors, our allies in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the Emirates, Jordan and beyond want Israel to rout Hamas.
Over the next five months, President Biden and Vice President Harris will still be in power, regardless of the outcome in November. Suppose Israel accepts a phase-one deal with the release of a few hostages, then determines that Hamas is not willing to release the remaining hostages without Israel acquiescing to impossible security concessions in a phase-two ceasefire. If Israel restarts the war, does anyone believe the administration will be supportive of Israel as the November presidential election approaches?
Will a future American president tolerate any Israeli kinetic actions against Hamas causing civilian casualties, no matter how justified in self-defense? Will it accuse Israel of being the side that keeps violating the ceasefire and the end of the war?
I want to ask President Biden, former President Trump and Vice President Harris to look at the realities as they are. That means, if you believe Israel has a right to defend itself, you must be supportive when they inevitably return to Gaza to stop the recurring threat of Hamas taking over Gaza and killing any Palestinian who wants a different solution.
One of the best things to push Hamas to accept reasonable concessions is not to create daylight between Israel and the U.S., which Hamas leaders Yahya Sinwar and Ismail Haniyeh interpret as a signal to become more intransigent. An excellent way to advance U.S. security interests and lower the flames is to stop talking incessantly about every detail of the war in Gaza. Finally, be flexible in your interpretation of “ending the war” to allow Israel to suppress one of its existential jihadist threats or, in plain terms, win the war.
It is counterintuitive to the administration, but pressure on Israel for restraint is an invitation to Iran, Hamas and now, more than ever, Hezbollah in the north to be aggressive, increasing the chance for a multifront war.
Eric R. Mandel is the director of the Middle East Political Information Network and senior security editor for the Jerusalem Post‘s Jerusalem Report.
Most Popular
Comments / 0