War on Hamas


The Bush Administration responded not once but twice to Israel's targeted assassination of Hamas spiritual leader and founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin on Monday. 

National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice gave the first reaction on Monday morning, saying that Yassin was a mastermind of terror. While both sides needed to take steps to calm the situation, she refrained from any criticism of Israel.  White House spokesman Scott McClellan also stated in his morning briefing that Israel had the right to defend itself.

Later that same day, McClellan had adjusted his message.  He reiterated the White House's previously stated opposition to the Israeli policy of targeted assassination, though refusing to condemn the Israeli action.  State Department spokesman Richard Boucher then said the US was "very troubled" by the assassination, and urged Israel to avoid action that would make it difficult to restore calm.

According to The New York Times, relying on an un-named administration official, "a change of tone was chosen only after a torrent of criticism erupted throughout the Arab world, and was then joined by condemnations from the European Union and Britain, Washington's closest ally in the Iraq war.  Those officials said the Hamas leader's death had jolted Administration officials just as they were accelerating plans for a highly visible and politically significant visit by Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, to Washington, perhaps next month."

The mixed reaction from the Administration reflected the uncertainty and divergence of opinions surrounding Israel's latest decision to assassinate such a high ranking Palestinian figure.  Though few Israelis were shedding tears for a man who had inspired and ordered countless attacks on Israeli citizens, many wondered whether the move would be helpful or harmful in the long run.

The Case for Assassination

This was not the first time Israel had tried to assassinate Yassin, as an attempt last September came quite close but failed to eliminate its target.  But the strategic implications of Yassin's death this week are different - they cannot be separated from Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stated intentions to unilaterally withdraw from the Gaza strip.

Israel's current military operations in Gaza make it clear that Sharon has no intention of allowing a Gaza withdrawal to be viewed as a victory for Hamas terror, or as an opportunity to allow Hamas to consolidate its power and grow stronger when Israeli troops are gone.  His plan is to leave Gaza, but to do so with guns blazing - Israeli officials hope this will avoid a repeat of the Lebanon scenario in 2000, when an Israeli withdrawal was seen as a victory for Hizbollah's military attacks and, some say, inspired the current intifada.  Though sources in the Prime Minister's bureau denied any connection between the withdrawal and the assassination, defense sources stated clearly that Israel had no intention of allowing Hamas to survive to the day of its withdrawal.

Yassin's assassination can also be seen in light of the failed Ashdod port bombing on March 14th.  A mega-attack with hundreds of casualties and widespread environmental damage was narrowly averted when the suicide bombers attempted to detonate their explosives near several chemical storage tanks, but their bombs exploded prematurely and they "only" killed 10.  Hamas's desire to attack such a sensitive target, in combination with other thwarted attempts and evidence, suggested that Hamas was trying to cross all previous boundaries and could be seen as necessitating a severe Israeli response. 

Thus more assassinations and offensives against Hamas can be expected, "until Hamas is given a total blow," as one senior security official told Ma'ariv.  Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz said simply that "Yassin was the Palestinian bin Laden. This action is part of the overall action of the State of Israel and will continue."

Yassin's role in ordering terror attacks was undisputed.  The "founder" of Hamas, though removed from the operational infrastructure behind Hamas activities, encouraged suicide operations and other attacks on Israeli civilians.  He was also a unifying figure in the internal power structure of Hamas, and his assassination may mean future conflicts between the operational officers in Gaza and the Damascus based leadership.

Thus some Israelis hope that Yassin's death represents the first big step towards the complete eradication of Hamas.  IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon said that the assassination would perhaps increase motivation to carry out terror attacks in the short term, but in the long term, would strengthen the moderate elements in Palestinian society.

The short term predictions were seemingly accurate, as thousands turned out for Yassin's funeral in the largest demonstrations seen in Gaza for years.  Israelis woke up to the highest state of alert, one that officials cautioned could last for weeks in expectation of reprisal attacks.  Israeli security officials acknowledged that Sheik Yassin's killing has energized the Palestinian factions. But they also say Hamas and the other groups were already going all-out to strike at Israel.

"The Palestinians and Hamas feel they have lost a father," said Aharon Zeevi-Farkash, the head of military intelligence. "But I think they have done their maximum to attack us until now, and will do their maximum to attack us from now on."

Meanwhile, the Yassin assassination enjoyed majority support (60%) among Israeli citizens, according to Israeli polls.  However, a much larger majority (80%) felt the act would increase the risk of terror attacks.

Justified, but Wise?

Despite the support in the polls, many voices in the Israeli press questioned the wisdom of the assassination.  Few argued as to whether or not it was justified, but many feared the reverberations, wondering aloud whether they had taken a step toward decapitating Hamas, or toward creating more incentive for future terror attacks. 

"No one in the system, not even Sharon, believes that the assassination of the sheikh will reduce the scope of terror," said Nahum Barnea in Yediot Achronoth.  "There is no strategy here: just bitter frustration and mounting difficulty to look the voters in the eye.  Sheikh Yassin bears responsibility for the death of hundreds of Jews in his life. The question that ought to trouble us now is how many Jews he will kill in his death."

The bleak mood in the streets of Israel, where stores and cafes are nearly empty, reflects the sense that Hamas would now try to go beyond the "usual" terror attacks and perpetrate a mass killing of Israelis.  According to Yediot Achronoth, the Mahane Yehuda market in Jerusalem appeared "as empty and sad as after a terror attack.  However, this time it was not a terror attack that already happened-but a terror attack that might happen, which drove the buyers away."   A vegetable stand owner remarked, "There is a terrible feeling of fear and panic.  Customers who have already arrived make their purchases and leave quickly." 

Security forces in Israel were reacting in unprecedented fashion to the expected retaliation.  Airplane landing routes were altered at Ben-Gurion airport, and security details were increased around the Prime Minister and other ministers and Knesset members,

Yediot Achronoth commentator Alex Fishman described the intensity of the rage on the Palestinian street, and the reasons to fear their reaction to Yassin's death.  "If Hamas has in its arsenal a secret weapon that it has been keeping for doomsday, now they will draw it without hesitation."

"If they have any Kassam rockets capable of striking Ashkelon, they will fire them. If they are capable of poisoning wells-they will do so. The Palestinian street is in a state of amok. It is convinced that Israel has been gripped by a fit of lunacy, and it means to respond in kind. No holds are barred. The army will carry out a series of operations in the next few days both in and around the Gaza Strip to prevent any surprises in the form of a Palestinian "doomsday weapon."
 
How the US Should React
 
Whether the Israeli defenders or critics are correct in their assessments, few in Washington or anywhere else seem to have the slightest notion of what to do next.  One of the rare exceptions is Dennis Ross, the veteran of the Reagan, Bush Sr., and Clinton administrations, where he served as the special Mideast envoy.  He is currently the director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

In a New York Times Op-Ed on Wednesday, he argues that in addition to working with Israel as it is doing now, the Bush administration should "begin parallel talks with the Palestinians, Egyptians, Jordanians and others to ensure a particular set of outcomes when the Israeli evacuation [from Gaza] takes place. Fundamental questions need to be raised now, including these: What steps should the Palestinian Authority take so that it, and not Hamas, assumes control of the territories and Israeli settlements? What kinds of assistance and investment would help Palestinian moderates show that they, and not extremists, are able to deliver for the Palestinian people?"

"The Palestinians are unlikely to put the necessary measures in place, especially given the increased turmoil from Sheik Yassin's assassination, without pressure from Arab leaders and other members of the international community to do so. There must be a collective public message that Palestinians have much to gain by acting and much to lose by avoiding any responsibility. This would have the added benefit of raising the cost to Mr. Arafat of impeding the Palestinian Authority's efforts."

"But unless the United States works out parallel understandings with the Palestinians and others, any initiative will fail its essential tests: creating greater security for Israel; putting Palestinians, free of Israeli control, in a position in which they assume real responsibilities; and fostering a climate that makes peace-making possible again."
Ross is right.  It's time for the Bush administration to take the lead in reversing the downward spiral.  Trouble in the Mideast won't wait until the election is over.