On Sunday, US President Joe Biden called the prospect of Israel reoccupying Gaza a “serious mistake.” One way to raise a question that remains largely ignored in the debate over the possible military ground operation in Gaza: What would happen in the event of an Israeli victory?
“A serious mistake. Last Sunday, the President of the United States, Joe Biden, warned Israel against the prospect of a new total occupation of the Gaza Strip as a consequence of the Israeli ground military operation that he is preparing to eliminate the threat posed by the radical Islamist movement Hamas.
It is the first time that the United States attempts to “put a limit on the operation planned by Israel in retaliation for the attack launched by Hamas – on Saturday, October 7,” states the American media ‘The Washington Post’.
The impossible return to before 2005
This way of looking to the future may seem premature. Indeed, talking at this point about a possible Israeli reoccupation of Gaza implies taking many “ifs” for granted. Firstly, Israel must decide to launch its military ground operation in Gaza and, secondly, its Army must succeed in eliminating the threat posed by Hamas.
However, “it’s an important debate to have right now,” says Jacob Eriksson, a specialist in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at the University of York. “We are concentrating almost exclusively on the tactical aspects of this preparation operation, without taking the time to consider the question of the long-term impact of a ground confrontation in Gaza. We have to ask ourselves what would happen once Hamas control over the Gaza Strip is removed. enclave,” adds this expert.
The idea of Israel regaining control of this area “may be on the agenda of some of the most extremist elements of the current government, who imagine that Gaza is part of Eretz Yisrael, Greater Israel in the biblical sense. But the most vocal voices reasonable people in Tel Aviv will want to leave as soon as possible,” says Ahron Bregman, a political scientist and specialist in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict at King’s College London.
The hypothesis of an occupation by the Army after a possible victory over Hamas means “a return to the situation before Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005,” says Amnon Aran, a specialist in conflicts between Israel and the Arab world at the City. University of London.
“If Israel left in 2005, it was because Ariel Sharon, then prime minister, had concluded that it had become too difficult to remain in the face of 1.4 million hostile Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. The same is true today – with a population that already exceeds 2 million-“, summarizes Ahron Bregman.
“That would require mobilizing too many resources for quite a long time,” adds Shahin Modarres, a specialist in Iran and Israeli-Palestinian relations at the International Team for the Study of Security (ITSS) in Verona. Indeed, an Israeli occupation of Gaza “would mean that Israel would have to manage everything, from the proper functioning of schools and hospitals to the sewage system. And since Gazans would never accept such an administration, soldiers would be needed to protect the administration.” on the ground. This would cost a fortune and clashes with the local population would be inevitable,” says Ahron Bregman.
Al-Fatah, an acceptable partner?
Not counting the diplomatic repercussions of a new occupation of Gaza. “The image of Hezbollah’s fighting in southern Lebanon would be reinforced, Israel’s relations with other Arab countries could be felt – particularly the ongoing negotiations with Saudi Arabia – and such a decision would go against the American desire for a two-state solution to the Middle East conflict,” says Jacob Eriksson.
Hence Joe Biden’s warning. But who would take over from Hamas in the Gaza Strip if reoccupation is not on the agenda? “If Israel achieves its objectives – that is, destroying Hamas’s military capabilities – there would be a transition period during which the Israeli army would have to provide security on the ground. But a more permanent solution will have to be found quickly, otherwise it will be would become a de facto occupation,” says Amnon Aran.
For him, the natural option “would be an agreement with the Palestinian Authority, which is already in charge of the West Bank.” Its president, Mahmoud Abbas, “has also begun to distance himself from Hamas, stating that the Islamist movement’s actions do not ‘represent the Palestinian people,'” notes Shahin Modarres.
A signal sent to the Israeli government to assure it that it would be a more acceptable interlocutor. Which is not to say that Mahmoud Abbas’s Al-Fatah would be welcomed with open arms by the Palestinians of Gaza. “Its popularity ratings are already low, so if the Palestinian Authority takes power after an Israeli military operation, it will have a very difficult time establishing itself in Gaza,” says Amnon Aran.
“It is true that Al-Fatah does not represent the ideal solution, but there is no alternative and the local population could accept it for lack of something better,” says Shahin Modarres.
A demilitarized zone?
Faced with such a weak government, which would have difficulty containing Gazans’ resentment towards Israel, the Jewish state could also be tempted to “establish a kind of security buffer zone, more or less like in Lebanon, before the Israeli withdrawal.” from southern Lebanon in 2000,” explains Amnon Aran.
The UN could also intervene “to establish a kind of demilitarized zone under UN control, with clauses that allow the Israeli army to intervene if it detects immediate risks to the country’s security,” adds Ahron Bregman.
Both options would mean further erosion of the already limited territory in which Gazans can live.
But it is also possible that the Palestinians in Gaza do not want to hear about Fatah leading them at all. If this is the case, there is still the option of chaos in Gaza. “There is a possibility that a military operation could create a leadership vacuum in this enclave. This is perhaps the most dangerous outcome,” says Jacob Eriksson.
In his opinion, by taking military action against a group like Hamas, it is possible to physically eliminate the organization’s leaders, but the violence used “tends to fuel resentment and anger towards the person using it,” he explains. In other words, any successful ground military operation could create or strengthen another group equally threatening to Israel. “The Israelis have to think about the day after. But at the moment, they seem to be too upset to think rationally,” concludes Ahron Bregman.
Adapted from its original French article
#IsraelHamas #dangerous #day #ground #operation #Gaza