Corporal Gilad Shalit was abducted on the 25 June 2006. At the time of his kidnapping he was on duty on the border between Gaza and Israel. In a cunning and well planned attack by terrorists 2 soldiers were killed and Shalit was taken to a "safe house" in Gaza.
Hamas was, at the time of abduction, just a few months in to its legitimate term after the general elections that took place. At this time the entire international community and Israel were watching Hamas to see what path they would choose. Clarification came after the abduction that Hamas would not show any flexibility toward international demands and since that time the situation in the territories and especially
in Gaza has deteriorated. It seems that Shalit has become for Hamas a serious thorn in its side. 429 days after the abduction, when the Israeli shock of the incident settled, Shalit has not turned in to the strategic playing card Hamas had wished for. Instead Hamas lost the ability to rule due to the freezing of money held by Israel and the freezing of international aid. As a result economy in the territories is in shambles, internal security deteriorated to a civil war that brought a "National Unity Government" and that eventually evaporated and brought a new reality, Hamas run Gaza and a Fatah run West Bank. If while the prospect of a national unity government Israel could negotiate with Abu Mazen for the release of Shalit, today this channel is non-existent. On the other hand, Hamas has proven that it can release those kidnapped as in the case of BBC journalist, Alan Jonston. Any negotiation that will end up in release of Palestinian prisoners to Hamas would definitely bolster its support, motivate terrorist factions to continue and evidently harm an already struggling Fatah government and leadership.
in Gaza has deteriorated. It seems that Shalit has become for Hamas a serious thorn in its side. 429 days after the abduction, when the Israeli shock of the incident settled, Shalit has not turned in to the strategic playing card Hamas had wished for. Instead Hamas lost the ability to rule due to the freezing of money held by Israel and the freezing of international aid. As a result economy in the territories is in shambles, internal security deteriorated to a civil war that brought a "National Unity Government" and that eventually evaporated and brought a new reality, Hamas run Gaza and a Fatah run West Bank. If while the prospect of a national unity government Israel could negotiate with Abu Mazen for the release of Shalit, today this channel is non-existent. On the other hand, Hamas has proven that it can release those kidnapped as in the case of BBC journalist, Alan Jonston. Any negotiation that will end up in release of Palestinian prisoners to Hamas would definitely bolster its support, motivate terrorist factions to continue and evidently harm an already struggling Fatah government and leadership. In conclusion, one Israeli soldier put Hamas government and leadership in a position that it had to choose, to be a nation among nations or another ruthless terrorist organization that plays not on the negotiating table but rather in the back streets of the refugee camps and the tomato greenhouses of Beit Lahia. For Israel that one soldier has brought international support and compassion, a financial embargo on the Palestinians and the legitimization for use of force. Once more the question for Hamas is what do you want to do with the control you have taken to yourself? In the near future Hamas will most certainly find itself in a new type of pressure, the pressure from within. The streets of Gaza, while calm and secure, are piled up with garbage, Fatah affiliated clinics are ordered shut, freedom of speech is a thing of the past. women are afraid to show their faces in public and Israel ar epermitting only essential humanitarian aid throughits borders. The pressure that is boiling beneath the surface is the people of Gaza that, thanks to Hamas, now have ample time to think what do they want for the future of the Strip. Hamas can offer two solutions, prosperity and cooperation with the Jewish neighbours or an act of war with the same neighbour.
No comments:
Post a Comment