The
developing international consensus to offer Gaza economic aid in exchange for a
ceasefire is a moral and strategic mistake. As long as Hamas rules Gaza, funds
sent to Gaza are likely to be used for aggression against Israel and the
personal use of Hamas leaders. The world should not be rewarding the most
extreme Palestinians for violence and terror.
The developing international consensus to
offer Gaza an economic package in order to convince Hamas to agree to a
ceasefire is immoral and a strategic folly. It is also unlikely to be
effective.
One of the main reasons for Hamas harassing
several million Israelis by launching thousands of rockets and sending
terrorists into Israel by tunnels, apart from the desire to kill Jews, is to
rock the boat in order to get out of its dire economic conditions. Getting paid
for stopping to shoot at Israeli civilians looks like the “protection money”
collected by the Mafia.
The morality of pouring money into Gaza so
that their civilians can live better remains questionable for as long as Hamas
does not stop its terrorism against Israel. Unfortunately, establishing a clear
connection between economic aid and political compliance is not on the agenda
of the “peacemakers”.
It is true that Gazans are suffering.
Nevertheless, it is wrong to argue that the Gazans should not suffer the
consequences of Hamas’ criminal actions. Unfortunately, Hamas was popular among
the Gazans and continues to be so. Moreover, all polls show that Gazans support
violence against Israel. What moral justification exists for helping people
that support an organization intent on destroying the Jewish state and is
actively engaged in killing innocent Israeli citizens?
Furthermore, we should not forget that the
essence of war is a competition of inflicting pain in order to change patterns
of behavior. Actually, pain may have a positive value in affecting the learning
curve of the warring sides. Israel has tried to influence the learning curve of
the Palestinians that aggression against Israel does not pay and that support
for Hamas could be costly.
Exacting a high cost from Hamas and the
Gazans may lead them to more peaceful behavior. It is true that it is difficult
to influence the learning process of large collectives, but this has occurred
before. For example, it took a lot of suffering in World War I and World War II
to transform German society into becoming less militaristic and less
belligerent. While not politically correct, such treatment might be the recipe
for turning the Palestinians into peaceful neighbors in the long run.
Moreover, economic aid to Gaza, as long as
Hamas stays in control, strengthens its power and its grip over the poor
Gazans. Allowing the continued rule of Hamas, as the US plans, also undermines
the rule of the more moderate Palestinian Authority (PA) leader, Mahmoud Abbas.
Indeed the PA also criticized the Kerry cease fire proposal that favored Hamas.
However, this clear strategic rationale
seems to be taken over by sentimentalist responses to Hamas media manipulation.
Instead of using the depressing pictures coming out of Gaza to tell Gazans: “We
told you all along that Hamas leadership would only make things worse” (just as
it has in other places where radical Islamists gain power), Western leaders
seem to have foolishly decided that Gaza should speedily be rebuilt! The US
efforts to bribe Hamas into behaving (while suspending aid to Egypt), are
probably against American laws dealing with terrorist organizations.
Promises of aid send the wrong signal. It tells
Palestinians that their leadership can make grave, deadly mistakes, and
nevertheless gullible Westerners and others will bail them out. It also signals
to Hamas that it can continue seeking the destruction of Israel and shooting at
the Jewish State; for if Israel repeats its military action, merciful donor
states will repair the damage yet again.
Diplomats are looking for formulas that
will enable channeling aid to the Gaza Strip bypassing Hamas. Realistically,
there is no way to reconstruct Gaza without strengthening the Hamas. The
reconstruction of Hamastan in Gaza — an Iranian base that threatens Israel and
many moderate Arab regimes — makes no strategic sense.
More importantly, Hamas has used aid to
enhance its military capabilities. It built an infrastructure to produce
missiles and a network of tunnels. The home-made missiles are relatively cheap,
but according to IDF estimates, the cost of each attack tunnel is approximately
$3 million. All this adds up to millions of dollars.
America helped reconstruct Western Europe
and Japan after World War II to make sure they would be ruled by friendly
democratic regimes. Hamas is authoritarian and anti-Western. Moreover, its rule
will doom the Gazans to continuous poverty and ignorance. It is simply senseless
to facilitate the continuation of Hamas rule.
History of humanitarian aid in the last
century shows that outside economic aid is only as good as the ability of a
recipient’s economy and government to use it prudently and productively. Like
many Third World countries, Gaza lacks the legal and institutional
infrastructure needed for the effective dispersal of economic aid. Billions of
euros transferred to the PA since the Oslo Accords have been squandered and
misused by corruption and ineptitude. Very little aid has filtered down to the
people. Therefore, it is not at all clear that sending more money to the
dysfunctional Gaza will do any good.
From what we know of the fortunes of the
humanitarian aid transferred to the Gazans in recent years, it is clear that
external aid will be siphoned off to the corrupt Hamas leadership. Khaled
Mashaal, and Musa Abu Marzook are evaluated to be billionaires, while Ismail
Haniyeh, is only a millionaire.
Some will be directed to Hamas activists;
and only what is left will go to the destitute. Those with arms always get the
first and best cut from international aid sent to the suffering. This is what
is happening everywhere international aid is dispensed. Gaza is not different.
Humanitarian aid should be dispensed
judiciously, while making sure that it does not preserve poverty and
dependence. Even the friends of the Palestinian national movement should
realize that it is time for tough love for Gaza.
*Prof. Efraim Inbar, director of
the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, is a professor of political
studies at Bar-Ilan University, and a Shillman/Ginsburg fellow at the Middle
East Forum.
No comments:
Post a Comment