Defeat must have consequences

(JNS) — With the completion of Phase 1 of the ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, and a new Israeli offensive into Gaza becoming more imminent, some Arab states have scrambled to put forward a plan for the “day after” as a counterproposal to the Trump plan of resettling Gazans and bringing a potential American presence to Gaza.

Arab countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Qatar advocate for Hamas to disarm but retain some governing role in Gaza going forward. As part of Egypt’s vision, Hamas would surrender its missiles and rockets to Egyptian and European supervision until a Palestinian state is created.

It is no accident that Egypt and Qatar want to save Hamas.

Most of the weapons Hamas has used against Israel were smuggled into the Gaza Strip from the Sinai through the Egypt-Gaza border across the Philadelphi Corridor. This is why Israel announced the other week that it would not withdraw troops from the corridor under any circumstance. While this illicit arms smuggling violated the 1978 Camp David Accords, the profits for a corrupt Egyptian government were sufficient enough for it to look the other way. Not surprisingly, most, if not all, of these weapons were paid for by Iran and Qatar—Hamas’s two biggest financial and political supporters.

As for Egypt’s suggestion that it and the Europeans serve as custodians for Hamas’s missiles and rockets until a Palestinian state is established, the mere idea insults the intelligence of any sentient individual. Egypt has already shown it cannot be trusted to prevent weapons smuggling. The Europeans have performed little better as countries like Ireland, Spain and Norway have unilaterally recognized a Palestinian state with no defined borders, no functioning government and no international recognition. What is to prevent other European countries and Egypt from making similar declarations, thus enabling them to release weapons to a Hamas-led Palestinian state to be used in a new war against Israel? It is hard to imagine a dumber idea.

As for the Saudi motivation to publicly declare that it wants Hamas to survive as a political entity, the best gloss to be put on it is that Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman wants as much latitude to deal with the fallout in Gaza as possible. MBS has competing priorities.

On the one hand, his priority is to bring Saudi Arabia into the 21st century. To achieve that goal, he needs the full support of the United States economically, politically and militarily. In addition to what America can provide, Israel can deliver state-of-the-art technology and protection from a hegemonic Iran. None of that is possible unless MBS enters the Abraham Accords. For that reason, he understands that his path to modernity runs through Jerusalem.

On the other hand, he is concerned about his physical survival. If he is seen as having sold out the Palestinians to the Zionists, there will be a price on his head. By claiming that he wants Hamas to survive as a political force in post-war Gaza, he hopes to placate a radicalized, restive and pro-Hamas Palestinian populace. To openly support Israel’s stated goal of destroying Hamas would make him a traitor in some quarters of the Arab world.

But this is all theater. There is no love lost between MBS and Hamas. Recall that MBS ordered the murder and mutilation of The Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Like Hamas, Khashoggi supported the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization dedicated to overthrowing the Saudi royal family. MBS is perfectly content to have Hamas destroyed. He just wants Israel to appear to do it over his “objections.”

In contrast to those Arab countries fighting (or in Saudi Arabia’s case, pretending to fight) to save Hamas, some Arab states, like the United Arab Emirates, want Hamas destroyed. They have made it clear they will not participate in any rebuilding of Gaza if Hamas has any future role in that. The UAE wants a “reformed” Palestinian Authority to govern Gaza. The term “reformed” remains intentionally undefined; it can mean anything. Presumably, it will mean whatever the UAE determines is in its best interest.

One of history’s lessons from the Arab-Israel conflict is that Arabs have never learned how to either win or lose a war against Israel. They do not know how to win because they cannot militarily defeat Israel, no matter how many times they have tried. They also do not know how to lose because the United States and Europe will never let Israel finish the job and win a clear and decisive victory.

Whether it was then-President Dwight D. Eisenhower who saved Egypt’s President Gamal Abdel Nasser after a resounding military defeat in the 1956 Suez Crisis, former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger who saved Egypt’s Anwar Sadat as Israel was about to decimate the Egyptian Army in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, or former President Barack Obama, who continually put pressure on Israel to refrain from defending itself in the wake of relentless Palestinian terrorism, the Arabs have learned that they face little downside to waging war. The worst that happens is that they end up no worse off than before they started the war. If there were deaths, it was all for a good cause. If there was destruction, the United States, Europe and usually the Gulf Arab states rebuild.

This dynamic must end.

World War II ended with the unconditional surrender of both Germany and Japan. The Axis powers admitted defeat. The Allies then governed their former enemies until the Germans and Japanese could rebuild their respective nations’ institutions and govern themselves. They accepted responsibility for waging a war of aggression. To prevent them from waging war again, the constitutions of both Germany and Japan limit the size and capabilities of their militaries. The United States played a central role in drafting those constitutions and setting up its former enemies’ governments. To ensure success, American forces remained in Germany and Japan 80 years later.

The rebuilding of Germany and Japan didn’t begin until they committed to beating their swords into plowshares and promising to make war no more. The same consequences must apply to Hamas and Gaza.

Hamas must be forced to surrender unconditionally and accept the humiliation and consequences that go with it. Defeat must have a price.

Eric Levine is a New York attorney, political commentator and Republican fundraiser. He is a founding member of the law firm Eiseman, Levine, Lehrhaupt & Kakoyiannis, P.C., as well as an essayist on political and legal issues. A passionate advocate for Israel, he frequently appears on radio, television and in print to provide analysis and counter media bias.