Gaza

The renewed fighting in Gaza is getting lots of coverage in the press and in the blogosphere. It really is awful to read about all about it, and there is something especially awful in the complete predictability of it.

Andrew Sullivan has a good summary of various reactions and opinions across the political spectrum. The vast majority of commentators spend time discussing the reasons why this particular burst of fighting occurred, or what exactly the US, or other states, should try to do about it.

One thing that is not discussed very often though is the degree to which other countries or states can actually have any significant influence. On the Hamas side, my thoughts are that there probably is a fair amount of leverage that could be exerted by Iran or Syria if they wished to do so. Everything I have read suggests that Hamas, much like Hezbollah, receives a large amount of its funding from Iran. However, is it really in Iran's interests right now to have this particular set of hostilities resolved easily or smoothly?

On the Israeli side though, I actually wonder how much leverage the US and other actors ultimately possess. Yes, the US provides billions of dollars of aid, materiel and technology transfers, but is this usable leverage? Could the US even attempt to use this support as a bargaining chip to force Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank as many people seem to believe ought to happen?

Frankly, I believe that on this particular issue, the Americans have lost control of their own foreign policy. AIPAC and other pro-Isreali lobby groups in Washington are incredibly smart operators and the cost for any member of the Senate or the House of Representatives to oppose aid to Israel is generally to high. The president has a lot more room to maneouver and perhaps Obama has some ideas here: he certainly can't do any worse than Bush.

The conventional wisdom is that the US will have to broker any final deal between the Palestinians and the Israelis. I would add an addendum to that, which would be that any final peace will only occur once the Israeli population really wants peace and is willing to confront the radical Zionists who make up the core of the settlers in the West Bank. From my reading of the situation this is not yet the case. There is something in the core of the Israeli soul that still dreams of a Greater Israel, and to confront that shadow side and the settler movement, seems like a step for which the Israeli people are not yet ready.

This is not, by any means, to exonerate the PLO or Hamas for their own unique and destructive contribution to the current political quagmire. Many writers have catalogued these in considerable detail. However, in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict it is Israel that occupies the land and has the overwhelming military advantage. To be blunt, they won the wars and hence hold most of the cards when it comes to negotiating any peace treaty.

If you put this altogether, especially given the current situation of settlements in the West Bank, I'd have to say I am pessimisstic on this particular issue being resolved any time soon. Nor do I have any confidence that any US administration, even one headed by Obama, will be able to do much to alter the fundamental dynamics that have taken hold of this conflict.