ISRAEL's strategic focus in 2009 will be on Iran's nuclear plans, on Syria and, to a lesser extent, on Lebanon, arenas where the arrival of the Obama administration in Washington may prompt shifts in tactics. But the nearer-term risks next year for both Israelis and the Palestinians lie a lot closer to home, where not only could fighting increase between Israelis and Palestinians but where risks have risen of internecine bloodshed inside each camp. Deep ideological fissures on both sides make for an exponentially greater risk of violent conflict, analysts say, who also note the uncertainties of an Israeli election in February as well as uncertainties about new US policies. For Palestinians, much of the focus of potential violence remains their internal split, between Hamas who rule the Gaza Strip and President Mahmoud Abbas's Western-backed Fatah, which holds sway in the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Israelis, disillusioned with or hostile to negotiations predicated on ceding occupied land to a Palestinian state which could coexist with the Jewish state, look likely to re-elect hawkish ex-premier Benjamin Netanyahu in a Feb. 10 ballot – effectively voting out Washington's current vision for peace. “Prospects for reconciliation have never seemed bleaker,” said Nicolas Pelham of the International Crisis Group. “In both Israeli and Palestinian society, there is a sense of leadership crisis in terms of lacking people who can confront internal opposition in order to maintain a two-state settlement.” Further afield, Israel, which is assumed to have its own nuclear arsenal, rejects Iran's insistence that its nuclear program is not a bid for weapons to threaten the Jewish state. Israeli leaders want Barack Obama to keep pressure on Tehran. They are also pursuing peace talks with Syria and hoping for more US engagement on a strategy to weaken Damascus's ties to Iran and its support for Lebanon's Hezbollah, and for Hamas. But in terms of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, the diplomatic stasis is raising the risk of open conflict. Flashpoint Gaza Many analysts point to tinderbox Gaza, across whose border guerrillas and Israeli forces have been trading fire despite a six-month-old truce that formally ends this week. Israel is in no rush to invade the impoverished coastal strip, but that mood would quickly change were the Palestinians to inflict heavy civilian casualties – say, with an improvised rocket from Gaza that hit a school or other large group. Such an attack could “wreck the calm and lead to escalation,” said the Israeli military intelligence commander, Major-General Amos Yadlin. The losses attendant on a Gaza offensive could draw a resumption of Hamas suicide bombings in Israel. But there could also be an effect in the West Bank, where Hamas loyalists accuse Abbas's administration of siding with Israel against them. “If there were an uprising in the West Bank, it would be against the Palestinian Authority security services, which are collaborating with the Zionist occupier,” said Mushir Al-Masri, a Hamas official in the Gaza Strip. Beholden to the international donors who also support his security forces, Abbas is unlikely to abandon rapprochement with Israel – let alone opt to fight it – however frustrated he may be at the lack of progress toward a Palestinian statehood deal. But pressure on Abbas to shift course could mount should a recent rash of rampages by Jewish settlers in the West Bank against Palestinians turn deadly, especially given views the Israeli state treats its ultranationalist fringe too leniently. Michael Oren, a military historian with the Shalem Centre in Jerusalem, said Israel would be forced to confront the radical settlers should its troops become victims of their violence. “Israeli society is quirky,” Oren said. “If a soldier were to be killed, Israeli support for the settlers would plummet, even among those who are well
