As Israel's barbaric war in Gaza enters its third week, there are four main reasons why its wholesale slaughter of Palestinian civilians continues unchecked. The first is the terrible weakness of the UN Security Council in carrying out its declared task of maintaining international peace and security. Its inability to halt Israel's aggression is largely due to the overly-intimate – some would say unhealthy – US-Israeli relationship. The second reason is that, as Hamas is the only Palestinian movement putting up armed resistance to Israel, it is the only remaining obstacle to Israel's mastery of the whole of historic Palestine. Israel knows that if it fails to secure Hamas's unconditional surrender, it will in due course have to enter into peace talks, and cede territory to an eventual Palestinian state – something it has long sought to avoid. At this decisive moment in the 100-year old Israeli-Palestinian struggle, there is, therefore, much at stake for both sides. The third reason is the debilitating divisions in the Arab and Muslim world which have robbed it of any effective leverage on events. These divisions are myriad – between so-called ‘moderate' Arab states and their ‘radical' rivals; between those who have made peace with Israel and those who have not; between those who rely on American aid and protection and those who do not; between those who loathe and fear Iran and those who rely on it for support; between Sunni and Shiite Muslims. This is by no means an exhaustive list. In the Palestinian camp, there is nothing more tragic than the vicious war between Fatah and Hamas, which makes them both an easy prey for Israel. The fourth reason why the carnage in Gaza continues unchecked is that neither Israel nor Hamas is ready for a ceasefire because neither has yet achieved its war aims. Israel's aims can be listed as follows, in reverse order of importance: Stopping the rockets Hamas has been firing at the Negev; destroying the tunnels into Gaza from Egypt in order to prevent Hamas from rearming; restoring Israel's ‘deterrence' by means of an overwhelming display of force – with the ‘lesson' directed as much at Hezbollah, Syria and Iran, as at Hamas itself; crushing the Palestinians' aspirations for independent statehood by inflicting a decisive defeat on them; pre-empting, by a hoped-for sweeping victory, any attempt by the incoming Obama administration to re-launch Israeli-Palestinian peace talks. As might be expected, Hamas's war aims are the exact opposite of Israel's. They are to survive the current battering and continue to govern Gaza; to continue armed resistance until Israel lifts its crippling siege of Gaza, reopens the crossing points and withdraws its troops; to overshadow and eventually displace Fatah and the ineffective Palestinian Authority as the main representative of the Palestinian people; to win recognition of its own legitimacy from the international community; to force the European Union, and eventually the US and Israel, to end their boycott and engage in dialogue with it. Hamas rejected last Thursday UN Security Council Resolution which appealed for a ceasefire because, although it is a party to the conflict, it was not consulted on the Resolution's terms. In addition, the Resolution made no provision for the immediate lifting of Israel's siege of Gaza and the withdrawal of its forces. Hamas has, nevertheless, been making good headway in international public opinion, with demonstrations in its support in many parts of the globe. Israel's image, on the contrary, has taken a hammering because of the terrible suffering it has inflicting on a defenseless population . In Europe, there is much anger and shame that, under American and Israeli pressure, the EU demonized Hamas as a ‘terrorist organization,' refused to recognize its victory in the 2006 democratic elections, and has been unable to protect the civilians of Gaza from an unimaginable fate. Across France alone, there were on 10 January no fewer than 80 demonstrations to protest Israel's carnage. Only the United States can restore some semblance of sanity to the troubled Middle East. Urgently required is a vigorous and sustained effort aimed at bringing about a comprehensive peace. Can President-elect Barack Obama deliver? Some of his recent appointments, and those of Hilary Clinton at the State Department, do not signal a radical change of policy. Nevertheless, Obama knows that George W. Bush's illegal war in Iraq was profoundly misconceived, as was his ‘Global War on Terror'. Unduly influenced by pro-Israeli neo-conservatives, they were the wrong American response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and have done America an enormous amount of harm. The time has surely come to resolve the major conflicts of the Middle East, not to exacerbate them. Once Barack Obama takes office on Jan. 20, the question the world will be asking is this: Weighed down as he will be by a thousand problems, and held in check by strong pro-Israeli forces both inside and outside his administration, will he be ready to use up some of his precious political capital to put things right? No one should expect miracles from him. In the meantime, Gaza continues to bleed. __
