Gaza: OK, So What's the Endgame?

As the death toll climbs above 300 and Israel threatens the next step of a ground invasion of Gaza, Juan Cole puts the point concisely:

What I can't understand is the end game here. The Israelis have pledged to continue their siege of the civilians of Gaza, and have threatened to resume assassinating Hamas political leaders, along with the bombardment....Do the Israelis expect the population at some point to turn against Hamas, blaming it for the blockade and the bombardment? But by destroying what was left of the Gaza middle class, surely they a throwing people into the arms of Hamas.

Rhetorically, the Israeli Government is pressing ahead, with Defense Minister Ehud Barak telling the Knesset, Israel's Parliament, "This is an all-out war against Hamas and its branches." This has been backed up by a Cabinet call-up of 7000 reservists, a step which should be approved by the Knesset on Monday.

Airstrikes continue, with the Hamas Interior Ministry amongst the latest targets. But as it becomes clear that, for all the destruction, the political situation in Gaza has not changed --- Hamas is still in control --- Israel faces its next decision. How many of the troops and infantry now massing on the border are sent across?

Ethan Bronner inadvertently captures the difficulty in a rather confused piece in The New York Times. He parrots the official but rather misleading line of "Israeli military commanders" that "they did not intend to reoccupy the coastal strip of 1.5 million Palestinians or to overthrow the Hamas government there". The aim is “to stop the firing against our civilians in the south and shape a different and new security situation there.”

Yet Bronner opens his piece with the assertion that the broader Israel objective is "to expunge the ghost of its flawed 2006 war against Hezbollah in Lebanon and re-establish Israeli deterrence".

A moment's reflection would highlight the contradiction, and thus the problem, for Israel. The 2006 war was not one of "deterrence". It was an attempt to shatter Hezbollah as an effective political and military force.

That attempt failed because, after Israel had inflicted all its military might in Lebanon, Hezbollah still remained, killing Israeli forces and avoiding its final destruction. More importantly, the organisation was politically stronger, a boost which means that today it is a key player in the future of the country.

So, to return to Juan Cole, who also notes the 2006 precedent of Israel bolstering, rather than breaking, its enemies:

By refusing to negotiate with Hamas, Israel and the United States leave only a military option on the table. The military option isn't going to resolve the problem by itself.

Meanwhile, the ripples of Gaza spread across the Middle East. The inaction of Arab Governments is prompting large demonstrations by their populations, criticising not only Israel and the United States but their own political leaders.