Alan Hart : A defeat for Israel…?

My own speculation is that Netanyahu finally decided that it would be too costly for Israel in diplomatic and political terms to say “No” to Obama and many other leaders who insisted that Israel had to agree to a ceasefire on more or less Egypt and Hamas’s terms in order to prevent further de-stabilization in the region.



By Alan Hart


It’s too soon to know whether the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas will be more than a sticking plaster to be ripped off by more violence whether provoked by Israel or not, but while we wait for events to give us the answer, there is a good case for saying that under Netanyahu’s leadership the Zionist (not Jewish) state has suffered a significant defeat.

One small clue that Netanyahu and his leadership colleagues know this was a statement to the BBC this morning by Mark Regev, the prime minister’s Goebbels-like spin doctor. He said, “We didn’t want this escalation.” Even by Regev’s own standards that was a big, fat propaganda lie. It was to trigger the escalation that Netanyahu ordered the assassination of Hamas’s military chief. (It now seems more than reasonably clear that he was within an hour or so of signing an Egyptian-sponsored agreement for a prolonged truce when he was murdered).

The three main reasons for believing that Israel has suffered a significant defeat are these:

  1. Israel did not get what it wanted and was demanding – an unconditional and unilateral ceasefire by Hamas.
  2. Hamas’s isolation is over, ended. The Obama administration and European governments may still refuse to recognise Hamas and talk directly and openly to it, but they are as good as doing so when they engage with Egypt’s President Morsi.
  3. President Obama had the good sense to realise that he can do business with the pragmatic Morsi.

In today’s Ha-aretz there is a fascinating and revealing account by Barak Ravid of what happened behind Netanyahu’s closed doors. The essence of it was that Defense Minister Barak “wanted it” (the truce on more or less Egypt’s terms); Foreign Minister Lieberman (who subsequently changed his mind) started out “demanding a ground invasion”; and Netanyahu “vacillated”.

My own speculation is that Netanyahu finally decided that it would be too costly for Israel in diplomatic and political terms to say “No” to Obama and many other leaders who insisted that Israel had to agree to a ceasefire on more or less Egypt and Hamas’s terms in order to prevent further de-stabilization in the region. (The extent to which Netanyahu was worried about the possible consequences for Israel of saying “No” was indicated by the fact that a few rockets were fired into Israel after the ceasefire came into effect, and Netanyahu did not allow himself to be provoked into responding with more bombs and missiles).

That said it is also the case that Netanyahu’s negotiators did create some wriggle room for their master. How so? The ceasefire document is not a binding agreement. It is a list of undertakings which are still to be worked out in detail and agreed. (It has to be acknowledged that Zionism is without equal in the business of finding ways not to honor commitments it makes in agreements).

There are three main and related questions arising.

The first is to what extent will Israel actually lift its blockade of the Gaza Strip?

The second is to what extent will Egypt succeed in preventing Hamas being re-armed by smuggling even if President Morsi has the will to succeed on this front where Mubarak failed? (The nuclear-armed Zionist state insists that it must be allowed to go on expanding its arsenal with the latest weapons, actually for offensive purposes, but Hamas must not have any weapons for defensive purposes).

The third is does Hamas have the ability to prevent violent Islamic fringe groups firing rockets into Israel? (It has to be said that its ability to do so has not been helped by the assassination of its military chief).

Another interesting question is this: What impact if any will Netanyahu’s acceptance of a ceasefire on more or less Egypt and Hamas’s terms have on his chances of emerging from Israel’s January election with a stronger than ever and unchallengeable coalition majority?

According to a snap poll taken very soon after the ceasefire announcement, 70 per cent of Israel’s Jews said they were opposed to the deal, meaning, presumably, that Netanyahu was wrong to agree to it. If that is and remains the view of a majority, we can expect to see Netanyahu aligning himself even more closely with the forces of the truly fascist right between now and the election.

Editor’s note; Palestinians celebrate “truce for Peace,” despite their heavy losses in terms of human life. They are obviously not genocidal.

In a best case scenario the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas will last and life for the Palestinians of the Gaza Strip will improve, but the fundamental problem will remain – Israel’s on-going colonization and ethnic cleansing by stealth of the occupied West Bank, the proof that Zionism is not remotely interested in peace on terms the Palestinians could accept.


 Editor’s Note:  One thing to do is get this Gaza ad in every newspaper in the US!


Please contact them to place this ad in publications of your choice (they will customize it to the necessary size and specifications), or donate so they can put it in publications they select.

You can also download a PDF of the image to print on fliers at home. For more information go to : If Americans Knew


Short URL:

The views expressed herein are the views of the author exclusively and not necessarily the views of VNN or any other VNN authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors or partners and technicians. Notices

Apply for your VA Home Loan Now
Apply for your VA Home Loan Now
Get Your Loan Now
Get Your Loan Now
Apply for Jobs on Now
Apply for Jobs on Now
Austins School of Spa Technology
ME Online
slow aging
What Price Gold

Posted by on Nov 22 2012, With 0 Reads, Filed under Editors' Picks, Expert Opinions ME, Middle East Conflicts, News From the Region, War. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.


To post a comment, you must login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.
Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with our site and post your comment.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Legal Notice

Comments Closed

2 Comments for “Alan Hart : A defeat for Israel…?”

  1. Though Hart put the following as speculation and technically it is at the moment for the public, I do not believe it is speculation in London, Washington or Paris. I think Paris, London and perhaps Washington forced Netanyahu to stop his assault.

    From the article: “Netanyahu finally decided that it would be too costly for Israel in diplomatic and political terms to say “No” to Obama and many other leaders who insisted that Israel had to agree to a ceasefire on more or less Egypt and Hamas’s terms in order to prevent further de-stabilization in the region.”

    Cameron and Hollande were openly against a ground invasion (Obama less so publicly).

    One note: Clinton looked angry at Netanyahu in the photos I have seen of their first appearance together. Though the videos of the event may indicate differently, it was enough for Scott Pelley, anchor for CBS news, to say that she looked frosty towards Netanyahu. When an anchor is given the green light to say that, the Jewish billionaires and millionaires in America are seeing a PR disaster for Israel and are saying Enough is Enough.

  2. What possible difference will a cease-fire make? The Israelis are common thieves stealing the Palestinian land one acre, one settlement at a time. White phosphorus, high explosive, a snipers bullet, a bulldozer, starvation, lack of reasonable medical care, exposure, malnutrition… So many ways to die at the hands of God’s chosen people. If not today, Israel will possess all of the land the Palestinians once cherished. The US is not only culpable in these crimes, we are guilty before, during and after the fact. My government makes me want to puke!

Comments are closed


Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Join Our Daily Newsletter
  View Newsletter ARCHIVE


  1. The Special Interest Problem
  2. The Pentagon and Big Oil: Militarism and Capital Accumulation
  3. Re-elected Dilma wins in a Brazil broken in two
  4. Boyd Sets Up Treatment Court for Veterans
  5. State Plan Aimed at Helping Alabama Veterans
  6. Israel-First NeoCons Equal Anti-American Turncoats
  7. Thanks for Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan
  8. US lawlessness fuels global insecurity
  9. Treating Putin Like a Lunatic when He makes Sense
  10. ‘The Moving Wall’ honoring Vietnam veterans returns to Covina
  11. Group to Make 54 Apartments Available to Homeless Veterans
  12. U.S. publicly humiliates Israeli defense minister
  13. Russell Brand exposes 9/11 in must watch BBC interview
  14. Staged ‘terror’ in Ottawa pretext for police state
  16. Calling all NC veterans to get out and vote
  17. Veterans Honored in Various Events for Their Day
  18. Suspicious Death of Journalist Serena Shim: Hypocritical Western Media Remains Silent
  19. Kiev Elections Can’t Sanitise State of Mob Rule
  20. Bolivia expels US ambassador Philip Goldberg
  1. Old Jules: The founders did everything in their power to separate the individual citizen from the exercise of power...
  2. Old Jules: Nicely done piece of writing.
  3. Old Jules: Sophomoric rant. As though Zak and Free Republic have anything to do with the tsunami of hurt the US is...
  4. Rufus Peterson: Good job, Brandon. You’ve grasped what should be painfully obvious to all of us, but few seem...
  5. joe chuy-medina: Ron may want to review the videos of mcCain and one by Hillary testifying about how Russia brought...

Apply for VA Home Loan Now!

Military Veterans Radio