Israeli editors reflect on the Gaza retaliation

By JEWISH REVIEW

article created on: 2009-01-01T00:00:00

The Jerusalem Post discusses the aftermath of the Dec. 28 air-force attack in Gaza, as reflected in the international press, and wonders “how an international community that can’t bring itself to explicitly support Israel’s operation against the most intransigent of Muslim fanatics expects to play a positive role in facilitating peace in this region.” The editor concludes by stating that “Hamas must be stopped. And the civilized world must help stop it.”

Ma’ariv avers that “If there is anything that Hamas cannot allow itself, it is a show of weakness,” and predicts that “Hamas will do its utmost in order to respond.” The author speculates that if Israel shows determination in the face of painful Hamas counterstrikes and if Hamas targets are struck amidst the heavy damage being inflicted on Gaza, “There is a chance that it will break first; it will never say so, but events on the ground will tell.”

Yediot Aharonot observes that “The [Second] Lebanon War also began with a successful aerial assault,” and cautions that “This operation, as well, could continue for several weeks until the minimal goals that have been set for it are met.” The author suggests that the success of ‘Operation Cast Lead’ depends, to a large extent, “on the stamina, resiliency and endurance of Israeli society and its leadership,” and recalls that “In the [Second] Lebanon War, we did not fare so well in this respect and paid the price.” The paper believes that Hamas has yet to recover from Israel’s opening strike but warns that when it does, “it will be capable of launching 200-300 rockets a day,” thus putting the Israeli home front to the test. The author claims that to realize the limited goal of improving the security situation in the south, the IDF must strike at the Hamas leadership, infrastructure and personnel, and “at its economic oxygen—the tunnels.”

Haaretz calls on the government to define the objectives of Operation Cast Lead, and states that “Even if the invasion continues for many days and even weeks, it will end in an agreement or at least an understanding similar to that reached last June.” The editor assumes that “the military message Israel sent was fully understood. It would be best not to turn it into a disaster that would preclude a future agreement.”