On June 17, 2008, Israel and Hamas, the militant and political organization in control of the Gaza Strip, announced a truce in hostilities beginning June 19 at 6 a.m. local time. Officially, Hamas and Israel did not negotiate the truce face to face but through the mediation of Egypt. Israel and Hamas have been in a state of war since June 2006.
Why Both Sides Want a Truce
For Israel, the psychological and political toll of a low-grade war with Hamas has been heavy. The government of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, never strong, has appeared at times ineffective and at times virtually powerless in the face of Hamas missiles, while retaliations by the Israeli military have been heavy-handed and ultimately ineffective: The military response has not stopped hostilities. Israel wants to get back Gilad Shalit , the Israeli soldier Hamas captured in a raid on an Israeli outpost in June 2006, escalating the violence. Hamas wants scores of Palestinians, including many underage Palestinians, freed from Israeli jails.Like Israel, Hamas has other reasons why it would favor a deal with Israel—for the moment.
Palestinians are to hold a presidential election in 2009, and parliamentary elections either in 2009 or in 2010. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas maintains that elections will not be held until Hamas and Fatah, the two principal Palestinian parties, mend their rift. Hamas controls the Gaza Strip, at least on paper. Fatah controls most of the West Bank not under Israeli occupation. A truce between Hamas and Israel would allow the organization, which has been struggling to preserve the mass of Palestinians’ allegiance, to regroup.
Terms of the Truce
Israeli officials say the Egyptian-mediated truce entail only a partial easing of the Israeli blockade of Gaza. They say the negotiations to get back Gilad Shalit will continue, while calm would enable more goods to enter Gaza. Israel was being imprecise about the amount of goods that would be allowed to enter the territory, but the Egyptian press said the flow of goods would resume its former levels by the end of June. But any truce was contingent on both sides ending violence—Hamas stopping to fire rockets at southern Israel, Israel stopping its own bombing raids and other kinds of attacks on the territory.
The truce was outlined in six points:
- Egypt sets the starting time of the truce (June 19 at 6 a.m.).
- Israel reopens the Karni and Sufa commercial crossings into the Gaza Strip on June 22, with the flow of goods set at 30 per cent of the levels before Hamas took over the territory in January 2006.
- Hamas guarantees that all Palestinian factions abide by the prohibition on the use of violence against Israel.
- By June 29, Israel is to lift all limits on the flow of goods through the Karni and Sufa crossings, with the exceptions of materials that could be used for explosives.
- Hamas and Fatah reach an arrangement on administering the Rafah crossing between Gaza and Egypt.
- Talks on the Rafah crossings and negotiations to over Shalit’s release as part of a prisoner swap with Hamas are to continue.
Talking Down the Prospects of Lasting Calm
Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was quick to warn that the truce was “fragile and likely to be short-lived.” Hamas’ al-Qassam Brigades’ English-language web site, for its part, headlined the news as “Truce Without Shalit,” a reference to Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Shalit has been a Hamas captive since.
The truce was initially believed to be conditional on Shalit’s release. Olmert insisted that it still was, while nevertheless saying that Israel would abide by the truce’s terms even though Shalit’s release was not expected. It was apparent that Olmert’s truce deal with Hamas was, in fact, not contingent on Shalit’s immediate release. As Olmert put it, “Gilad Shalit’s release is inseparable from the understandings reached in the terms for calm. Each day, I make efforts to return him to his parents. I believe that as part of the understandings that enabled this calm, we will be able to advance his release.” In other words, the truce itself is not conditional on his release.
Quoted in Haaretz, the Israeli daily, Olmert also said: “We have no illusions. The calm is fragile and likely to be short-lived. Hamas has not changed its skin. These are bloodthirsty and despicable terrorists who even today are doing all they can to harm Israeli civilians. Hamas is the address in Gaza, and it carries responsibility for everything that happens in Gaza.”
Olmert’s characterization of Hamas directing Gaza’s fate, however, is inaccurate: Read more about how Israel's withdrawal from Gaza did not end Israel's effective control of every Gazan's fate .
