After several days of violence on the Gaza-Israel border saw at least seven Palestinian militants dead and over a dozen wounded on both sides, a tense calm started to set in on Wednesday afternoon and Thursday. If the Egyptian-mediated truce continues to hold, this will attest, among other things, both to the increased regional influence of the Muslim Brotherhood and its Gulf Arab allies and to Hamas's desire to shore up its diplomatic and political achievements of the past week.
A very public visit by the Emir of Qatar, hailed by the Palestinians as the breaking of "the political and economic blockade of the Gaza Strip," is one such victory for the dominant Gaza militant movement. A municipal election in the West Bank where its rival, the Palestinian Authority, took a beating, presented Hamas
(which did not participate) with another.
It is not completely clear what set off the current round of violence - gun battles, rocket and air strikes erupted on Monday, both sides pointing a finger at the other - but in contrast to previous episodes, Hamas bore the brunt of both the attacks and the casualties. Perhaps the militants did not want to be outdone by smaller terror groups such as Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees, acting provocatively on Iranian orders, and perhaps Israel also had some interest to embarrass further the Gaza rulers. In any case, the wider context of the clash, which could evolve into a redrawing of the Palestinian political map, cannot be ignored.
The visit of Qatar's emir Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani to the coastal enclave Tuesday was the first of its kind since the brief Palestinian civil war in 2007 which brought Hamas to power there (in fact, since at least 1999). It bestowed a measure of international recognition to Hamas and was widely perceived as a slap in the faces of both Israel and the Palestinian Authority. "Such visits give Hamas the impression that the visitors recognize their rule and that would reinforce the split and not help the reconciliation," an aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told the Associated Press.
Al-Thani entered Gaza from Egypt, underscoring the close cooperation between his kingdom and Egypt's ruling Muslim Brotherhood, whose offshoot is Hamas. He brought with him a check for over US$400 million, a part of which is allocated for a massive building project nicknamed "Hamad City." It bears noting the execution of the project will require that Egypt actively participate in the transfer of building materials into the strip, a move that will further erode the Israeli blockade and will increase Gaza's dependence on Egypt.
This in turn may increase the separation between the strip and the West Bank, though the emir could yet use his newly gained influence to try to broker a reconciliation agreement between the main Palestinian factions. His previous such attempt was torpedoed in November 2011 by the Gaza leadership of Hamas. This time around, not only would Hamas be much more cooperative - rumor has it that it is hoping to move its headquarters to Doha, and al-Thani's visit may well have been an occasion to advance such plans - but the Palestinian authority may be desperate to accept an extended hand. Among recent setbacks it suffered was Saturday's municipal election, labeled by the Palestinian news agency Ma'an a "failure". [1]
Less publicly, his visit was also a coup against Iran's influence in the area, which would explain why Tehran may have had an interest in the flare-up. As analyst David Roberts put it in an article in Foreign Policy Magazine,
[W]hile Israel and the Palestinian Authority may view Qatar's embrace of Hamas with chagrin, it is Iran that is the central loser in this drama … When Tehran stopped sending money to Hamas after the group failed to publicly support Iran's embattled ally in Syria, Qatar saw an opportunity to split the Palestinian group from its long-time sponsor. While its $400 million donation is earmarked for humanitarian development, not only is such support fungible, but there are doubtless other financial arrangements being made between Qatar and Hamas on this trip - further strengthening the ties between the Palestinian Islamist movement and Doha.
This circumstance further complicates Israel's role in the crisis. The Jewish State is in the middle of an election campaign, and members of the opposition accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak of intentionally escalating the hostilities. On the other hand, as Israeli analyst Herb Keinon noted, "[Netanyahu] said he brought security, but the events of the past few days seem to belie that. He needs quiet to run on a campaign ticket of having brought quiet."
The blow to the Israeli blockade on Gaza which the Emir of Qatar delivered may well have persuaded the Israeli leaders that they needed to convey a tough message. It appears, however, that they acted with considerable restraint in the strip, even as over 100 missiles rained on southern Israel. All of the Palestinian casualties in the exchange were militants.
On the other hand, Israel is widely believed to have carried out a bombing raid in Sudan on Tuesday, destroying a missile factory allegedly operated by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. It is quite possible that the factory's output was being smuggled into Gaza (the Sudanese information minister declined to answer a Reuters question about this [3]), which would mean that the operation was an indirect blow to both Iran and its proxies in the strip. In this way - and especially since organizations like Islamic Jihad are currently much more likely to receive such deliveries than Hamas - the raid may have quietly aided Qatar's mission.
The million-dollar question is whether any of these developments would bring closer a strike on the Iranian nuclear facilities. A prominent Israeli analyst called the operation in Sudan a "live-fire practice run" for the Islamic Republic, while the Qatari initiative to pry Hamas further out of Tehran's orbit can be interpreted in the same vein. However, for now this is a highly speculative interpretation. What seems much more certain is that major political developments on a more local level are underway.
