Cease-Fire in Gaza

Whether there is war or peace in Israel is none of my concern, although I have hospitality bonds with some Israelis that mean that I ought to be on their side if they are attacked and forced to defend themselves. The coming of the ceasefire announced yesterday surprised me a bit, however, in spite of the fact that our own incoming President was pushing for one rather strongly. It doesn't really make strategic sense for Israel; it does for Hamas, but why would anyone give a deadly enemy such relief? 

Sun Tzu says -- wisely enough -- generally to leave a road for your enemy to retreat upon, so you don't have to fight to the last man. But Hamas isn't going anywhere. This was always going to be a fight on Sun Tzu's "death ground." Structurally the conflict sounds like "enclosed ground," but the fact that no retreat is possible or contemplated shows the truth of the conflict that was forced upon Israel. 

It may be that peace is earnestly desired, even by many right-leaning Israelis, because of the pain of war. The numbers still don't come close to supporting the harsh language used against Israel, by the way: even by very Palestine-friendly estimates, we are under 50,000 dead in a year and a half of intense urban warfare. That's still less than one percent of the population of the Palestinian territories (0.891%), and about one-third-of-one-percent of Palestinians total (0.338%). Talk about 'genocide' remains irrational nonsense; if Israel had been set upon killing as many as possible, it could have posted much bigger numbers. It's a measure of how little they wanted to kill innocents that such intense fighting in a densely populated area has resulted in so few casualties -- cf. US efforts in the battle of Mosul, where the numbers there are blurry but run as high as 33,000 enemy/civilian dead (to stick with the 'numbers most favored by our opponents' metric used with the Gaza conflict) in only half a year.

There are two distinct reactions I have noticed from my Israeli friends. One set is disappointed, but blames their own leadership rather than Trump: they feel betrayed by a leadership that never really wanted to finish Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, but always wanted to find some way to return control of Gaza to them. The other set is quite happy, believing that this will represent an end to the hostages' suffering (those still alive, in any case) and a potential for a return to stability. This set views Trump very positively, and is currently engaged in sending symbolic gifts to Mar-a-Lago. 

It's their business, but I don't think any peace can last. That's their business, too.