Best to avoid a ground operation

Last night a senior source suggested I wait before writing this article. An announcement about a cease-fire may be a mere three hours away, he said, adding that then again, it may be days away, as the situation is dynamic and uncertain.

It is now obvious that he knew that overtures were being made, directed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon, to facilitate a cease-fire, and that several cabinet members have felt that Operation Protective Edge has taken a turn.

But nothing is set in stone at this time, as there is no way of telling which way things would go under the (desired) Egyptian mediation. Former intelligence official and Senior Citizens Minister Rafi Eitan told me Monday of talks with senior Cairo officials, who seek to re-establish Egypt's control over Gaza Strip, for Egypt and Israel's sakes and contrary to Hamas' desires. That, however, would require a complex maneuver on an international level.

Only scarce information is available about the cease-fire negotiations as this time, and there is no real way of knowing what, if anything, has already been agreed upon. Based on very partial information, one can form only an initial position about this hurried and surprising move, which indicates that the Israel Defense Forces has dealt Hamas a debilitating, perhaps even critical blow.

Naturally, perception is everything. As I believed from the very beginning that Israel should avoid a complex ground incursion that may result in many casualties; and as I still believe that Israel would be unable to topple Hamas' regime in Gaza Strip outside of a larger regional coalition that would include Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia; and as I have maintained that this operation was about "crisis management" rather than solving the problem. I can only welcome the decision to declare a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas starting at 9 a.m. Only the naïve could have thought every operational objective could have been achieved.

Still, a cease-fire without a basic agreement would make the Egyptian-brokered negotiations between Israel and Hamas into a version of the West's negotiations with Iran, meaning that the weaker player is likely to procrastinate.

After firing nearly 1,000 rockets at Israel, Hamas can no longer withstand the airstrikes threatening its hold on Gaza. Hamas will therefore be relieved when a cease-fire is in place and its heads would be able to negotiate the organization's future from the comfort of a Cairo hotel.

Israel, on the other hand, is a democracy with homegrown back-stabbers, and if the cease-fire talks fail -- as they often do when one deals with extortionists the likes of Hamas -- it will not be the first to resume fire.

There are basic conditions for establishing the post-fighting balance of power, and those must be set under fire. Israel has offered "quiet for quiet," but not in the current situation, in which Hamas is beaten and defeated, and at least part of the anomaly of life on the border between the western Negev and the Gaza Strip can be rectified.

Rushed negotiations would result in less than favorable results. The IDF should not agree to hold its fire unless Hamas agrees to our terms.