(Photo: Flash/90)

P

alestinians have long been accused of never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity to make peace.

Can that same phraseology now be applied to Israel, who — with a cabinet decision to adhere to a tenuous cease-fire — fumbled a chance to deal Hamas a mortal military blow?

The answer is, it depends how far ahead you look.

The cabinet heard two voices, says Maj.-Gen. (res.) Yaakov Amidror, the former national security advisor to the prime minister and onetime head of the National Security Council. Speaking to the foreign press on a conference call after the cabinet decision Thursday evening, Amidror said one voice advocated a major military campaign, contending Hamas will never make peace with Israel, so strike hard now, when they’re weakest.

The second view — which won the day — suggested Israel faces a far more serious military threat in Syria from Iran and Hezbollah and can’t afford to open a second major front.

A Gaza invasion would risk the lives of thousands of IDF soldiers in serpentine streets and underground passageways. The IDF would have to level hundreds of residential buildings to ferret out Hamas, bringing the wrath of the international community down on Israel.

“Hamas not only fights within the civilian population, but in many cases, eight to ten levels underneath them,” Amidror said. “Collapsing those buildings means that all the civilians living inside might be killed. It would be a very problematic, costly war for Israel.”

It’s already been a very problematic, costly battle for Jewish residents near the Gaza border; they have been subjected to weeks of rocket attacks and sleepless nights in air raid shelters, along with incendiary kite terror that has burned farms and crops beyond recognition.

At a time when Israel enjoys unprecedented support from a US administration, I asked Amidror, why would the Netanyahu government be so hesitant to take the battle to Hamas?

“With all due respect, when we make a decision about such an operation, the reaction in Washington is not the number one factor,” he answered. “It’s very important, but the main issue is what we stand to gain versus the costs. The ones who have to pay those costs from the consequences of our decisions live right here in Israel.”

The risk of the unknown helps to explain the cabinet decision in the short term, but has Israel lost its last, best chance to bring Hamas to its knees before the Trump administration publicizes its long-awaited peace plan?

The economic rehabilitation of Gaza is certain to be chief among the recommendations to underpin a comprehensive regional peace.

A recalcitrant Hamas will feign indignity with the plan, while privately celebrating the reward of big international bucks brought about by their terror campaign. Israel, conversely, will be forced to applaud Trump’s initiative out of political necessity, even while feeling constrained from delivering forceful responses to any new Hamas terror, for fear of being viewed as the spoiler. (Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 723)