Last week any pretense of a border between the Gaza Strip and northeast Sinai were literally blown away by the Hamas as they detonated explosives toppling the wall marking the international line with Egypt.  Previously tunnel traffic in arms, ammunition and terrorists between the two made a mockery of the “border” yet there were those who continued to insist that some sort of barrier existed.  The “breakout” engineered by the Hamas showed they were in full control of the Strip and in the showdown with Egypt they had the upper hand.  In essence Israel’s cutback in fuel and supplies to the pro-Hamas/Jihad Palestinian population is cited as the reason for the internal pressure cooker leading to the “escape” into Sinai.  Lacking in supplies, but nowhere near a humanitarian crisis the Hamas directed the destruction of the border barrier so scrupulously filmed by the Arab satellite station Al-Jazeera.  Hundreds of thousands streamed across into Sinai to buy basic necessities and the obligatory cartons of cigarettes.

Predictably, the Israeli effort to pressure Hamas and other terrorist organizations through restriction of fuel and other goods to the population of Gaza has begun to buckle under the weight of international criticism.  We predicted this outcome months ago (see “The Gaza Enemy,” Mid-East: On Target Archives, September 21, 2007); now we are watching the tragedy play itself out.  Hamas and UN agencies will naturally exaggerate the humanitarian catastrophe; world opinion will commiserate with the Palestinian victims of Israeli oppression; the true victims (the Israeli civilians targeted daily by Palestinian terrorist rockets) will be forgotten and ignored; and the Israeli government will assure the Palestinians that it will not permit a humanitarian crisis, thus negating the punitive threat value of the entire policy.  There may exist a worse way to confront the Gaza terrorists, but frankly we are hard pressed to think of one.

It is time for a post mortem on the visit by US Pres. George Bush to Israel and the Middle East last week.  For all the good intentions, there was nothing new.  As written previously in these columns, the Americans want to show the Palestinians the benefits of a final status agreement with Israel once it is negotiated in full.  There will be a two-state solution, no Palestinian refugee return, borders similar to those between Israel and the West Bank/Gaza from 1949 – 67 armistice lines and Israel’s security needs will be met concerning the curtailment of terrorism and defense along the Jordan River (even if this area may well end up in Palestinian hands).  The Palestinians can get on with economic development and Israel will no longer be at war.

The deplorable assassination of Pakistani presidential candidate Benazir Bhutto (apparently by Islamic extremists) has highlighted the contradictions and intricacies confronting Third World Moslem states as they grapple with issues of modern development in the face of traditional Islamic society.  The situation is somewhat less complicated in Arab/Moslem regimes as there are basically two avenues to follow – either a secular semi-dictatorship usually supported by the US and Europe or an adversarial resurgent Islamic regime preaching fundamentalist jihad.  Pakistan presents us with a triangle as Bhutto represented a third side to the options, that of a liberal democratic approach, even should it be more flawed than meets the eye.  In the Arab/Moslem world the liberal democratic approach receives little sympathy and has extremely limited representation in public discourse or representative assemblies.