Love and hate relation between Netanyahu and Hamas

The recent 11-day encounter between Israel and Hamas clearly demonstrates that Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu hates Hamas the most. Netanyahu’s retaliation against Hamas was based on one fact ‘people of Gaza refuses to become subservient to Israel’s dictate, while people living areas under the control of Palestinian Authority and West bank don’t behave in the similar manner’.

This point gets credibility because elections in PA administered area were postponed on the fears that Hamas has also developed its strong clout there. It may also be said that Israel wanted to destroy Hamas infrastructure, which could only be done by dragging it into an encounter, paving way for the most precise air attacks, including blowing up of tunnels and the tower housing Hamas intelligence office.

The media outlets towing Israeli policy are saying: 1) Hamas has suffered a devastating blow. Its military assets, administration infrastructure and underground system of tunnels have been destroyed, 2) already difficult humanitarian conditions of two million Palestinians living in Gaza has become even worse, 3) the citizens are incapable of paying the high price of Hamas’s aggressive ideology and 4) a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, based on two-state solution is not yet achievable.

Hamas is also being portrayed as ‘bad boy’ adamant at keeping its control over Gaza and pursuing the role of leading the Palestinian national movement and of taking over the PLO.

It may sound a bit shocking, but it is reality that Israelis are sick and tired of Netanyahu’s policy of maintaining Hamas’s control in Gaza. The money, supplied to Hamas by Qatar with the support of Netanyahu, enabled the huge military build-up that Israel is now trying to destroy.

It is not only Israelis, several Arab countries, who don’t like Hamas want to see the end of its regime in Gaza.

With the support of the international community and under the auspices of the Arab League, it is being proposed to establish a civilian, non-partisan Palestinian administration in Gaza. The new order in the Gaza will be enshrined in a new UN Security Council resolution and resolution from the Arab League.

If such a non-partisan administration is established, Qatar will no longer be dominantly involved in Gaza. Other Gulf countries will replace it. The external security of the Gaza could be under the responsibility of Egypt. Domestic security would be under a new police agency, reporting to the civil administration, not to Hamas.

Israel expresses its readiness to assist in the activities of the new Gaza administration, including those involving trade, labor, energy and activity

This alternative path will promise to offer people living in Gaza a safer and better future. The citizens of Israel living in the South would gain the calm and security they deserve after thousands of rockets hitting them for more than two decades.

Whatever the next step is to improve the Gaza situation, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will not be resolved. The International quartet, together with the Arab quartet will encourage the parties to resume negotiations for a permanent status agreement based on two states, which may not be achieved in near future.

Copper price on the rise

Copper prices rose on Monday as a softer USD spurred modest purchases, but gains were capped by concerns over price curbs on industrial metals in top consumer China. Benchmark copper on the London Metal Exchange (LME) was up 0.3% at US$9,916 a ton at 1014 GMT.

However, prices of the metal used widely in the power and construction industries are down 8% since touching a record high of US$10,747.50 a ton earlier this month.

“The USD is giving some support to copper, but overall the mood is negative,” one metals trader said. “Still, the market did need a breather and consolidation.”

China’s market regulators warned industrial metal companies to maintain “normal market order” during talks on the significant gains in metals prices this year.

China’s government also said last week that it would manage “unreasonable” price increases for commodities such as copper, coal, steel and iron ore.

Some concern about supplies on the LME market has narrowed the discount for cash copper over the three-month contract to about US$14 a ton from US$28 last week.

Supporting copper is political uncertainty in Peru and top producer Chile. An overhaul of Chile’s market-orientated constitution is under way and the country is debating whether to increase royalties on miners.

Peru, the No. 2 producer, is heading for a polarized June presidential election. Leading in the polls is a little-known socialist who wants to redistribute mining wealth.

A likely surge in reviewable energy demand, particularly windmills is set to drive a surge in copper demand. It is estimated that the quantity of copper required per wind turbine is staggering at 63,000 pounds.

A week ago, price of the basic metal surged to a record high because of supply chain disruptions. By the end of the week it had cooled off on efforts by China to rein in the commodity market rally.

Now copper price is on the way up again, and this is likely to be a steady trend. The reason for this is renewable energy—and more specifically wind energy. Offshore wind turbines require 8 tons of copper for every megawatt of generation capacity. According to data from the International Energy Agency, “An average turbine of 3.6MW will contain close to 29 tons of copper.”

This upward trend in demand for copper will only intensify in the coming years as the world expands its renewable power generation capacity. It is likely to be supported by the constant threat of a supply disruption like the one in Chile that spurred the latest reversal in copper’s fortunes.

Earlier, copper price rebounded by concerns of supply disruptions in Chile and signs that Chinese demand is picking up.

Workers at BHP Group’s remote operations center in Santiago rejected the company’s final wage offer, with almost 97% of the union’s members opting to strike. Under Chilean labor rules, BHP now has the right to call for five days of government mediation. Meanwhile, demand in top user China is recovering after prices retreated, Jinrui Futures Co. said in a note, pointing to a spike in the domestic spot premium.

Bets on tight supplies and rising use have fueled a year-long rally in copper, which touched an all-time high before gains ebbed. The risk of a strike poses an added threat to output from the top copper-mining country, which already faces a potential giant tax hike. A proposal to tax Chilean copper sales at rates of as high as 75% is rippling all the way to Peru, where the leading presidential candidate wants to impose a similar measure.

“LME metals have started the new week on a firmer footing amid a slew of news stories,” Ed Meir, an analyst at ED&F Man Capital Markets, said in a note. “We are watching copper in particular; we learned that a union representing workers at BHP’s Escondida and Spence mines rejected an offer on a future contract, raising the risk of a strike at these sizable facilities.”

Israelis march in Tel Aviv for peace and coexistence

Thousands of Israelis marched in Tel Aviv on Saturday evening in a show of support for peace and coexistence between Jews and Arabs after two weeks of intense violent riots across the country. 

Protesters also voiced support for the recent ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that came into effect early Friday, called on the government to take immediate action to end Israeli occupation in the West Bank and to reach peace with the Palestinians.   

The mass march was organized by the "Standing Together" and "Breaking the Silence" movements. It left Rabin Square in Tel Aviv and made its way toward Habima Square.

Speakers included well-known Israeli novelist and left-wing activist David Grossman, author ʻAwdah Bishārāt, Joint List leader Ayman Odeh and MK Tamar Zandberg (Meretz).

"I hear politicians and security officials speak about another round of fighting in a few months or years, while being blind to the 7 million Palestinians living between the [Jordan] river and the [Mediterranean] sea," Odeh said. "There are two peoples living here and both deserve the right for self-determination." 

"These past few days have shown us how life in this country can look like - a nightmare," Zandberg added. "We don't want to start waiting for the next war, but to change direction toward peace - to live together in true partnership."

A similar protest took place last Saturday at Habima Square, which was one of several protests attended by Jews and Arabs across the country that called for peace and for coexistence amid the nationwide riots and the military operation in Gaza.

Jews and Arabs gathered daily during Operation Guardians of the Walls on bridges and intersections along the country and protested against the ongoing violence.

Also on Saturday, hundreds gathered outside the Prime Minister's Residence in Jerusalem, calling on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to resign and blaming him for the escalation in Gaza and claiming that he deliberately extended the operation for no reason but personal interest.

Earlier Saturday, about 200 people marched along the streets of the mixed city of Jaffa, voicing support for coexistence between Arabs and Jews while visiting small local businesses.

 

What could be likely impact of Gaza crisis on South Asia?

While some analysts may say South Asia is not a party to the Gaza conflict, the region is still vulnerable to its potentially destabilizing effects. It poses security risks within the region, including violent protests and terrorist attacks.

It is worth exploring what the crisis means for South Asia, which does not have common border with the Middle East. India and Nepal have long-standing links to Israel and Bhutan normalized ties in December 2020. As against this Pakistan fully support the Palestinian cause.

India has strengthened its ties with Israel significantly. Relations between the two countries have grown stronger under Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. He became the first sitting Indian prime minister to visit Israel. India has supported the Palestinian cause in the past. In 2018, Modi became the first Indian prime minister to visit the Palestinian territories too.

India’s ambassador to the United Nations issued a bit confusing statement on the conflict. He condemned Palestinian violence and described Israel’s use of force as retaliatory, but in the same breath affirmed India’s strong support for the Palestinian cause and two-state solution.

As against this, Pakistan has put to rest all lingering speculation that it could be one of the next countries normalizing ties with Israel. Pakistan made it clear that it will only recognize Israel when a Palestinian state is established.

Some analysts say the current conflict also poses security risks for South Asia. It could spark pro-Palestinian protests that could lead to violence. They also fear that some non-state actors or miscreants hiding in Afghanistan may enter Kashmir and try to put the valley inferno.

Washington must actively manage Israel-Palestine conflict it can’t end

The administration of US President Joe Biden entered office expecting to take a less proactive approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than many of its predecessors. Four days into the recent war between Israel and Hamas this approach was evident. 

Biden responded to a question,“I have spoken to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel had a right to defend itself, and that he hoped the fighting would be over sooner rather than later.”

The conflict requires management, because conditions simply do not exist for its resolution. Sadly, Biden administration has not yet put an ambassador in Israel (even an interim one) or a consul general in Jerusalem to deal with the Palestinians. Instead, management was left to one poorly staffed, midlevel official in the State Department. The Biden administration deserves credit for intervening at a higher level to get Netanyahu to stop the evictions, marches, and Israeli police violence in East Jerusalem.

Before the outbreak of this latest conflict, there was hope that a new government would be formed in Israel that would put an end to Netanyahu’s rule. Yair Lapid (the head of the Yesh Atid party) and Naftali Bennett (the head of the Yamina party) were about to cobble together a left-center-right coalition that would depend on the support of Arab parties to scrape together a majority vote of confidence.

Then a shocking spate of mob violence broke out between Jews and Arabs, spreading from Jerusalem to other Israeli cities. This severely complicated the task of building a government. Even if a unity government emerges, its first prime minister will be Naftali Bennett. Among Israel’s leaders, he is the most dedicated opponent of an independent Palestinian state and the most dedicated proponent of annexing the West Bank.

In the coming days, once the IDF has completed its destruction of Hamas’s infrastructure and eliminated as many of the leaders of its armed wing as it can find, Netanyahu will likely be willing, too. Usually cautious, he will not want to go into a fifth election with a war raging. Already, he is being blamed for the disruption to Israeli life. 

The world has seen Israel-Hamas wars before—the last one was in 2014. This time it is alleged that Hamas, with the assistance Iranian-backed Palestinian Islamic Jihad, fired rockets indiscriminately. Israel retaliated disproportionately. The United States supports Israel's right to defend itself. Europe wags its finger at Israel. Hamas eventually decides it has made its point. Qatar and Egypt mediate a cease-fire based on the usual “quiet for quiet” deal. Both sides bury their dead, clear the rubble, and go back to business as usual while the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Hamas’s Ezzedeen al-Qassam Brigades prepare for the next round.

The Biden administration’s approach suggests that Washington will be comfortable with another ceasefire, as it has other priorities. These include pandemic, economic recovery, climate change, China’s rise and Iran’s nuclear ambitions, to mention a few. The president’s deference to Netanyahu’s timetable is indicative of this change in approach, in which the parties are left to deal with the conflict.

Every crisis creates an opportunity. Could the circumstances this time create an opportunity for Washington to step up its engagement? Could the United States progress toward its avowed goal of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?

The answer, unfortunately, is no. The status quo actually suits both sides quite well and neither has an interest in changing it. Hamas was upset by the cancellation of Palestinian elections, in which it hoped to extend its influence to the West Bank. In exchange for that it took advantage of a confluence of Jewish-Arab confrontations in East Jerusalem to extend its influence there. It fired rockets toward Jerusalem. That in turn enraged Netanyahu, who was content to have Hamas rule in Gaza but not in the West Bank, and certainly not in East Jerusalem.

Hamas hopes to enhance its standing among Palestinians; Israel hopes to reestablish its deterrence against Hamas’s attacks on its citizens. Neither side is interested in having the United States broker a two-state solution. Hamas is dedicated to a one-state solution in which Israel does not exist; Netanyahu is committed to a three-state solution in which Hamas rules in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority presides over West Bank enclaves.

The third party to this conflict—Abu Mazen—would love to see the United States re-engage, because that would help make him relevant again. But American negotiators have had enough experience with Abu Mazen and believe that he is in no position to accept the compromises necessary to achieve a two-state solution. He fears, he will be denounced as a traitor by Hamas for any concession he makes to Israel, Abu Mazen intends to go into the history books as the leader who refused to compromise Palestinian rights.

Resolution to block arms sale to Israel won’t pass the Senate

An effort by Sen. Bernie Sanders to block a US$735 million arms sale to Israel appears doomed in the Senate. His effort is largely symbolic, and short-lived, as he faces multiple headaches that essentially guarantee his resolution won’t pass the Senate. 

Midnight Friday is the end of the 15 days for this particular commercial sale to Israel, and the export license can be issued after that. It is usually done so pretty much automatically when time expires.

“Our goal must be to bring, to do everything possible, under very, very difficult circumstances to bring the Israelis and the Palestinians together,” Sanders said. “That is the best way we fight terrorism, not just give support to Israel. We need an even handed approach.”

Typically when lawmakers try to prevent an arms sale — something Congress has never accomplished through a joint resolution — they are able to force a vote, with passage requiring only a simple majority in the Senate by using the Arms Export Control Act to bypass the 60-vote filibuster.

That means Sanders would need 51 votes, or 50 votes and Vice President Harris to vote against the administration’s arms sale.

With deep Democratic divisions over what tactics the administration should deploy against Israel, a long-time ally that typically enjoys bipartisan support, Sanders does not appear to have a path to the votes he needs.

Among those opposing the resolution is Sen. Bob Menendez, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. “I wouldn't be supporting it,” Menendez said.

Sen. Ben Cardin also said he isn’t on board, adding that he doesn’t think there are 50 votes in the Senate to try to block the sale. “I’m not supportive of his resolution,” Cardin said. “I have confidence that the Biden administration is handling it properly.”

Sen. Chris Murphy, who has used the same provision of the Arms Export Control Act to try to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia — said he was waiting to get briefed before taking a position on the sale to Israel.

Sen. Tim Kaine, a member of the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committees, declined to take a position on Sanders’s resolution but signaled that he trusted the Biden administration’s approach. “The sale is going to take place a year from now ... I hope they are talking to them about the proposed use of these weapons,” Kaine said.

While a growing number of Democrats, including leadership in both chambers, publicly backed efforts for a cease-fire, calling off the arms sale didn’t garner nearly as much support.

Even Sen. Rand Paul, a libertarian-minded Republican who typically supports blocking arms sales, said he wouldn’t back the resolution. "I have been opposed in the past to arms sales to people who I think are acting in a way that's sort of an undemocratic way, a tyrannical way," Paul said. "I think what I see Israel doing is acting in self-defense."

Most arms sales are subject to a 30-day congressional review period during which lawmakers can attempt to block the deal if they want. But some close allies, including Israel, are afforded a 15-day review period, which runs out this week.

But a disagreement has cropped up over when the review window expires and, once it does, what it means for Sanders’s ability to force a vote. “I think procedurally he may be out of time,” Menendez said. “But I’m not sure, we’ll see what the parliamentarian has to say.”

The Senate aide and Cardin both said they expected that once the review window expires, Sanders’s resolution loses its privileged status that allows him to force a quick vote.

Under the fast-track procedures, Sanders still needs to let the resolution sit in the Foreign Relations Committee for 10 calendar days before he can try to bring it to the Senate floor. And the House is out of town until mid-June, well past the congressional review period.

What after ceasefire?

Israel and Hamas finally agreed to a ceasefire on Thursday, ending a bruising 11-day war that caused widespread destruction in the Gaza Strip and brought life in much of Israel to a standstill. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepted the Egyptian proposal and Hamas was quick to follow the suit.

In a statement, Netanyahu’s office said the security cabinet unanimously approved the proposal after recommendations from the military chief of staff and other top defence officials. The statement boasted of significant achievements in the operation, some of which are unprecedented.

The agreement would close the heaviest round of fighting between the bitter enemies since a 50-day war in 2014, and once again there was no clear winner. Israel inflicted heavy damage on Hamas but was unable to prevent the rocket fire that has disrupted life for millions of Israelis for more than a decade.

The fighting began on May 10, when Hamas fighters in Gaza fired long-range rockets toward Jerusalem after days of clashes between Palestinian protesters and Israeli police at the Al-Aqsa Mosque compound.

Israel launched hundreds of airstrikes targeting what it said was Hamas’ military infrastructure. Hamas fired over 4,000 rockets at Israeli cities, with hundreds falling short and most of the rest intercepted.

The OIC statement came after a virtual meeting in which Saudi Arabia condemned the violation of the sanctity of Muslim holy sites and evictions of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem. Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud urged the global community to end the escalation in violence and revive peace negotiations based on a two-state solution.

Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates called for a ceasefire. "De-escalation and the highest degree of restraint are important to avoid dragging the region to new levels of instability," said UAE Minister of State for International Cooperation Reem al-Hashimy.

“The massacre of Palestinian children follows the purported normalization,” Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said. “This criminal and genocidal regime has once again proven that friendly gestures only aggravate its atrocities.” Zarif accused Israel of “genocide and crimes against humanity”.

"Each time Israel hears a foreign leader speak of its right to defend itself it is further emboldened to continue murdering entire families in their sleep," Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki told the Security Council.

The OIC video conference meeting attracted criticism on countries like Bahrain, Morocco, Sudan and the United Arab Emirates, which reached normalization deals last year to recognize Israel. Supporters of the Palestinians criticized the countries for recognizing Israel before the formation of an independent Palestinian state.

Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu joined Zarif in criticizing the normalization. Cavusoglu called for an international protection mechanism for Palestinian civilians and told the OIC that Israel should be held accountable for war crimes and that the International Criminal Court should play a role.

The United States told the United Nations Security Council that it has made clear to Israel, the Palestinians and others that it is ready to offer support should the parties seek a ceasefire to end the worsening violence by Israel in Gaza.

"The United States has been working tirelessly through diplomatic channels to try to bring an end to this conflict," US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the 15-member council. "Because we believe Israelis and Palestinians equally have a right to live in safety and security."

"We call upon the US to shoulder its responsibilities, take a just position, and together with most of the international community support the Security Council in easing the situation," said Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, who chaired Sunday's meeting because China is president for May.

UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said the United Nations is "actively engaging all sides toward an immediate ceasefire" and called on them "to allow mediation efforts to intensify and succeed".

Way Forward

These quotes clearly indicate that the root cause of the problem is known to all and they are also aware of the solution. Following two states theory can help in establishing sustainable peace in the region. There is a need to convert ‘Gaza the world’s largest open air prison’ into home for Palestinians. United States and other world powers should support Palestine Authority (PA) to initiate economic activities. On top of all Israel must immediately stop eviction of Palestinians from Jerusalem and construction of settlements on occupied land.