Israel may boost ground forces in Gaza

WASHINGTON, Jan. 12 (UPI) -- The Israeli army looks like it is belatedly preparing for a longer, more massive ground action than it originally planned.

As the Israeli incursion into Gaza enters its third week, the Israel Defense Forces appear to be easing back on the air attacks and revving up the ground action.

Reservists were called up last week, pushed through rapid training in urban conflict and flung into Gaza City.

Training for urban conflict, as the Soviet Red Army taught the Nazi Wehrmacht in Stalingrad in the fall of 1942, requires ground infantry and their supporting forces to be expert in a large number of extremely complex, demanding tactics. The Soviet 62nd Army at Stalingrad was led and taught by the world's leading expert on urban conventional war at the time, Gen. Vasily Chuikov, later five-star marshal of the Soviet Union. Over the past quarter-century, the regular Israeli army has been the best in the world at such operations.

Latest reports have the homes of Hamas leaders bombed while the Israeli troops move forward. Over the weekend Israeli ground forces pushed into Gaza City but then pulled back. The death toll, almost all Palestinian, now stands at around 900.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert says Israel is now close to reaching its goal in Gaza, but it is not clear what that goal is. Is it disabling Hamas' ability to function? Is it simply demonstrating to the 1.4 million inhabitants of Gaza that their support for Hamas -- which was demonstrated in a free and fair democratic election -- comes with a high cost?

Some reports from Israel have indicated there is already some frustration among the IDF leadership because Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak do not agree on what that endgame is. If that is true, it is very bad news for the Israelis. Clarity and full agreement on the strategic goals to be achieved in war have been recognized at least since Carl von Clausewitz as the most essential prerequisite for any successful outcome of military operations.

Meanwhile, Hamas is in battered-but-defiant mode and seems not in a hurry for a cease-fire unless it can claim some sort of concession from the Israelis, and it still seems doubtful that the Israelis are ready to offer that. The calling up of reserves to throw into Gaza suggests precisely the opposite.

As we have noted in previous analyses, the remarkably leisurely rhythm of operations that the Israelis have been conducting in Gaza neglects the sense of urgency and tight windows of opportunity that were the hallmarks of their military operations 50 and 40 years ago when Gen. Moshe Dayan led the IDF as chief of staff and then defense minister.

So far, the drawn-out nature of the Gaza incursion has not yet provoked a serious military, diplomatic or strategic backlash against the Israelis, but there are growing indications that this could happen.

Pro-American Egypt and Jordan are coming under increasing attack from Iran and Syria for not sticking up for the Gazans. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and King Abdullah II of Jordan are facing growing pressure to open their borders to Gazans and West Bank Palestinians, respectively. And as we have noted previously, the current uncritical, strong and reliable support from the United States for the Israelis in their Gaza operations is likely to change dramatically as soon as President-elect Barack Obama and his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, take office.

The Washington Times reported Monday that current U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is upset that President Bush refused to support the Security Council cease-fire resolution that she had spent three days negotiating. The newspaper said Bush had previously assured Olmert that the United States would not support the measure. U.S. abstention on the Security Council resolution was therefore a compromise on the issue.

However, The Washington Times reported possible splits in the Hamas leadership, too. The newspaper also reported Monday that at a weekend meeting in Cairo, the Hamas leadership in Gaza was ready to accept an Egyptian cease-fire proposal but that it was nixed by the delegation from Damascus representing hard-liner Khalid Mashaal.

As we have predicted before in these columns, the strategic outcome of the Gaza conflict could therefore come down to who shows more fortitude in the current confrontation -- Hamas or Israel. But time is ultimately on Hamas' side, and it is the Israelis who must force a conclusion if they want to achieve anything they can present plausibly as a victory. As Winston Churchill said, in war it does not matter who is right, but who is left.