Special to WorldTribune.com

TEL AVIV — Israel agreed to harsh conditions in exchange for a
ceasefire with the Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip, a report said.

The Institute for National Security Studies said Israel ended the latest
mini-war with Hamas amid a decline in deterrence. The institute, in a report by former Israeli military intelligence chief Amos Yadlin, said the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to an
Egyptian-sponsored ceasefire in November that harmed Israel’s military and political standing.

“The first drafts presented by Egypt were unacceptable from Israel’s
point of view, and even the final document has elements that are
disadvantageous for Israel,” the report, titled “In the Aftermath of
Operation Pillar of Defense,” said. “This is a major topic for investigation by the political echelon.”

The report raised the prospect that the ceasefire agreement marked a
political achievement for Hamas and challenged Israel’s legitimacy and
freedom of action. Yadlin said “most of the agreement’s clauses are
problematic for Israel.”

Yadlin said the ceasefire agreement marked a political success for Hamas and could pave the way for the next mini-war. He said the timing would depend on the military buildup of the Islamic regime and its militia allies.

The report urged the Israeli government and military to examine the
erosion in deterrence since 2009. Yadlin said Israel must ensure that Hamas,
which fired rockets into Tel Aviv and near Jerusalem, could not hide behind
its new foreign allies, particularly neighboring Egypt.

“It is important to make every effort to prevent Hamas and Islamic Jihad
from rebuilding their strategic arsenals, and if a trickle of rockets
begins, the Israeli response must be such that it will affect Hamas’s
considerations in deciding whether to resume firing, that is, it must be a
much stronger response than in the years between 2009 and 2012,” the report
said.

The report said Hamas’ goal was to sustain rocket fire and strike
Israeli cities. Yadlin said Israel’s military must prepare to increase the
scale of its attacks to “create a more significant deterrent effect.”

“It is necessary to examine in retrospect when it would have been
appropriate to end the armed conflict,” the report said. “The first question
that must be asked is whether it was even appropriate to stop without a
sufficient lever for an agreement and without hitting Hamas hard, dealing it
a blow that would at least ensure that deterrence had been achieved.”

Another leading strategist, Giora Eiland, said the government failed to
exploit Israel’s air superiority. Eiland, a former national security chief,
also said Israel treated Hamas as a terrorist organization despite its
control of the Gaza Strip.

“It was possible — and it would have been correct — to expand the
operation by massively attacking all targets of infrastructure and
governance in Gaza,” the report said. “It is a pity that this approach was
not adopted.”

  Amos Yadlin, Benjamin Netanyahu, Gaza Strip, Institute for National Security Studies, Islamic Jihad, Report: Israel agreed to ceasefire terms that harmed its deterrence and legitimacy