A recent article in the official organ of Islamic State (IS) castigated Muslims in general, and Hizballah and al-Qaeda in particular, for giving undue attention to the struggle to destroy Israel. After all, its author notes, there’s a whole world filled with infidels against whom jihad can be waged. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) provides some excerpts in English:

For decades, the issue of Palestine and its occupation by the Jews has dominated the lives of Muslims the world over. The exaggerators have exceeded in stressing its importance, and the merchants have traded in it—to the point where most people came to believe that Palestine is the Muslims’ primary cause. This is after the [secular Arab] nationalists declared it to be the Muslims’ top priority, and [vowed] that no other issue should be raised until Palestine was liberated, so as not to diversify efforts or waste capabilities. Moreover, many believe that there is no room for jihad [anywhere] but in Palestine. . . .

After nearly seven decades of empty slogans, Palestine is still ruled by the Jews. . . . Allah ordered worshippers to fight all the infidels, without exception. . . . [R]estricting jihad to the Jews alone . . . is an alteration of Allah’s law, and constitutes following the delusions of the [secular Arab rulers] who seek to prevent Muslims from waging jihad against the polytheists and infidels in the countries that they themselves control.

Tamir Hayman analyzes the latest reports about an offer by Hamas to release three female soldiers in exchange for 150 captured terrorists, of whom 90 have received life sentences; then, if that exchange happens successfully, a second stage of the deal will begin.

If this does happen, Israel will release all the serious prisoners who had been sentenced to life and who are associated with Hamas, which will leave Israel without any bargaining chips for the second stage. In practice, Israel will release everyone who is important to Hamas without getting back all the hostages. In this situation, it’s evident that Israel will approach the second stage of the negotiations in the most unfavorable way possible. Hamas will achieve all its demands in the first stage, except for a commitment from Israel to end the war completely.

How does this relate to the fighting in Rafah? Hayman explains:

In the absence of an agreement or compromise by Hamas, it is detrimental for Israel to continue the static situation we were in. It is positive that new energy has entered the campaign. . . . The [capture of the] border of the Gaza Strip and the Rafah crossing are extremely important achievements, while the ongoing dismantling of the battalions is of secondary importance.

That being said, Hayman is critical of the approach to negotiations taken so far:

Gradual hostage trades don’t work. We must adopt a different concept of a single deal in which Israel offers a complete cessation of the war in exchange for all the hostages.