A terrorist attack at the Temple Mount last month led Israel to install metal detectors and other security measures at the site, which in turn led to Palestinian demonstrations and rioting, which died down after Israel removed the metal detectors. The initial incident, writes Yossi Kuperwasser, was the first “in many years” that “involved a relatively extensive organization that planned a very complex operation at the most sensitive spot.” To Kuperwasser, the entire episode played in to Mahmoud Abbas’s hands:

Through his formal control of the religious establishment in Jerusalem, Abbas made use of the Mufti Muhammad Hussein (whom he himself appointed) to dictate the nature of the struggle [against the metal detectors] and set the conditions for ending it. It was Abbas who decided that the struggle would be the “popular resistance” he favors, meaning it would mainly involve prayers and demonstrations with limited violence and without firearms. Abbas deployed protestors and ostensibly punitive measures against Israel such as [purportedly] halting security coordination and civilian contacts.

It was also he who insisted that Israel remove all the security devices [at the Mount] and did not settle for Jordan’s achievement in getting only the metal detectors removed. And it was Abbas who, after he got Israel to accept his terms, stood at the mufti’s side while he announced that prayer on the Temple Mount had resumed.

Abbas saw Israel’s capitulation in revoking the security measures as a morale-booster for the Palestinians and as a great personal achievement. He has hastened to translate it into several operational goals: stepped-up pressure on Hamas; a change for the better in his public status, among other things by hosting [Jordan’s] King Abdullah in Ramallah and convening the Palestinian National Council as a show of support for his leadership; an attempt to extract further gains from Israel by posing additional conditions for renewing security coordination; and an easing of the American pressure, while criticizing the new administration for its conduct toward the Palestinians thus far. . . .

The Palestinians are caught up in a sense of achievement, which inspires them to harden their positions. . . . Such an atmosphere does not encourage a Palestinian willingness to renew negotiations without prior conditions.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.