Hamas wants to close deal
Timing of Shalit audiotape's release shows Hamas eager to finalize prisoner swap
We must make a distinction between the manipulative content of the audiotape released by Hamas and its publication at the current time. The content is manipulative. It was meant to play on all the emotional strings and guilt feelings of the Israeli government and the IDF's top brass. It also aimed to emotionally strain Gilad Shalit's parents, relatives, and anyone who is sensitive about the issue.
All this was carried out in order to exert pressure on the government coercing it to meet the demands of Hamas, which also represents the Popular Resistance Committees and Army of Islam, whose members participated in the abduction.
It appears that Hamas was quick to learn form Hizbullah and from the Iranian psychological warfare masters who guide it. Yet the very publication of the audiotape, several hours before the Sharm el-Sheikh summit, in actual fact constitutes a clear positive sign and a goodwill gesture on Hamas' part.
This gesture was aimed at securing two objectives. First, regain some of Hamas' international and Arab legitimacy, which it lost when it took over Gaza. The gesture was also designed for the ears of Egyptian President Mubarak, who severed his ties with Hamas in the wake of the organization's takeover of Egypt's mission in Gaza.
Egypt, as we recall, played the role of mediator in the effort to release Shalit, and without the Egyptian mediation Hamas remained stuck with Gilad Shalit and without a middle-man that would formulate a prisoner swap in exchange for the Israeli captive.
Hamas too is facing pressure from the families of Palestinian prisoners who are concerned about the dead-end in the efforts to release Shalit due to the severance of ties with Egypt.
The audiotape also aimed at making Israel curb its military operations in the Gaza Strip. This message was not part of the text dictated to Gilad Shalit by his captors, but rather, could be found in a statement issued by Hamas that includes its demands. Most demands are old, but the Hamas military wing's statement has a new condition for releasing the Israeli captive – an end to Israeli military operations. This would allow the Hamas government to stablize its government and prepare militarily without Israeli interruptions.
The Qassam trap
There is no telling how determined Hamas is when it comes to its new demand, but if the organization insists on it, the State of Israel will be facing a complex dilemma while western Negev and Sderot residents would be exposed to Islamic Jihad rocket fire, with the IDF unable to offer a response.
If its demand is accepted, Hamas would refrain from terror attacks and Qassam fire, but it would argue that it cannot be held responsible for the actions of Islamic Jihad. Therefore, such a Hamas demand is in fact unacceptable for the State of Israel. As noted, we should hope Hamas does not insist on this point.
Yet we should also hope that President Mubarak reached an agreement with Prime Minister Olmert in Sharm el-Sheikh on directly sending his mediators to Hamas, because direct talks between Israel and Hamas are impractical. This is so not only because Israel does not want direct contacts with Hamas, but first and foremost because Hamas is unwilling to accept direct contact with the State of Israel's representatives, even when it comes to prisoner release.
And another brief but significant comment: Gilad Shalit's voice on the audiotape and his ability to coherently read the text dictated to him by his captors shows that he is in good health. The text, by the way, was written in Arabic and translated to Hebrew. This can be easily ascertained based on the grammar mistakes and the use of Arabic terms where the translator was unfamiliar with the proper Hebrew terms.
The bottom line is that the audiotape's publication constitutes a crack in the door opened by Hamas, and it invites Israel and Egypt to get their foot in there, in the hopes of scoring Palestinian public opinion points in light of a prisoner release as well as legitimacy in international public opinion.
