Seth Frantzman Profile picture
Feb 21, 2024 14 tweets 3 min read Read on X
When Hamas launched the October 7 attack, likely with backing and advise from several countries that host and back Hamas, it knew that there would be an Israeli response. It assumed if it took enough a hostages then it could somehow force talks to go on for years...while it benefited.
It's important to understand that Hamas has been able to carry out massacres and attacks for three decades because each time it does it, it relies on the international community to quickly rush to make sure there is a ceasefire. So the process is:

1. Hamas attacks
2. Israel responds
3. Ceasefire.
4. Hamas attacks again.
Hamas is the "tool" that was found by some in the international community in the late 1980s and early 1990s to prevent peace and it was always on hand to be picked up to attack Israel whenever there was any sign of peace. They reach for the "tool" each time, during the Oslo process, in the Second Intifada...after Disengagement etc.
It's so obvious because Disengagement was an opportunity to help Gaza thrive...but the international community and other backers of Hamas reached for their tool to have Hamas take over Gaza. No one reached for the tool of peace and moderation, which would have been easy to reach for.
October 7 was planned as a major moment for Hamas, it would committ an unprecedented massacre, then hold hostages for years to bring in billions more for its tunnels in Gaza and then use the hostages to gain more influence in the West Bank. When Abbas passes, Hamas would swoop in...it would make itself a "tool" again to be picked up to take over Ramallah for its patrons and benefactors abroad.
It's important to understand also that Hamas believed on October 7 that there was a time limit to Israel's reaction...Israel would be allowed to "run wild" for a few weeks...and then there would be a ceasefire and deal and the war would stop so Hamas can replenish its thousands of rockets and start a new war the next year or two.
This is the model for Hamas. Start a war, bring ruin on part of Gaza...use the rebuilding of Gaza to construct tunnels and arsenals...start a war, bring ruin, reconstruct tunnels...
It's important to understand that Hamas did this because in past wars it didn't lose very many fighters. Usually 100 to 1,000 fighters and then it would replace them. All the destruction caused by Israeli bombs can be rebuilt and Hamas contractors make the money doing reconstruction and for each dollar that comes half of it or something like that goes to Hamas and tunnels.
In fact each war was a "win" for Hamas because for each building hit by an IDF bomb, Hamas can then openly build a tunnel underneath as part of "reconstruction"....it doesn't even had to hide that it replaces whole ruined areas with new terror infrastructure, enhanced and embedded in new civilian homes. Fully integrated. As militaries say "5th gen"...
And Hamas always benefits from war because when there are civilian casualties it can use this to bring the ceasefire faster and bring condemnation of Israel. Hamas has its connections abroad via its allies and partners who mobilize protests and activists. In the May 2021 conflict with Israel there was a dry run to mobilize attacks on Jewish communities abroad, for instance.
So we have to understand how Hamas thought on October 6. It believed it would use the hostages to bring itself power in Ramallah. It believed that after a few weeks the war would end and it would thrive.
Now, four months in, it knows that it has not been able to get Israel to do a ceasefire, but it watches the UN and it knows the votes are getting closer. It is being advised by its host country to hold out a little longer. Hold out in Rafah and then filtrate back to northern Gaza and return to power.
Hamas also knows that quietly, behind the scenes many international organizations prefer its rule in Gaza. For instance they speak about Hamas police as "law and order" and if there aren't Hamas gunmen to guard the humanitarian aid they are displeased...they feel secure when Hamas is there. It's their partner.
The idea that anyone but Hamas could or would control Gaza is worrisome to many international stakeholders there. Hamas has been their loyal partner for decades. Hamas police are the ones they work with. In areas without Hamas they call it "lawless"....in essence Hamas is the preferred authoritarian they want.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Seth Frantzman

Seth Frantzman Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @sfrantzman

Feb 25
For many years there was a subset of critics of Israel who would say things like "I want Israel to reflect my liberal/progressive values." And they expected to take part in a discussion where reasonable people would say "well I can understand that, let's debate Israel's policies, I understand why you feel uncomfortable with some of them." They posed as being inside the tent of Israel discussions, merely objecting to Israel's "policies." And they were taken at face value by moderates and centrists.
Some of these types of people would even come to Israel, they'd spend most of their time with Palestinians, or at unrecognized beduin villages, or supporting African refugees. They posed as just wanting Israelis to support their progressive causes.
Then came October 7 and these folk were all silent. They never posted one photo of hostages, never had any empathy for Shani Louk or Naama Levy, they never wanted their "social justice" faith to mention the hostages...their "social justice Passover" never mentioned those held in Gaza. It never mentioned the Bibas children.
Read 10 tweets
Feb 21
What is further surprising about kidnappinig and murder of the Bibas children, and now the decision by Hamas to lie about returning the body of Shiri Bibas, the mother, is the way Israel has always been surprised at every turn of events, always reacting.
Israeli officials have vowed to avenge the latest Hamas action; but the fact is that since Oct. 7 Israel has always been reacting. Israel was taken by surprise by the Hamas attack. Shiri, Yarden, Kfir and Ariel Bibas were kidnapped from Nir Oz.
The family were alive when they were kidnapped. Israel now believes that the children were killed in November. However, that means that during October the baby Kfir and toddler Ariel were alive. Between October 7 and 27 four adults were released by Hamas; two American women and two elderly women. However there was seemingly no priority put on getting the Bibas children out of Gaza. Why?
Read 18 tweets
Feb 20
One thing that has interested me a little since the hostage deal began, is the lack of interest in the freed hostages or the victims such as the Bibas children, among self-defined progressive Jewish circles in the US. I mean groups such as rabbis involved in human rights or academics or social justice activist types and commentators. It's a small, niche group of outspoken people, but symbolic.
What I see is a collective silence from them, a decision apparently to never post images of the Bibas children, never post images of women hostages or Hamas parading emaciated male hostages. Basically anything related to hostages who are Jewish and Israeli is considered something they won't discuss or empathize with or post about.
It's hard to quantify because most of these people have left this platform but some of them still post elsewhere and you can look at their posts since mid-January and see. Is it a collective decision since Oct. 7 in most of these groups to never mention Jewish victims of Hamas crimes?
Read 10 tweets
Feb 19
I think it's important to understand that Hamas purposely targeted civilian communities that had been involved in peace because Hamas' goal is one state. Hamas is weakened by peace and two states. Hamas was created and grew in the late 1980s and early 1990s largely in opposition to Oslo and peace.
Whenever there was a chance for peace Hamas has come along to destroy it, to create war. When Israel left Gaza there was a chance for Gaza to be governed in a peaceful way and pave the way for two states. Hamas took over to use it as a base to prevent peace.
What's strange is that Hamas is not only backed by Iran, which wants to destroy Israel; but the West supported having Hamas leaders in Doha. Hamas is backed by Doha and Ankara, two western allies. As such the destruction of peace requires a discussion of why western countries wanted Hamas in Doha.
Read 9 tweets
Feb 18
There is a false comfort in the assertion that Hamas cannot be defeated or that Israel has achieved most of its goals in Gaza. The fallacy rests on assertions that Hamas cannot be eradicated and that similar groups in other places have not been removed.
This analysis is It's ahistorical but gives comfort because it means one doesn't ever have to defeat an enemy fully, one can always just "degrade" capabilities and use precision strikes to go after "command and control" and then after X number of things have been destroyed (key leaders, fighters, bunkers, weapon platforms, capabilities etc)...then you have completed your mission.
This way of looking at war is inviting because it means you never really have to accomplish too much. Back in the 1990s after Al Qaeda attacked US Embassies, the US "responded" with strikes in Afghanistan and Sudan. Let's recall what the claims at the time were.
Read 24 tweets
Feb 12
One of the interesting things about Hamas and the Oct. 7 war is that in the past Hamas was often seen by some/many in the progressive, left, liberal and human rights community as part of the problem, part of the rise of extremists or "far-right" that weakened the Oslo peace process. You'd hear arguments such as "Hamas and the Israeli Right are against peace" which posited that the Israeli center and left and the PA or Fatah were partners for peace.
Over time this narrative changed and there was a quiet attempt to infiltrate pro-Hamas messaging throughout the global far-left. This was openly stated by one western intellectual who said Hamas and Hezbollah were part of the global left. The goal was to portray the most fanatic and murderous groups, the armed groups, the ones attacking civilians, blowing up buses and raining rockets down on civilians as "left" and thus "good."
This dovetailed with a coordinated push among human rights groups (HRW and Amnesty) to define all of Israel as "apartheid." Their reports erased the Green Line and defined Israel in the pre-1967 borders as "apartheid."
Read 10 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(