PACIFICA – Israel could have extended the ceasefire with Hamas if it had wanted to before launching its 22-day offensive on Gaza that killed 1,300 Palestinians, mainly civilians, said the senior adviser on conflict resolution at the Carter Center.
"Both sides violated the key elements of the ceasefire," noted Robert Pastor, professor of international relations at American University, during an interview with Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! on Thursday.
"With regard to the question of whether Israel had an alternative than to invade in Gaza, I think the answer is obvious, that it did, that an effective ceasefire, full compliance with the agreement, would have stopped the rockets without the terrible loss of life that occurred," added Pastor, who served as national security adviser on Latin America and the Caribbean under President Carter from 1977-81.
The senior adviser at the Carter Center noted that Hamas was willing to extend the ceasefire if Israel lifted its blockade of Gaza.
"Hamas felt and was willing to contemplate extending the ceasefire if Israel would lift the siege," said Pastor.
"In the absence of opening of [the Gaza] crossings, [Hamas] said they would not renew the ceasefire," he explained.
But it remains unclear why Israel chose to launch war rather than extend the ceasefire.
"Israel was of two minds. First of all, whether to accept any deal with Hamas, they were never very clear on what their objective was. Was their objective to exterminate Hamas, which is an awful goal, particularly for a country born of the Holocaust? Was it to punish Hamas or to disrupt their command and control?" Asked Pastor.
"Or was it simply to stop the rockets? We’ve never heard a very clear declaration of objectives on the part of Israel. And so, we don’t really know what their intention was in going in. And if it were to stop the rockets, however, it is clear that they did have another alternative other than a massive invasion," he added.
Either way, Hamas came out stronger than before the Israeli assault.
"Initial reports coming out after the invasion suggest now," Pasto noted, "that Hamas is stronger, and Fatah is weaker, because of the invasion. And that would be still one more tragic irony of this invasion. If the purpose was to weaken Hamas, apparently it had the opposite effect."
On the role of Egypt as an honest broker, Pastor said: "It’s clear that Egypt is now questioned by Hamas as to whether they were an honest broker and indeed there is some evidence that perhaps they (the Egyptians) said different things to each of the two parties."
But Pastor is optimistic that peace could still prevail in the Middle East, if Hamas is not shunned.
"The decision to appoint George Mitchell as special envoy is a very encouraging and a very positive step. This is a man of independent stature, a man of proven capability. In the case of Northern Ireland, he helped bring the IRA into the political process. And to the extent that the challenge in Israel and Palestine is to find a way to bring the spoilers, those who believe that only violent resistance is the way to independence, such as Hamas, the way to bring them into the process—the way to bring peace is to bring them into the process," he noted.
However, Pastor stressed that "the United States needs to play an honest broker’s role if there is to be peace in the Middle East."
Washington must send a message to Tel Aviv, noted Pastor "that the United States is committed to peace, it’s committed to Israel’s security, but that that security relies on a two-state solution, a sharing of Jerusalem, 1967 borders, a right to return with compensation, rather than necessarily having Palestinians return to Israel."
"The basic elements of peace are known."
Blair blasts Britons over Iraq war