殺害試圖尋求停火的哈馬斯領導人是以色列的一貫行為

溪邊愚人按：

不久前離開主流媒體，自己創辦媒體平台 Zeteo 的邁赫迪·哈桑（Mehdi Hasan）今天一早就哈馬斯領導人伊斯梅爾·哈尼亞（Ismail Haniyeh）被殺一事，給 Zeteo 的訂閱者發出了一個電子郵件，題為“以色列有殺害試圖確保停火的哈馬斯領導人的曆史——內塔尼亞胡不計後果地暗殺伊斯梅爾·哈尼亞，破壞了達成和平協議和釋放人質的前景”。

這裏全文翻譯此電子郵件，並附英文原文。

譯：溪邊愚人

 

“以色列領導人一石三鳥”，以色列《國土報》高級軍事事務分析師魯文·佩達祖爾（Reuven Pedatzur）寫道。“他們暗殺了有能力與以色列達成協議的人；他們報複了造成以色列多人傷亡的人；他們向哈馬斯發出信號，以色列隻通過軍事力量與其進行溝通。”

佩達祖爾指的是以色列星期三淩晨在德黑蘭暗殺哈馬斯高級領導人、哈馬斯政治局負責人伊斯梅爾·哈尼亞（Ismail Haniyeh）一事嗎？

不是。佩達祖爾已死於 2014 年的一場交通事故。上文引用的《國土報》報道是針對2012年11月以色列暗殺哈馬斯另一名高級指揮官艾哈邁德·賈巴裏（Ahmed Jabari）的事件，該事件引發了2012年的加沙戰爭。

就像我在 The Intercept 的前同事喬恩·施瓦茨（Jon Schwarz）去年詳細記錄的，“賈巴裏開始相信，哈馬斯通過談判達成長期停戰最符合巴勒斯坦人的利益”，並一直與受人尊敬的以色列和平活動家格申·巴斯金（Gershon Baskin）保持溝通。“就在暗殺發生之前，[巴斯金] 給了賈巴裏一份關於停戰的建議草案，讓他審閱和批準。該草案得到了巴斯金和哈馬斯副外長的同意，巴斯金還說，他此前曾將該草案給時任以色列國防部長的埃胡德·巴拉克看過。”

賈巴裏會簽署哈馬斯和以色列之間的“休戰協議”或長期停戰協議嗎？我們永遠不會知道。

事實上，殺害正在進行停火談判的哈馬斯領導人是以色列長期的曆史，這也是很諷刺的事情。以色列甚至殺害隻是提出長期停戰想法的哈馬斯領導人。

還記得四肢癱瘓的哈馬斯共同創始人和精神領袖謝赫·艾哈邁德·亞辛嗎？他提出“如果在約旦河西岸和加沙地帶建立巴勒斯坦國”，就與以色列長期停戰，但不到三個月，他就被暗殺了。

他的繼任者阿卜杜勒·阿齊茲-蘭提西在向以色列提出類似的停戰建議不到三個月後被暗殺。

然後，內塔尼亞胡政府在 2012 年暗殺了賈巴裏，如前所述，就在“賈巴裏遇害前幾小時”，他還在審查“長期共同停火”協議。

2012 年和 2024 年兩件事情之間，賈巴裏和哈尼亞遇害事件之間的相似之處，令人毛骨悚然。

“他不是天使，也不是正義的和平人士，”巴斯金在賈巴裏遇害後不久這樣評價他，“但他的遇刺也扼殺了實現停戰的可能性，同時也扼殺了埃及調停人發揮作用的能力。”

哈尼亞也是如此。西方主流媒體一致認為，按照哈馬斯的標準，這個哈馬斯領導人是一位“實用主義者”；是目前為確保加沙停火和釋放以色列人質而進行的談判中的關鍵人物。

路透社： 

哈馬斯的軍事部門在加沙策劃了 10 月 7 日的襲擊。盡管哈馬斯在公開場合言辭強硬，但阿拉伯外交官和官員們認為，與加沙內部更強硬的聲音相比，[哈尼亞]相對務實。一方麵，他告訴以色列軍方，他們會發現自己'淹沒在加沙的泥沙中'，另一方麵，他和他的前任哈馬斯領導人哈立德·梅沙爾（Khaled Meshaal）在該地區穿梭，就卡塔爾促成的與以色列的停火協議進行談判，該協議將包括用人質交換以色列監獄中的巴勒斯坦人，以及向加沙提供更多援助。

天空新聞（Sky News）： 

哈尼亞是哈馬斯的務實代表。他沒有葉海亞·辛瓦爾（Yahya Sinwar）那麽強硬和軍國主義，辛瓦爾是哈馬斯在加沙的領導人，領導著這場戰鬥。哈尼亞是哈馬斯在阿拉伯國家首都外交的公眾形象。他領導著加沙停火談判。

 

本雅明·內塔尼亞胡領導的以色列極右翼政府周三選擇在伊朗領土上暗殺的就是他。

為什麽？

很簡單，內塔尼亞胡及其法西斯和偏執狂聯盟不希望達成釋放人質的協議。他們寧願繼續戰爭，無論加沙平民或仍被關押在飛地內的本國公民付出多大代價。盡管喬·拜登的說法令人啼笑皆非，但內塔尼亞胡才是達成釋放加沙以色列人質協議的最大障礙。人質家屬的前發言人說，內塔尼亞胡拒絕了一個協議。以色列前戰爭內閣成員恩尼·甘茲（enny Gantz）說，內塔尼亞胡阻止了協議的達成。以色列國防官員告訴《國土報》，“內塔尼亞胡係統地挫敗了釋放人質的談判”。

這並不新鮮。套用溫斯頓·丘吉爾的話說，以色列一向喜歡“戰爭-戰爭”，而不是“談話-談話”。以色列政府——尤其是內塔尼亞胡領導的政府——更喜歡把哈馬斯作為永久的敵人，或者用以色列現任財政部長貝紮萊爾·斯莫特裏奇的話說，作為“資產”，而不是試圖與哈馬斯達成永久協議。

就如已故以色列記者佩達祖爾在分析 2012 年災難性的賈巴裏暗殺事件時所寫的：

包括國防部長在內的決策者，或許還有本雅明·內塔尼亞胡總理，都知道賈巴裏在推動永久停火協議方麵的作用......因此，殺害賈巴裏的決定表明，我們的決策者認為此時停火對以色列來說並不可取，攻擊哈馬斯更可取。

 

把上麵的“賈巴裏”改成“哈尼亞”，這些話用在今天完全合適。

---

英文原文：

Mehdi Hasan：Israel Has a History of Killing Hamas Leaders Who Are Trying To Secure Ceasefires.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s reckless assassination of Ismail Haniyeh undermines the prospects for a peace deal and the release of the hostages.

“Israel's leaders killed three birds with one stone,” wrote Reuven Pedatzur, a senior military affairs analyst for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. “They assassinated the man who had the power to make a deal with Israel; they took revenge on someone who had caused more than a few Israeli casualties; and they signaled to Hamas that communications with it will be conducted only through military force.”

Was Pedatzur referring to the Israeli assassination of senior Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, the head of the group’s political bureau, in Tehran in the early hours of Wednesday morning?

No. Pedatzur died in a road traffic accident in 2014. His quote from Haaretz, above, was in response to the Israeli assassination of another senior Hamas commander, Ahmed Jabari, in November 2012, which kicked off the 2012 Gaza war. 

As my former colleague at The Intercept, Jon Schwarz, documented in great detail last year, “Jabari had come to believe that it was in the best interest of Palestinians for Hamas to negotiate a long-term truce” and had been in communication with the respected Israeli peace activist Gershon Baskin. “Just before the assassination, [Baskin] gave Jabari a draft proposal for such a truce to review and approve. The draft was agreed to by Baskin and Hamas’s deputy foreign minister, and Baskin also said he had previously shown it to Ehud Barak, then the Israeli minister of defense.”

Would Jabari have signed off on a ‘hudna,’ or long-term truce, between Hamas and Israel? We’ll never know. 

Israel, in fact, has a long and cynical history of killing Hamas leaders who are in the midst of ceasefire negotiations or, even, proposing long-term truces with the Jewish state. 

Remember Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the quadriplegic co-founder and spiritual leader of Hamas? He was assassinated less than three months after he proposed a long-term truce with Israel “if a Palestinian state is established in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.” 

His successor, Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi, was assassinated less than three months after he made a similar truce offer to Israel.

Then there was the Netanyahu government’s 2012 assassination of Jabari, who, as mentioned, was reviewing a “long-term mutual cease-fire” deal just “hours before he was killed,” according to Baskin. 

The parallels between 2012 and 2024, between the killings of Jabari and Haniyeh, are eery. 

"He was in line to die, not an angel and not a righteous man of peace,” Baskin said of Jabari shortly after his killing, “but his assassination also killed the possibility of achieving a truce and also the Egyptian mediators’ ability to function.”

The same could be said of Haniyeh. Mainstream Western media outlets agree that the Hamas leader was – by Hamas standards – a “pragmatist”; a key figure in the ongoing negotiations to secure a ceasefire in Gaza and free the Israeli hostages.

From Reuters: 

“For all the tough language in public, Arab diplomats and officials had viewed [Haniyeh] as relatively pragmatic compared with more hardline voices inside Gaza, where the military wing of Hamas planned the October 7 attack. While telling Israel's military they would find themselves ‘drowning in the sands of Gaza,’ he and his predecessor as Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, had shuttled around the region for talks over a Qatari-brokered cease-fire deal with Israel that would include exchanging hostages for Palestinians in Israeli jails as well as more aid for Gaza.”

From Sky News: 

“Haniyeh was the pragmatic face of Hamas. He was less hard-line and militaristic than Yahya Sinwar, who is the head of Hamas inside Gaza and is leading the battle. Haniyeh was the public face of Hamas's diplomacy in Arab capitals. He was leading efforts to negotiate a ceasefire in Gaza.”

This was the person that the far-right Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu chose to assassinate on Iranian soil on Wednesday.

Why?

Put simply, Netanyahu and his coalition of fascists and bigots do not want a deal to release the hostages. They prefer to continue the war, no matter the cost to Gaza’s civilians or to their own citizens still held inside of the enclave. Despite Joe Biden’s ludicrous claims to the contrary, it is Netanyahu who has been the biggest obstacle to a deal to free Israel’s hostages in Gaza. The former spokesperson for the hostages’ families says Netanyahu rejected a deal. Benny Gantz, a former member of Israel’s war cabinet, says Netanyahu blocked a deal. Israeli defense officials tell Haaretz that “Netanyahu systematically foiled the negotiations to free the hostages.”

There is nothing new here. To misquote Winston Churchill, Israel has always preferred “war-war” over “jaw-jaw.” Israeli governments – especially those led by Netanyahu – have preferred having Hamas as the permanent enemy – or as an “asset,” to quote the current Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich – rather than trying to do a permanent deal with Hamas. 

As the late Israeli journalist Pedatzur wrote, in his analysis of the disastrous Jabari assassination in 2012: 

“Our decision makers, including the defense minister and perhaps also Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, knew about Jabari’s role in advancing a permanent cease-fire agreement. … Thus the decision to kill Jabari shows that our decision makers decided a cease-fire would be undesirable for Israel at this time, and that attacking Hamas would be preferable.”

Change the name ‘Jabari’ to ‘Haniyeh’ above, and those words could have been written today.