The Daily Signal - Where Israel-Hamas War Stands

Episode Date: December 5, 2023

Dec. 7 will mark two months since Hamas attacked Israel, killing 1,200 people and taking 240 others hostage.  Fighting between Hamas and Israel resumed Friday after the release of about 100 hostages during a weeklong cease-fire. As Israeli troops advance in Gaza, they are “constricting the size of ground they don’t control,” defense expert Robert Greenway says of the Israel Defense Forces.  Israel is now advancing to conduct military operations in southern Gaza in addition to the north, and Greenway, director of the Center for National Defense at The Heritage Foundation, says that’s necessary because “you can’t have a sanctuary” region where terrorists can remain. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.) Greenway joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to explain how the U.S. should be engaged in the war and to share what is known about the hostages that have been freed and those still in captivity.  Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is the Daily Signal podcast for Tuesday, December 5th. I'm Virginia Allen. Thursday will mark exactly two months since Hamas attacked Israel and killed 1,200 people. Robert Greenway is the director of the Center for National Defense here at the Heritage Foundation, and he's joining us on the show today to answer critical questions about where we stand in the fight right now, the hostages that still remain in Gaza. and what the future may hold for this conflict. So stay tuned for our conversation after this. Hi, I'm John Carlo Canaparo.

And I'm Zach Smith. And we host SCOTUS 101. It's a podcast where you'll get a breakdown of top cases in the highest court in the land. Hear from some of the greatest legal minds. And, of course, get a healthy dose of Supreme Court trivia. Want to listen? Find us wherever you get your podcasts or just head toheritage.org slash podcasts. The Heritage Foundation's Robert Greenway is with us now.

Thank you so much for being here with us. My pleasure. Thanks for having me. All right. So let's dive in first and talk about what we know about the remaining hostages that are still in Gaza. There are just over 100 hostages have been released. We're obviously incredibly thankful. We celebrate their release. These are mainly women and children.

We know there's still about 120 hostages that are estimated to be in Gaza. From the hostages that had been released, what have we learned about how they were treated and the conditions that they were in while they were captive in Gaza? So great question. What we've learned, I think, from the hostages that have been released two things. First is that Hamas conducted an absolutely horrific attack and took toddlers, women, the elderly hostage, which being taken hostage and taking hostage, of course, is a war crime in and of itself. but to do so with the most vulnerable in our populations among the innocent civilians in Israel, I think is just another stark reminder of what happened. So that's number one.

Number two is the Israelis have been able to conduct interviews with those that have been released, and it reinforced, again, the horrific tendencies, because much of what we saw perpetrated and captured by the terrorists on October the 7th was continued during the period of time that they were held hostage. So they were subjected to physical and mental abuse that's difficult to comprehend. We have to, of course, understand that many of those still have family members, and so they have to be somewhat guarded in what they will say and what the Israelis will release publicly. But enough has come out to give us an indication that we're dealing with intolerable, unsanctionable, irreconcilable behavior from the worst form of terrorism we can imagine. And I'd add last that there was a body of foreign individuals that were working in the kibbutzs in Israel taken hostage,

particularly from Thailand, that were released also as part of this independent of the hostage negotiation process. And that took place directly between the government of Thailand, for example, and the government of Iran, which also obviously direction controls Hamas. And they were able to secure the release of a number of their hostages as well. And so, again, as a reminder of who's really responsible here. Among the about 120 hostages that we know of that remain in Gaza, how confident do you think we can be that those hostages are still alive? Well, we don't even know the number, right? As you pointed out, we have a range.

It's about 130 Israelis maybe there. There may be nine or ten Americans on account for. We're not entirely sure. We don't know their location, obviously. We don't know their condition. Part of the original negotiation was to allow the International Red Cross to Red Cross, Red Crescent access to verify the physical condition, and they were denied access to do so. And so here again, we're left to wonder the condition and even the number.

And again, it's just a reminder of who we're dealing with. Terrorists, obviously, we don't negotiate with them for this very reason. But I think we're learning that there's far too many left in captivity and the conditions in which they're being held is horrific. And many have died, we know, since they've been held captive. Yeah, I was working on a report recently with the names and the faces of all of those that we know of, that we believe are still alive and held hostage. And it was, I had to start making a separate list of those who were originally believed to be held hostage, but now we have learned that they have been murdered. And the number is quite high.

It's, it's, tragic is a very light word to use. There really aren't words for it. what do we know about where negotiations do stand? And I think it's on everyone's hearts and minds of, okay, for the folks that are still over there, we got to get them out. But fighting has restarted after that week-long ceasefire. So could we be looking at months? Do we have any sense on how long it could be before the rest of the hostages are released?

Well, we don't. And now that the ceasefire has ended and the hostage exchange concluded, Israel directed its negotiating team to return to Israel, an indication that talks are not ongoing, at least that they are party to. Second, that Hamas broke the ceasefire on a number of fronts, not least of which was the terrorist attack that took place in Jerusalem, claiming yet more lives. But also because, again, they were not cooperative in the inspection of vehicles that were providing aid and a number of other fronts. And so here we are back to hostilities. But it's important to remember, too, that Israel's progress in Gaza created. the leverage necessary to get to the point where they were willing to negotiate the release of

hostages in the first place, which does give us some encouragement that that same pressure could resume and provide, again, an opportunity to obtain hostages, hopefully the American hostages. It's inexplicable to me that we could be part of these agreements and not get our own people back. But again, I think it shows, one, their perception of U.S. weakness, and two, that the leverage they really hold is over the United States. It's inconsequential in a certain way, the leverage they have over Israel.

I think that's sort of understood. What isn't is the leverage over the United States is the only way they can apply leverage over Israel. And what I mean is that only by convincing the United States to constrain Israel and modify its behavior in their direction can come from Washington. And that is how they're using our hostages in order to do it and international condemnation of what's going on in Gaza to the extent that they're able to convince people. And so it's important, I think, to calculate. But I'm encouraged that additional progress made by Israel would give them leverage, but also may create circumstances in which they're able to physically execute a recovery operation themselves. How is America involved? Because obviously the U.S. does not have direct contact with Hamas.

Who are the individuals that were in contact with and working with? And what should the demands be that America is making in order to get our people out? Well, the demand is starting the reverse order. The demands are easy. All American hostages, all hostages need to be released immediately. And we've really not done that in a convincing way. And this, again, is why we've strongly discouraged negotiating with terrorists for obvious reasons, I would think. Second, the negotiations are taking place out of the office of Hamas in Doha, Qatar, which is a major non-NATO U.S. ally.

They house the largest regional air base in the United States in the region, but it's a complex relationship. They also, many will recall, at our request, opened up an office for the Taliban. where negotiations between the U.S. government and the Taliban took place over multiple U.S. administrations. This is a request that I've always thought is not in our best interest. It's not even in Qatar's interest, really, to host these groups. But nonetheless, the calculation was that if we allow them in office, then we can have negotiations, we can have discussions that otherwise would be complicated.

And that's what's taking place now. And so, again, that calculation is it's better for them to have a presence there than it is for us to not have one. I'm unconvinced of it. I think there are ways to negotiate without it. And I think there are ways to communicate absent the risk of having that office because now what we've done is created a sanctuary for leadership to remain with impunity. And we should make no mistake that the individuals that are culpable in planning, executing, and supporting these attacks have a home. And again, is the cost of having a presence and an address and a phone number to call and have indirect negotiations necessary?

In my judgment, probably not. How is Israel's defense force, Israel's military, specifically targeting Hamas leaders right now? Obviously, the fighting has restarted. Where are they focusing their firepower? So up to this point, most everyone accepts the fact that operations were confined mostly to northern Gaza. It's the most population dense portion of the strip. It's very small in and of itself. And it has the capital city, for lack of a better time.

term. And one of the initial moves made by the Israeli defense force was to split and to establish a presence in the essentially sever with only humanitarian channel connecting the two and directing movements of civilians from one area into the next. They've surrounded it. It's bordered by the sea and Israel and southern Gaza. So in effect, they've surrounded it and they are constricting the size of ground they don't control ever since. They've recently started operations in southern Gaza. It is only early stages of this, but I think the idea is the same. They want to establish a presence to increase the ability to collect and obtain information and intelligence necessary to prosecute subsequent phases. And they recognize that many fled from northern Gaza

into southern Gaza quite naturally to avoid military operations. And so you can't have a sanctuary because all you do is sort of move the problem from one place to another. And if you say there's a part of, there's a space in which I won't conduct, I won't solve the problem, then that sanctuary and then obviously will become a home for terrorist organizations. You can't eliminate them. So I think now you'll see a constricting sort of anaconda approach in northern Gaza, restricting access and control, and Israel will prioritize regaining, reacquiring, and resurfacing high value targets in Hamas leadership and infrastructure. But the operation will have to go much further than that. And to your question earlier, how long will it take? Well,

progress in the past has indicated this is probably going to take weeks and months, and I think that's probably accurate. Okay. So then looping back to what you said about Qatar and having that Hamas office there, the question would be, all right, well, if Israel is closing and closing in, maybe they could destroy many Hamas troops, but wouldn't the high-ranking leaders of Hamas just escape to Qatar and seek shelter there where essentially

Israeli troops can't reach them. Well, certainly it is a possibility. Again, anywhere sanctuary is tolerated, that risk is present. Now, there have been different reports about Israel's intent in terms of leadership outside of Gaza. Safe to assume, I think,

that they should probably renew their life insurance policies. At some point in time, they are likely to become targets regardless of arrangements made, again, it predicated on what happens next. But fundamentally the issue is if you allow space for them to exist, they will find a way to get there to avoid the consequences. And unfortunately, the civilian populations are bearing the consequences of this.

But that is by design. They have forbid their movement to avoid conflict, to avoid targeting operations. So even though Israel is providing advance warning and now helping move the population from areas of conflict, areas of non-conflict, Hamas is doing everything they can to avoid that and to keep. the civilian population there so that the cost borne by the civilian population can be used in a propaganda campaign to constrain Israel's operations. But that is by design. This is what terrorists do. They don't care about the consequences of the civilian population.

In fact, it's by design. They want them to incur the cost of the conflict. And do we know how many targets Israel has taken out so far? How successful they have been at taking out Hamas targets? Well, so targets, you know, is a broad category of terms. So we know that they've taken over 10,000 strikes within Gaza, but that, again, compasses a broad range. That could be infrastructure supporting terrorist attacks. So a rocket is launched.

That rocket site then becomes a viable military target to destruct. Surprisingly, to many, Gaza and Hamas are still launching missiles, rockets two months after October the 7th, and despite the operations in Gaza, are still, they have the ability to launch rockets into civilian occupied territories and civilian areas of Israel. And so that threat persists. Likewise, leadership targets moving about would also propose a viable target. Those strikes have also been undertaken. And then lastly, there's the tunnel infrastructure and supporting infrastructure that sustains this entire animal that was built at great expense. And we are led to believe the support of international organizations, whether they are witting or non-witting, in the construction of these massive facilities underground and above ground, often under schools, hospitals and civilian infrastructure. And that also has to be eliminated as part of the threat.

So all told, some 10,000 strikes have been conducted. And I don't know how many thousands of missiles launched from Gaza still into Israeli territory, but probably a greater number than 10,000. And as it relates to the Palestinian civilians, what is the latest on Egypt? Are Palestinians able, if they want to, to escape into Egypt? Is that an option? So first there are a large number of Palestinians in many of the countries within the Middle East for all kinds of reasons. Some have been there for generations and others have since moved.

The official positions of Egypt and other countries in the region is they will not accept Palestinian refugees from Gaza. The official reason that they've cited is so that they're not providing an alternate home so that they don't want long term to provide a location other than what they believe is their actual home. home in the territories. The real reason many suspect, and I put myself in this category, is they really don't want to export a domestic security issue themselves. They can't guarantee or that they know with some degree of probability that they're inviting a risk into their country. And unlike the U.S. open border policy under the current administration, they're not willing to accept that risk themselves. Okay. We've seen some recent escalations outside of Israel itself. Syria, Iraq, the Red Sea, explain what is going on there?

So as of today, we're looking at some 75 attacks against U.S. forces and bases in Iraq and Syria alone since October 17th, with only five U.S. responses, including one over the weekend, striking in Iraq, killing five members of Harakato Nujaba, an Iranian-sponsored terrorist group, conducting an attack on U.S. bases in infrastructure in Iraq. So that is alarming in and of itself. That volume of attack is an incredible spike in some 60 days. It's almost two attacks a day. And the odds of them killing or wounding an American increase every time this happens.

It's only luck that has prevented us and the skill of our forces and the capability they have to defend themselves. But honestly speaking, the odds are tremendously in favor of a casualty at some point just because of the volume of attacks. We're very, very blessed. In fact, this has not yet happened. Second, that they continue to have the intent to do it because they, they, they, bear no costs. As long as they have no penalty associated with this, they're not bearing their costs. And by they, I mean the Iranians themselves who are directing this attack, arming, equipping, and funding the operations against us, then they'll continue to do it. What is also alarming

is we've seen actions in the Red Sea interdicted by ourselves. Drones launched by the Houthis in Yemen against commercial shipping and our own naval vessels. And over the weekend, three ships were struck with cruise missiles, one at the verge of sinking, and drones were fired, probably at a responding U.S. naval vessel who is responding to the aid distress call of the three commercial ships. And what we know from the Iranian-sponsored Houthi organization is they'll continue to do this. So we've seen piracy. They've taken over a ship in the Red Sea that they believe is owned or operated by the Israelis. And they've fired now at three additional ships, which make, I think, five all told, doesn't fall into the category of the 75 attacks that have happened since October the 17th, but should.

Ultimately, the same issue is present here. They'll continue to conduct these attacks until a cost is born until they have to pay a price for it. The problem is 25% of the world shipping transit, this very narrow area between the Babel Mendeb and the Red Sea and the Suez Canal. 25% of the world shipping could be disrupted as a result of this attack on maritime vessels,

which, as you'd appreciate, are not well defended. And so it is in our collective best interest to stop this before it escalates and has a greater economic impact on not just ourselves, but others. and then there's the loss of more innocent lives. That ship that they hijacked has a crew. That crew are now part of the hostage calculation. They're sitting now in Yemeni waters under the control of Iranian-sponsored terrorist groups,

and now the hostage list grows because we are incentivizing the taking of hostages. Why is it not a strike for a strike? Five to 75 is not equal math. It's not unless the five resulted in a cost and a consequence. For us, in the Trump administration, a strike against Qasem Soleimani, that resulted in his death and Aba Madhya al-Mohandis was sufficient to stop the escalation spiral, ultimately and brought things to a very quick conclusion. And that has historically been successful.

So five could work if they were the right five. One could work, but they have to pay a price. Up to this point, we've hit empty, abandoned infrastructure and bases where no personnel were wounded, or we've struck and produced casualties that exist among their surrogates. They're willing the surrogates exist to die for the cause. That's the whole point. and the equipment is replaceable, and the civilian populations that they reside in are completely expendable in their calculations.

Only Iran paying a price will stop Iran issuing directions to conduct attacks. And as we saw during the ceasefire, these attacks ebbed to near zero, indicating that Iran is under total control here. And that's, again, everyone knows and accepts this, but the administration's unwilling to do so because their policy has been to appease Iran to get better behavior. That was going to be my next question, but you just answered it. the why, why aren't we doing more, and it's that appeasement. Okay, interesting. Over the weekend, we learned that there was a church in the Philippines that was bombed and those actions. The bombing

was believed to have been carried out by members of ISIS. It's been a little while since we heard much about ISIS in the news. Should this be a concern? Is ISIS resurging? So it absolutely should be a concern. First, because it got persecuted religious minorities that exist across the globe that are under threat in so many different regions and often escape public attention. I would say Sudan falls in this category. But there are a number of different areas in which we see the risk to a number of different small minorities exposed to the threat of ISIS and other groups.

Is this an indication that ISIS resurgent? I think the answer is it's not clear that that is the case now, but the conditions are there. So what I think we're seeing is exactly the conditions that resurgence. resulted in ISIS obtaining territorial control in Iraq and Syria and launching external operations. Their infrastructure remains intact. We handed Afghanistan back to the Taliban and to a large element. ISIS's largest component outside of Iraq and Syria was in Afghanistan. They still have control of that terrain and resources now that we left on the battlefield

in Afghanistan. It's likely that that is the global command and control element at this point. And second, Iraq and Syria still are suffering under the same consequences that we saw after the U.S. withdrawal in 2011. So I think we are seeing the conditions for resurgence, and therefore I think we are likely to see a resurgence. I don't think that this strike is an indication that that is certain, but I think it is a warning that if we are not careful and don't take action now, that is exactly what we

are going to see, because all the conditions are necessary. I had one other thing, and that is as Iran continues to assert itself in the region, this is also a natural consequence. One of ISIS's biggest recruiting pitches other than the United States, but after we departed, the biggest recruiting pitch was we cannot be subjugated to Persian Shia Islam in natural Arab Sunni areas. And so ISIS also fed off of that discontent. And we're seeing, again, the same conditions where Iran is asserting itself in areas that are not traditionally Iranian. And there is going to be and is, in some senses, already a backlash against it. an ISIS or something very much like it could very well be that backlash.

The Heritage Foundation's Robert Greenway, do you have any final thoughts before we let you go today? No, I think we covered a great deal of ground and I'm grateful for the opportunity. Thank you so much for being with us to cover so much, ground. Really appreciate your time. For all of our listeners, if you want to stay up to date on all of the things that Mr. Greenway is reporting on, specifically as it relates to Israel, you can find all of his work at the Heritage Foundation website. That's heritage.org. Thank you all so much for being with us today for joining us here on the Daily Signal's top news.

If you haven't had the chance, make sure that you check out our evening show. It's right here in this same podcast feed. For every weekday, we bring you the top news of the day. Also take a minute to subscribe to the Daily Signal podcast, wherever you like to listen, we are across all podcast platforms. But with that, we hope you have a great Tuesday. We will see you right back here around 5 p.m. for our top news edition. The Daily Signal podcast is brought to you by more than half a million members of the Heritage Foundation.

Foundation. Executive producers are Rob Blewey and Kate Trinko. Producers are Virginia Allen and Samantha Asheras. Sound designed by Lauren Evans, Mark Geiney, and John Pop. To learn more, please visit DailySignal.com.