Volume 2, Issue 2, Spring 2012
Infinity Journal
Page 20
Introduction
The aim of this essay is to look at the opposing strategies
of Israel and Hamas. To this end, we will attempt to define
“rational” and “irrational” strategies and we will use these
definitions to evaluate the parties’ strategies.
A comparison of the strategies explains why a stable situation
of ongoing limited confrontation in Gaza is occurring. The
analysis further indicates that Hamas’ strategy does not
constitute an existential threat to Israel, since it contains a
built-in limitation, in that excessive “success” will cause it to
fail (the Amorite Iniquity Effect).
The Role of a Grand Strategy
A grand strategy is a comprehensive plan for addressing a
specific problem or situation. In the political-security context,
grand strategy defines the basic principles of the political-
security planning from which the military and political
strategies that serve it can be inferred. There is a difficulty in
demarcating between a grand strategy and the underlying
strategic levels, down to the level of military strategy. Grand
strategy may be detailed or general. In some issues it virtually
overlaps with military strategy, while in others they are almost
unrelated. This essay does not differentiate between the
various dimensions of strategy, and for the sake of simplicity
the generic term “strategy” is used. Consequently, in this
essay, “strategy” denotes the manner in which means and
ways are connected to ends in the political (foreign and
domestic policy) and security (military and the state’s tools
of power) fields.
Why Is the Other Party’s Strategy Being Analyzed?
The determination of a strategy, consisting of the analysis of
alternative strategies, is an effective way of formulating and
implementing a strategy designed to achieve specific ends.
The work process involved in the formulation of the strategy
analyzes the different options for achieving various ends in
order to arrive at the preferred strategy. In other words, the
principal task is that of creating alternatives, evaluating them
and selecting the preferred one.
On the other hand,when analyzing the other party’s strategy,
both the process and its purpose are different. The purpose
of identifying the other party’s strategy is not so much to
evaluate
the strategy (the degree of its effectiveness) but
more an attempt to
understand
the other party’s way of
thinking and
modus operandi
, so that it will be possible to
effectively act against it (or in collaboration with it). We are
sometimes required to look at the strategy of both parties in
order to choose the one that seems to have the better strategy
(for instance,when it is required to select a manufacturer of a
product for some purpose).
However, in the political-security context we choose our side
based on other considerations (culture, history, geography)
rather than on the quality of the strategy employed by it.
This is especially true when we look at our alternative
modi
operandi
against a specified opponent, when we attempt to
understand its strategy and attach virtually no importance to
our estimation of it.
Below, we will attempt to map out two types of strategy – the
rational and the irrational.These two methods of thinking are
Gur Laish
Senior Director, National Security Council
Office of the Prime Minister, Israel
Gur Laish is a retired Israel Air Force (IAF) Colonel. He has
served as, among others, the head of the IAF Warfare
Planning Department and he has been involved in
strategic planning for both the IAF and the Israel Defense
Force. Currently, Gur is a Senior Director for National
Security Strategy at the Israel’s National Security Council.
To cite this Article:
Laish, Gur, “The Amorites Iniquity – A Comparative Analysis of Israeli and Hamas Strategies in Gaza,”
Infinity
Journal
,Volume 2, Issue No. 2, Spring 2012, pages 20-24.
The Amorites Iniquity – A Comparative Analysis of Israeli
and Hamas Strategies in Gaza
The work process involved in the
formulation of the strategy analyzes
the different options for achieving
various ends in order to arrive
at the preferred strategy.
