If you've been monitoring the news sources we suggested a few days ago, you know that Hamas has been trumpeting their great military "victory" over the IDF this past week. But who really won? For their part, the IDF hasn't been talking about victory or defeat, but rather about the achievement of their military objectives--which they have declared a success. So once again, who won the war? Were there any winners or losers? For his perspective as an Israeli believer who lives in Haifa, Israel, we turn once again to our friend Marvin Kramer:

Shalom all, Operation "Pillar of Cloud" came to an abrupt halt on Wednesday night. Israel abided by the cease fire and stopped all aggressive military action by 9:00 p.m., as agreed. Not so with Hamas, who kept firing missiles into Israel for another 2 hours plus, after the cease fire went into effect. Who won? Who lost? Those two big questions that immediately followed the announcement of the cease fire properly focused on Israel and Hamas. But, from a very practical perspective, the big winner was Egyptian President, Mohamed Morsi. With the dust finally beginning to settle on the 8-day conflict, we are able to get a better perspective on what happened, what was done, what remains to be done and whether it will be done and the when and where of it all. The cease fire that was declared this past Wednesday evening was brokered, and announced, by the United States and Egypt, not by the parties themselves. This, in itself, should give us all a clear indication of who was acting behind the scenes while the players themselves continued in the conflict, testing whose missiles would be the first to succeed to achieve their objectives. A joint press conference was held in Cairo, Egypt, by U.S. Secretary of State Hilary Clinton and Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohamed Kamel Amr, who announced a "de-escalation of the situation in Gaza." The essence of their statements appear in the following:- Amr: “The government of Egypt will continue its efforts to achieve this noble objective through ongoing attempts to end the divisions between the various 'Palestinian' factions and to assist them in achieving 'Palestinian' national unity on the basis of genuine 'Palestinian' values and interests,” he said. “Egypt appreciates the role of the Arab League, the valuable contributions of Turkey and Qatar, and those of the secretary-general of the United Nations to support the efforts of the government of Egypt to end the violence. At the same time, Egypt calls upon the international community to be engaged in monitoring the implementation of the Egyptian-brokered agreement and to ensure all parties adhere to these agreements.” Clinton: “The people of this region deserve the chance to live free from fear and violence, and today’s agreement is a step in the right direction that we should build on,” she said. “Now we have to focus on reaching a durable outcome that promotes regional stability and advances the security, dignity, and legitimate aspirations of 'Palestinians' and Israelis alike. President [of Egypt, Mohamed}  Morsi [who played a central role in negotiating the cease fire] and I discussed how the United States and Egypt can work together to support the next steps in that process....Ultimately, every step must move us toward a comprehensive peace for all the people of the region.” Neither statement was surprising. Both set forth the national perspectives of the speakers. Amr - Egyptian President Morsi remains allied to the Moslem Brotherhood and to the radical Islamist agenda. Clinton - Israel and "Palestinians" are considered equals and they both should be able to "advance [their] legitimate aspirations ... for all the people of the region." Both statements were clearly pro-"Palestinian". His being contextually more racial and religious in tone, while hers expressed an intention to resume the "two states for two peoples" rhetoric. No condemnation of terrorism of Hamas, who fired missiles into civilization population centers. No condemnation of Hamas, who sent missiles into Tel Aviv, the economic center of Israel. No condemnation, or even specific mention, of Hamas, who fired missiles at Jerusalem, the capital of Israel, with seeming unconcern that sites considered holy to Islam and Christianity, as well as Judaism, might be hit. Maybe a cease fire was the right thing, maybe it wasn't. Maybe it was right and the timing was right. Maybe it was right and the timing was wrong. Maybe it was simply the wrong thing at the wrong time. As with most things, and particularly, with politically-motivated events, time will tell. In a nutshell, the Agreement of Understanding For a Ceasefire in the Gaza Strip (note: even the title of this "agreement" is limited in its geographical area) requires that “Israel should stop all hostilities in the Gaza Strip land, sea and air including incursions and targeting of individuals” (Paragraph "1A") and open “the crossings and facilitating the movement of people and transfer of goods and refraining from restricting residents’ free movements and targeting residents in border areas....” (Paragraph "1C"). Sandwiched in-between those two paragraphs is the requirement placed on “[all] ‘Palestinian’ factions”, who are to “stop all hostilities from the Gaza Strip against Israel including rocket attacks and all attacks along the border.” (Paragraph "1B"). The last paragraph of this short agreement calls for Egypt to act as mediator between the parties in the event of a breach by either side (Paragraph "2C"). In other words, Egypt, acting through its current President, Mohamed Morsi, who played a central role in negotiating the cease fire, will be given the role of mediating violations of that agreement. The verbatim text of this agreement can be viewed at: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/text-cease-fire-agreement-between-israel-and-hamas.premium-1.479653  The failure to refer specifically to Hamas and to its indiscriminate shelling of civilian, population centers, speaks volumes. As a brief aside, Morsi wasted no time in rearranging the power structure in Egypt for his own benefit, which act provoked protests and demonstrations once again in Cairo's Tahrir Square. Essentially, and among other edicts, Morsi granted to himself new powers that placed him, and his decrees, above the judiciary and ordered that the Moslem Brotherhood dominated assembly, that was writing the new constitution, could not be dissolved by any legal challenges. He also ordered the retrial of former President Hosni Mubarak (now serving a life sentence for his crimes against the Egyptian people) and others and cancelled protections against being tried twice for the same crime, by issuing a special law that set up a new, transitional legal system to handle such retrials. Placing mediation of cease-fire violations in Morsi's hands has caused not a few commentators to indicate that this is a classic instance of the "scorpion on the back of the turtle." Over the last two days, there seems to be a topsy-turvy kind of response to the 8-day military operation against rocket bombardments from Gaza. We knocked the socks off of them, but they are dancing in the streets. Many here, on the other hand, are hanging there heads low. Whether we agree with the cease fire, or disagree with it, is not the issue. It is a fact and we need to see how it will pan out. Both P.M. Netanyahu and his ministers did their best to explain to the media the following day how successful Operation "Pillar of Cloud" (wrongfully translation as "Pillar of Defense") was.  Their efforts were given assistance by the IDF, whose website contributed greatly to the on-going media, explanation offensive that took place during and following the military Operation. Notwithstanding the official, government statements of resounding success, still, public opinion polls reflected popular disappointment that Israel did not pursue its campaign to the end, i.e., to the total devastation of not only Hamas' infrastructure, but to Hamas and its leadership as well. On the whole, during the course of the present operation and until the announcement of the cease fire, the public was appreciative of the performance of Defense Minister Ehud Barak. He acknowledged that the majority of Israelis wanted the IDF to launch as ground assault, he pointed out that “The time is not right for us to go in and conquer Gaza. We may though reach that point at another time.” See the IDF web site for the following list of 1,500 terror sites targeted during the recent Operation, namely: 30   senior Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists 19   high-level command centers 980 underground rocket launchers 140 smuggling tunnels 66   tunnels used for terrorist operations 42   operation rooms and bases owned by Hamas 26   weapons manufacturing and storage facilities Dozens of long-range rocket launchers and launch sites http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=490421037647438&set=a.250335824989295.62131.125249070831305&type=1&relevant_count=1&ref=nf In an attempt to further justify the cease fire, he pointed out that previous military operations started out well, with much public support, which support quickly waned, both nationally as well as internationally, as the body count increased. Continuation of the conflict and the sending in of ground troops could again result in such a situation, leaving the government embroiled in military conflict that lacks popular support. There are other factors to take into account, such as the shadow of Hamas' big brother, Iran, and his fraternal twin brothers, the Hisb'allah in Lebanon and the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt. They may have been discussed, along with other considerations in deciding whether or not to employ ground troops in the recent conflict, and the price that would have to be paid from all perspectives. One such consideration was clearly that sending in ground troops could easily result in canceling the fragile peace treaty with Egypt. With all of the rhetoric put aside, there is still no clear answer to the question of why the government did not instruct the IDF to launch a ground assault. Perhaps we can glean some understanding from the comment of F.M. Avigdor Lieberman, who stated on Thursday: “We cannot ignore requests by the U.S. president and EU heads of state, who formed an international coalition that supported Israel.”  He also stated: “I am sure that under the circumstances, we made the best decision we could have made. We cannot share all of our considerations with the public.” No matter how many try to deny it or get around it, if plain words have any significance, then those of leading, government ministers should be understood as stated. This presumes, of course, that such words are capable of simple understanding and are not clouded by political double-talk. Given such a situation, where pressure was placed upon us by our friends, one would have to question the validity of the statement of Defense Minister Ehud Barak: “If the rocket fire is renewed and they do not honor their promises, we will hit them extremely hard. We will not tolerate another round of fighting every few weeks.” Time will tell whether he will be held accountable to fulfill those words. On the one hand, all here acknowledge that the IDF hit Hamas hard. But, was it hard enough? Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen Benny Gantz said on Thursday: “All the aims of the operation were achieved....” If that is the case and the operation was limited in its scope, then why was it necessary to mobilize tens of thousands of reservists, only to have them return to civilian life a few days later? If it was a scare tactic, it doesn't seem to have worked, as rockets continued to be launched from Gaza even two hours after the cease fire went into effect. Just to be sure that the wrong message is not being conveyed, we return to the question: Did we win? The answer must be “Yes, in many ways.” For the first time in a long time, the international media, not including Arab-controlled media, gave us almost a balanced representation, at least for a while. That is no small accomplishment. Israeli victims of Hamas rocket attacks, sitting in bomb shelters, were shown to be people with faces, and emotions, while Hamas was shown to be what it is, a terrorist organization. We were shown to be determined not to allow enemy missiles to destroy our resolve to hang in there, no matter how long it takes, even at tremendous cost to us. We sustained loss of life and to property, but remained resolute not to yield to despair. Our intelligence gathering branch did what it was supposed to do and provided information that lead to pinpointing and attacking precise targets and to destroying much of the terrorist infrastructure, both above and under the ground, that had been constructed in the four years since Operation "Cast Lead". Hamas did everything it could to kill civilians indiscriminately and cause as much damage as possible. Our reservists acted like war heroes, displaying the enthusiasm of new recruits, even though they were kept mostly out of the fighting. Our nation did not rejoice when we saw pictures of civilian casualties in Gaza. Yet, Hamas and its ardent followers claimed victory and rejoiced while standing on the ruins of their destroyed homes and the dead bodies of their friends and members of their families. Many more comparisons can be made and we can point to the many achievements in this latest conflict, not the least of which is the effectiveness of the Iron Dome anti-missile system, and the simply exemplary manner in which the Israeli home front conducted itself, even in the midst of missile attacks that brought Tel Aviv (the city that never sleeps - because everyone is looking for a parking space!) to a temporary standstill. I could mention those areas where Israel was less than successful in this recent confrontation, but I would rather concentrate on the glass being half full, rather than half empty. War isn't a game that is played and then the players pack up and go home. It is serious and deadly. People are killed or injured. Lives are disrupted and family units are torn apart. Homes are lost and property is destroyed. Thoughts run in every direction, but people are driven by the overriding desire to survive. For Israel and primarily for the Jewish people who live here, the present cease fire does not end the war. The battle continues to rage over our right to exist and to live freely in our ancient homeland. This ongoing battle is one for the mind. It is fought not only with weapons, but also with words, caricatures, media campaigns and internet communications and then some. Given this understanding of the waging of war, why in the world are people looking at Gazans who are cheering over their destroyed neighborhoods and believing their "V for victory" signs and their shouts of victory over Israel? Why would we listen to, much less believe, the absurd rhetoric of Hamas leaders, who claim to have been victorious over the Israeli military establishment, particularly when the rest of the world recognizes that Hamas has suffered a major blow? Probably, because notwithstanding that we won, we recognize that it was less than an absolutely decisive victory. Hamas did not cry "uncle". It called out for its big brother, the Moslem Brotherhood. Morsi showed up and negotiations to end fighting began and pressure was applied to end it before it escalated and multiplied the numbers of casualties. When Operation "Pillar of Cloud" came to an end, Hamas continued to exist and raised its head. Being human and having been involved in war after war, battle after battle and operation after operation, we would have preferred to see it end with Hamas unable to raise its head, because its head was cut off. Things didn't work out that way. Instead, we see that the failures of Hamas and its followers was taken out on members of its own citizenry, who were suspected, but not proven, to be cooperating with Israel, and who were executed and made public examples of what would happen to collaborators. And this, for them, was a reason to celebrate. Then, of course, they celebrated not because they won, but because our missiles stopped. Before complaining that we did not cut off the head of Hamas, we should reflect on the following story: “A high-ranking IDF officer was conducting a patrol of infantry positions near the Syrian border. Suddenly the whistle of a bullet came from the enemy’s direction. The commanding officer, an experienced campaigner, jumped into a nearby trench and ordered the company commander to locate the sniper. But the company commander stayed upright and kept on walking, calm as could be. “‘Why don’t you kill him?’ fumed the high-ranking officer. “‘Sir,’ the company commander said, ‘that sniper has been responsible for our sector for the past two months and hasn’t managed to hit anybody. If we kill him, the Syrians could send another sniper who actually knows how to shoot.’” Time after time, agreements have been signed between Israel and her neighbors, including the leadership of those who call themselves "Palestinians". Most of the time, it turned out that such agreements were not worth the price of the paper on which they were written. If Hamas' memory proves to be short and violates the cease-fire agreement, then it will learn the hard way that Israel has the ability to put an end, once and for all, to rocket fire and all forms of aggression coming out of Gaza. And, if it must be done, it will be done. Then, Operation "Pillar of Cloud" will be re-designated as Operation "Pillar of Fire". And that was The Week That Was. “The LORD bless you from Zion and may you see the prosperity of Jerusalem all the days of your life.” (Psalm 128:5) “The LORD’s lovingkindnesses indeed never cease, For His compassions never fail. They are new every morning; Great is Your faithfulness. ‘The LORD is my portion’, says my soul, ‘Therefore I have hope in Him.’ The LORD is good to those who wait for Him, To the person who seeks Him. It is good that he waits silently for the salvation of the LORD.” (Lam. 3:22-26) Be blessed and have a Great week, Marvin