Faced with a multi-level dilemma regarding the Gaza Strip, Hamas might choose to respond to Egypt’s efforts to broker a settlement and move toward an acceptance of Israeli terms, in order to bring about a swift improvement in the humanitarian situation and present this to the Gaza population as a substantive achievement. In the cost-benefit analysis that compares this with a toppling of the Hamas government or a reoccupation of Gaza, Israel should accept the existence of a hostile state entity controlled by Hamas on its southern border – although ironically in that case it would itself be the element that saves Hamas from disintegration, just as the PLO was saved from disintegration following the Oslo process. The more this hostile entity is prepared to adopt logical political conduct, the easier it will be for Israel to deal with it. The option of dealing with a hostile state entity in Gaza while maintaining military deterrence on the one hand, and developing essential cooperation in civilian fields and allowing life in the Gaza Strip under reasonable conditions on the other hand, is the least worst option for Israel, even when it is clear that this future reality will also involve violent crises from time to time.

Read More at INSS.