The call yesterday by Hamas and other fighting factions for a 24-hour ceasefire had a strategic, humanitarian, public relations and political purpose.
The pause was timed to precede today’s holiday of Eid al-Fitr, which marks the end of the Muslim fasting month of Ramadan.
Israel’s rejection of the truce clears Hamas in the blame game the two sides have been playing.
The pause would have given Palestinian civilians in Gaza a respite from aerial attack and shelling, and a chance to get money from ATMs and shop for food.
Hamas had rejected a proposal to extend a previous ceasefire until midnight yesterday because Israel had continued its offensive.
Strategy
Strategically , Hamas could have been planning to take advantage of this ceasefire to redeploy its fighters along an Israeli-imposed 3km exclusion zone on Gaza’s land borders with Israel to inflict fresh casualties on Israeli troops.
However, Israel dismissed the ceasefire offer. If Hamas is no longer able to pursue its mission, Palestinians could demand the movement declare a unilateral ceasefire.
Hamas is partially justifying continuation of the campaign because it is having more of an effect than any other such campaign, with the loss of more Israeli soldiers.
On the humanitarian front, Hamas’s change of mind on a ceasefire appeared to have been inspired by scenes of utter devastation in Israeli-targeted neighbourhoods and by the need to give Palestinians more time to see if relatives had survived, assess damage to homes and recover whatever belongings they could.
Rescue workers also needed more time to retrieve from the rubble crushed and burned bodies that need early burial in accordance with Muslim custom.
Public relations
In terms of public relations, the movement did not want to lose all-important popular backing for its decision to stand up to Israel and press for the Palestinian demand for an end to the siege and blockade of Gaza. It also counts on images of destruction and death broadcast around the world to exert pressure on Israel to halt its assault and agree to terms Hamas can accept.
Finally, in terms of diplomacy, Hamas sought to gain political advantage over Israel by calling for a new truce after Israel rejected the seven-day ceasefire proposed by US secretary of state John Kerry.
Before Israel’s security cabinet voted against the Kerry proposal, Hamas had shown willingness to go along with the plan, which addressed the easing of Israel’s siege and blockade of Gaza.
Hamas demands the release of Palestinian prisoners, opening of border crossings into Gaza and an end to Israeli limitations on trade, farming, fishing and freedom of movement. These issues were supposed to be tackled after Israel’s 2012 offensive but nothing has been done due to Israeli rejection.