It’s hard to see the point. As the body and casualty count continues to rise in Gaza, and neither party seems open to a ceasefire, I find myself more and more confused. I don’t see how Hamas rule in Gaza has done anything wreck the Palestinian national interest while securing the rightwing in Israel. Ignoring his pugnacious and obnoxious signature style, especially as reflected in the title of this recent piece, would friends to the left of me or on the anti-Zionist left please explain what’s wrong with the basic contours of Jeffrey Goldberg’s analysis here in this piece re: the motivations driving Hamas in this current round of conflict and the counter-factual posed at the end of the article?
The main points seem to be 2:
 “Mahmoud Abbas, the sometimes moderate, often ineffectual leader of the Palestinian Authority, just asked his rivals in Hamas a question that other bewildered people are also asking: “What are you trying to achieve by sending rockets?”…There is no doubt that Hamas could protect Palestinian lives by ceasing its current campaign to end Israeli lives. The decision is Hamas’s. As the secretary-general of the United Nations, Ban Ki-moon, said yesterday, “We face the risk of an all-out escalation in Israel and Gaza, with the threat of a ground offensive still palpable — and preventable only if Hamas stops rocket firing.”
 “In 2005, the Palestinians of Gaza, free from their Israeli occupiers, could have…created the necessary infrastructure for eventual freedom. Gaza is centrally located between two large economies, those of Israel and Egypt. Europe is just across the Mediterranean. Gaza could have easily attracted untold billions in economic aid. If Gaza had, despite all the difficulties, despite all the handicaps imposed on it by Israel and Egypt, taken practical steps toward creating the nucleus of a state, I believe Israel would have soon moved to evacuate large sections of the West Bank as well. But what Hamas wants most is not a state in a part of Palestine. What it wants is the elimination of Israel. It will not achieve the latter, and it is actively thwarting the former.”
To anticipate critical pushback, I’d add that it’s not that I don’t see how the 1967 occupation of the West Bank constitutes a key driver factoring into this conflict with Hamas. But I don’t think that’s what, at present, motivates Hamas rule in Gaza, its steps and missteps. My own guess is that what drives this current round of conflict from the Hamas side has more to do with partisan party interest, the attempt to bolster it’s own reputation and authority, more than it does with advancing the Palestinian national interest against the 1967 occupation.