JERUSALEM — The Israeli military calls it “the campaign between the wars” — short but increasingly harsh operations against the Hamas rulers of Gaza that are meant to warn off the Islamist militant group and postpone, if not prevent, the next major conflagration. The problem is that each round of escalating violence may instead bring the next war closer. For the second time in a week, Israel and Hamas battled across the Gaza border on Friday. Israeli warplanes fiercely pounded about 60 Hamas military sites after Palestinian gunmen from Gaza fatally shot an Israeli soldier. Both sides then quickly stepped back from the brink. Hamas, which lost three of its members, said Saturday that it was resuming the cease-fire that ended the last war with Israel in 2014 after intensive mediation by Egypt and the United Nations. Calm was mostly restored but once again, none of the underlying issues fanning the tensions had been resolved, leaving the two sides in a dangerous paralysis. Israel and Hamas have fought three wars in the last decade and many on both sides think a fourth is inevitable. With all the dangers of miscalculation, any number of mishaps could spiral into a war of no choice that neither side actually wants.<doc-sep>The events of the past few months along the border between Israel and the Gaza Strip show that Hamas’s strategy is to keep the conflict simmering, and thus keep the focus of international attention – while also keeping the conflict from boiling over into outright war.For the first time in weeks, the aftermath of the sniper attack that killed Givati Brigade St.-Sgt. Aviv Levi on Friday led Hamas leaders to realize Israel was closer than ever to launching a major military operation that could end their 11-year misrule over the Gaza Strip.This is why Hamas was quick to accept another Egyptian and UN-brokered truce with Israel. The massive IDF strikes on numerous Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip convinced the movement’s leaders that Israel has run out of patience and is determined to put an end to the attacks on its civilians and soldiers.Although Gaza sources insisted the sniper attack was a “local initiative” by some members of the movement’s armed wing, Izzadin al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas and other factions presented it as an “achievement.”It’s important for Hamas to show its supporters that it is capable of making Israel pay for the attacks that led to the death of some of its members in the past few weeks. So Friday’s sniper attack allowed Hamas to send a message to its supporters that it will not sit idly by as Israel kills Hamas operatives.These sources pointed out that Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh was on a tour of the Gaza-Israel border when the sniper attack took place. This, the sources said, proves that Hamas’s leadership did not have advanced knowledge of the shooting that killed the IDF soldier.Also, Hamas members were still in their bases near the border when the shooting occurred – another sign that the movement’s leadership and armed wing did not know about it in advance.“Hamas would not have sent one of its top leaders to the border had it known [in advance] about the sniper attack,” said a source in the Gaza Strip. “Hamas would also have ordered its men to leave their posts, as it regularly does, in anticipation of an Israeli retaliatory strike.”Regardless of the identity of the group behind the sniper attack, Hamas achieved two objectives on Friday: First, an IDF soldier was killed, in what Hamas and other Palestinian factions in Gaza call their “eye-for-an-eye” policy vis-à-vis Israel.Second, Hamas managed yet again to avoid an all-out war with Israel.Hamas’s top priority now is to remain in power while keeping the conflict with Israel on a low-burning flame.Hamas embarked on a risky strategy by launching the mass protests along the border with Israel in March. Hamas leaders say the protests will not stop until they achieve their number one objective: removing the blockade on the Gaza Strip. Hamas feels the protests have thus far achieved the goal of bringing Gaza’s crisis back to center stage in international coverage.At this phase, it’s hard to see how Hamas could climb down from the ladder without being able to present its supporters with some sort of achievement for the 140 killed and thousands injured during the weekly protests. This is why there is no end in sight for the protests, which the Palestinians call the “March of Return.”<doc-sep>Editor’s Note: Nikki Haley is the US permanent representative to the United Nations, David Friedman is the US ambassador to Israel, Jared Kushner is assistant to the President and senior adviser to the President, and Jason Greenblatt is assistant to the President and special representative for international negotiations. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the authors; view more opinion articles on CNN. (CNN) — The old cliché about turning around a battleship is true. It doesn’t happen quickly. But something is happening at the United Nations that proves that changing course is possible, and it holds important lessons for how the world considers issues in the Middle East. United States Mission to the United Nations Nikki Haley White House Photo Jared Kushner White House Photo David Friedman Stephanie Chasez/White House Jason Greenblatt For decades, the United Nations has been a metaphorical battleship, and its direction has been relentlessly and blindly anti-Israel. But something remarkable happened on June 13, and if our international partners continue the trend, we have cause to be more hopeful for a peaceful future for Israel and the Palestinians. On the surface, everything about the General Assembly session on June 13 appeared to be business as usual. Algeria offered a grossly one-sided resolution blaming Israel – and Israel alone – for the recent violence in Gaza. The resolution blatantly ignored the facts. Hamas, the terrorist group that controls Gaza, has been inciting the violence at the Israeli boundary fence for months, using Palestinian civilians as human shields. And Hamas and other terror groups have fired more than 100 rockets and sent untold numbers of flaming kites, some displaying swastikas, into Israel in the past month, hoping to kill as many Israeli civilians and destroy as much property as possible. And yet the Algerian resolution not only failed to hold Hamas terrorists accountable for their role in the violence, it failed to mention Hamas at all. In response, the United States proposed a simple amendment to the resolution that called out Hamas for its role in the skirmishes. A minimum fealty to the truth demanded that the United Nations condemn Hamas by name for firing rockets into Israel and for allowing other terror groups to do the same. Basic decency demanded that the United Nations express concern about the damage Hamas purposely does to the border crossings that deliver desperately needed food and fuel to the people of Gaza. We offered our amendment to give countries the opportunity to put the truth above politics by holding Hamas to account. Nothing like this had ever been done before at the United Nations. Hundreds of resolutions passed by the General Assembly dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have failed even to mention Hamas. What happened next was the beginning of a paradigm shift. Algeria made a motion to dismiss our amendment without debate and called for a vote, a move that was essentially saying that condemning Hamas didn’t even merit discussion. But when the voting was done, the assembled nations that voted rejected this contention. They voted 78-59 to go ahead with a vote on our amendment. When the amendment came to a vote, a miracle by UN standards happened. Although the measure ultimately failed for technical reasons, more nations voted for holding Hamas accountable with the US amendment than against it. For the first time in the United Nations, more nations than not acknowledged that peace between Israel and the Palestinian people must be built on a foundation of truth regarding Hamas. They recognized that reconciliation is impossible if reality is denied for the sake of scoring political points. And part of that reality is recognizing the primary responsibility Hamas bears in perpetuating the suffering of the people of Gaza. Unfortunately, Hamas’ malign activity is pushing Israel to engage in increasingly significant acts of self-defense. As in the case of past conflicts, Hamas starts a clash, loses the battle and its people suffer. That is the reality that needs to change. That foundation of reality underscores our administration’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital was a reflection of reality. Any realistic person knows that Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel under any peace agreement. But as President Donald Trump said when he made that decision, he made no judgment about the final borders of Jerusalem; the President directly called on all parties to maintain the status quo at Jerusalem’s holy sites. Those questions are for the parties to decide. Get our free weekly newsletter Sign up for CNN Opinion's new newsletter. Join us on Twitter and Facebook The peace proposal we will make will be similarly realistic, recognizing the legitimate needs of both Israel and the Palestinians as well as the interests of the broader region. No one will be fully pleased with our proposal, but that’s the way it must be if real peace is to be achieved. Peace can only succeed if it is based on realities. We got a glimpse of that at the United Nations on June 13. We expect to see more of this in the days ahead. The battleship is turning around.<doc-sep>
United Nations condemns excessive Israeli force against Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and east Jerusalem, June 13, 2018 (Reuters) NEW YORK – Senior Trump administration officials are placing full blame on Hamas for an increasingly dangerous military standoff with Israel in Gaza.Four members of the administration responsible for crafting Israel policy penned an op-ed in CNN on Saturday, claiming a “paradigm shift” is under way at the UN, in which member states are for the first time placing blame for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza on Hamas terrorists.Pressuring Hamas is critical, the US team asserted, in its effort to broker peace between Israelis and Palestinians – and in staving off a new war in the region.With the launching of rockets and arson kites, Hamas is “pushing Israel to engage in increasingly significant acts of self-defense,” the group added.Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law and senior adviser; Jason Greenblatt, US special representative for international negotiations; Nikki Haley, ambassador to the United Nations; and David Friedman, ambassador to Israel, wrote the piece. It was the second op-ed on the topic in two days from members of the Trump administration, following an article that appeared in The Washington Post on Friday.They cite a vote that took place last month in the UN General Assembly, when Algeria proposed a resolution criticizing Israel’s treatment of Palestinians in Gaza without referencing Hamas. Algeria tried – and failed – to shut down debate on a US amendment that would have added condemnation of Hamas.“Nothing like this had ever been done before at the United Nations. Hundreds of resolutions passed by the General Assembly dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict have failed even to mention Hamas,” the group wrote. “When the amendment came to a vote, a miracle by UN standards happened. Although the measure ultimately failed for technical reasons, more nations voted for holding Hamas accountable with the US amendment than against it.“For the first time in the United Nations, more nations than not acknowledged that peace between Israel and the Palestinian people must be built on a foundation of truth regarding Hamas,” the US team added. “They recognized that reconciliation is impossible if reality is denied for the sake of scoring political points. And part of that reality is recognizing the primary responsibility Hamas bears in perpetuating the suffering of the people of Gaza.”The four top officials said that Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital – a controversial decision widely condemned by the international community, but praised by Israelis and the president’s political base – would serve as a model in their larger Middle East peace plan, which the White House is expected to unveil by the end of the year.“That foundation of reality underscores our administration’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” the group said. “The peace proposal we will make will be similarly realistic, recognizing the legitimate needs of both Israel and the Palestinians as well as the interests of the broader region.“No one will be fully pleased with our proposal,” they added, “but that’s the way it must be if real peace is to be achieved. Peace can only succeed if it is based on realities.”