Last night I had the strangest dream I ever dreamed before. I dreamed the world had all agreed put an end to war. I dreamed I saw a mighty room. The room was filled with men, and the paper they were signing said they’d never fight again. And when the papers were all signed, and a million copies made, they all joined hands and bowed their heads, and grateful prayers were prayed. And the people in the streets below were dancing round and round, while swords and guns and uniforms lay scattered on the ground. – Ed McCurdy, 1950.

That was written 75 years ago, and popularized in the 1960’s by Paul Simon. How many wars have we seen since then? And how many truces and ceasefires broken?

An article this week by Joshua Arnold in the Washington Standard reports, regarding the peace deal just worked out between Israel and Hamas, that “few commentators have chosen to dwell on the dark exchange that made that possible. Namely, in exchange for Hamas freeing the last 20 hostages, Israel also freed nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners, including 250 convicted terrorists, most of whom were serving life sentences in Israeli prisons.” According to the Standard, many of these prisoners were not Gaza Palestinians. They were terrorists from the Palestinian Authority (PA), captured in earlier conflicts and now released at the demand of Hamas.

In other words, for some reason a severely depleted Hamas has just negotiated the release of captive PA terrorists in addition to its own prisoners as a part of its truce agreement with Israel. In effect, this element of the deal unites Hamas and the PA, formerly rivals for power but always partners in their ultimate objective. Both seek the destruction of Israel, and both see terror as not only legitimate but as a preferential means to that objective.

Hamas may have been defeated in the field, but it appears likely that – as usual – they have won the truce. In just a few years, hordes of Palestinian children, brainwashed by Hamas to hate Jews, will replace the existing terror cadre. And now they will be joined by the equally rabid progeny of PA terrorists. How hard is it to imagine that under the tutelage of these newly released Hamas and PA zealots, this bloody cycle will stage yet another encore? I find it impossible to imagine otherwise.

As the Standard article points out, based on past performance, “Hamas will do everything it can to cheat.” This applies to the PA as well. Does this mean yet more terror even in the short term? Or can this ageless leopard really change its spots? “In practice, their inclinations and objectives (those of Hamas and the PA) seem to overlap to an uncanny—and uncomfortable—degree.”

Traditional Islamic jurisprudence requires that truces with non-Muslims must be temporary, with a duration of no more than ten years. Such treaties, called hudnas, may and in fact must be violated whenever it would be advantageous for the Muslim forces to do so. The practice of hudna is based on Muhammad’s observation that “war is deceit,” and that false treaties (hudnas) are merely another form of military strategy.

For Muslims, to maintain a treaty when it would be more advantageous to violate it would greatly displease Allah. Hudnas are typically employed as a strategic maneuver by Muslims who find themselves facing defeat or in a state of weakness. It allows them to regroup, re-arm, and build up strength. The concept is derived from the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, a 10-year armistice signed by Muhammad with the Quraysh tribe of Mecca in 628 AD.

Muhammad’s forces were outnumbered at the time, and so he agreed as follows: “This is what Muhammad b. Abdullah has agreed with Suhayl v. Amr. They have agreed to lay aside war for ten years during which men can be safe and refrain from hostilities on condition that if anyone comes to Muhammad (approaches him from the Quraysh as a refugee or ally) without the permission of his guardian he (Muhammad) will return him to them; and if anyone of those with Muhammad comes to Quraysh (approaches them as a refugee or ally) they will not return him to him. We will not show enmity one to another and there shall be no secret reservation of bad faith….” (Sirat page 504).

The “Companions” (Muhammad’s inner circle) saw this treaty with pagans as a humiliation and a defeat, and they challenged the Prophet over it. In response, Allah instructed Muhammad that the truce was actually a great victory, from which, he told his followers, “much spoil which you will capture.” However, the provision that required his jihadis to turn over escaped fellow Muslims to the Quraysh still rankled. (Bukhari 4.406)

In the end, to appease his discontented followers Muhammad chose to violate the clear terms of the treaty. When some women came to him for refuge from the Quraysh, Allah conveniently but not surprisingly forbade him to return them. (Sirat page 509). Instead, he instructed the “Prophet” merely to return their dowries. Muhammad reported to his followers that Allah allowed him to violate the terms of the treaty because they were only a test of their faith. (Surah 60:10)

But this too was a problem for Muhammad, because Allah had already forbidden him to accept terms harmful to Muslims, which this treaty clearly did. (By the way, this analysis finds confirmation in The Encyclopedia of Islam, New Edition, Volume III, Hiram, Brill, Leiden, page 539, “Hudaybiyya.”) In short, according to Muhammad, Allah ordered him to break the very treaty he had only a short while earlier ordered him to accept. In any event, during this his first hudna Muhammad recruited an army of 10,000 and defeated the Quraysh, setting the doctrine in stone.

It was from Allah’s approbation of this deceit by Muhammad, “the perfect man,” that the doctrine of hudna became formalized. Contemporary treaty violations by Hamas and other Islamist factions around the world are in perfect conformity with this doctrine. And so, it should come as no surprise that Hamas has repeatedly violated its ceasefire agreements with Israel, significantly benefitting from doing so each time.

In December of 2008, after unprovoked Hamas rocket attacks on Israeli civilians, Israel agreed to a ceasefire based on a US promise to help block arms flow to Hamas. Hamas conceded nothing, and the stream of arms continued to flow.

That treaty didn’t last. In July of 2012 Hamas again launched unprovoked rocket attacks on the people of Israel. The Israelis countered with air strikes. A ceasefire between the two was arranged by Egypt and the US.

But two years later this treaty was also broken by Hamas, when Muslim militants kidnapped and murdered three Israeli teenagers. In retaliation, Israel sent troops into the West Bank. Hamas then launched rockets on Israel from Gaza, and so on. As part of a ceasefire arranged by Egypt, Israel delivered millions of dollars in aid to Hamas for the rebuilding of Gaza.

But this aid only helped to prepare Hamas for its next attack. In May of 2021, Hamas launched rockets at Israeli cities. Israel retaliated with air strikes on Gaza. After two weeks of fighting, the sides agree to a ceasefire brokered by Egypt, Qatar and the UN. Pursuant to this agreement, Israel issued thousands of permits allowing Gaza Palestinians to work in Israel.

But as should have been expected, that gesture of good will did not relieve Hamas from the duties of hudna. In October of 2023, Hamas launched a surprise attack against the Israeli village of Simchat Torah. The invading terrorists murdered roughly 1200 young Israelis and kidnapped more than 200 others. Eventually that war, like all the others, turned against Hamas. Hence the dubious treaty the world is so joyously celebrating right now.

In each case the development of the conflict has been the same. Hamas contrives a pretext, and launches an assault into Israel from Gaza. Israel counters with air strikes. Next, under international pressure Israel, though winning the conflict militarily, agrees to a cease fire. Hamas is rewarded for its pretense of good faith with international aid and economic concessions from Israel, and often from “the international community.” There is quiet for a time, as everyone forgets the past betrayals, and then Hamas launches a new surprise attack against Israeli civilians.

We are all too familiar with the hackneyed definition of insanity, so I won’t bore you with it. But sometimes, when it comes to policy, it seems we lack the sense or the will to apply it. So let me ask you this pointed and rather obvious question. Why will it be any different this time?