The war in the Gaza Strip is both about the illusion of power and about its limitations. Hamas, like a classic, guerrilla-terror organization, spent five years developing an impressive long-range rocket arsenal as well as a comprehensive underground terror world — a fundamentalist religious ideology marrying sophisticated modern armament. The well-prepared infrastructure of terror, however, turned out to be a disappointment to its architects, due to the Iron Dome air defense system and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) incursion.

Israel is one of the leading military powers in the world; yet, it is unable to defeat a terrorist group of 20,000 fighters, surviving underneath the Gaza Strip.

Much thought is given in political capitals across the region, the United States and Europe to the strategic repercussions of the war for the region's future; not only in terms of policy analysis but also for eventual policymaking. When the guns finally go silent, it is time for diplomacy.

Senior policy analysts at the State Department are talking about a new configuration of forces in the aftermath of Operation Protective Edge. Throughout the war, a regional coalition of interests became evident in favor of a pragmatic policy and security approach. It includes Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. They see in Islamic fundamentalism and radicalism — such as in Syria, Iraq and Gaza — a danger to regional stability and geopolitical interests. The challenge now facing American, Arab and Israeli policymakers is how to translate this common view into a sustainable structure of stability.