When
Israelis discuss Hamas's attack as an existential threat, they mean it quite
literally, not figuratively. The undeniable toll of Israel's strikes in Gaza
underscores the gravity of the situation. However, achieving peace in the
region necessitates a substantial dismantling and weakening of Hamas's control.
Israeli forces are now confronted with a harrowing situation, one they seem unable to prevent from unfolding. The relentless onslaught of Israeli airstrikes and artillery has laid waste to an alarming one in ten buildings in Gaza. This catastrophic campaign has resulted in the tragic loss of over 8,000 Palestinian lives, with a heart-wrenching number of victims being innocent children. Adding to the severity of the crisis, the Israeli blockade has exacerbated shortages of critical resources, including fuel, clean water, and food, placing the lives of many thousands more Palestinians in an ever-increasing state of jeopardy.
Across
the globe, a unified call is echoing for an immediate ceasefire or for Israel
to withdraw from its ground invasion. Amid this tumultuous period, the rhetoric
of certain Israeli politicians, including Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu,
invoking calls for vengeance, has left many individuals with a disheartening
impression that Israel's actions may indeed be both disproportionate and
morally questionable. It is worth noting that among those raising these
concerns, there exists a shared belief in the necessity of a Jewish state.
However, they grapple with deep-seated apprehensions regarding a Jewish state
that appears to undervalue Palestinian lives. These concerned voices are
haunted by the fear that the slender hopes for peace in this enduring conflict
may ultimately be entombed beneath the ruins of Gaza.
These
arguments carry significant weight, but they lead to a conclusion that may not
align with the ultimate goal of peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Undoubtedly, there have been distressing civilian casualties resulting from the
conflict, and it is imperative for Israel to take measures to minimize such
tragic outcomes. Furthermore, there is a pressing need for Israel to find
effective ways to communicate these efforts to the global community, ensuring
transparency in their actions. Simultaneously, the Palestinian population in
Gaza faces a dire shortage of essential humanitarian supplies, necessitating a
more substantial flow of aid from Israel.
Nevertheless,
even if Israel commits to fulfilling these responsibilities, the path to
lasting peace appears to require a significant reduction in Hamas's ability to
utilize Gaza as a source of supplies and a base for its military operations.
Tragically, this might entail the use of military force. To fully grasp why
this approach is considered necessary, one must delve into the events of
October 7th. When Israelis refer to Hamas's attacks as an existential threat,
it's a literal concern, not a mere figure of speech. This unique apprehension
stems from the historical context of pogroms and the Holocaust, which
underscore the importance of Israel's social contract: to establish a land
where Jews can live free from the fear of persecution or harm due to their
Jewish identity. Over the years, the state has consistently honored this
commitment through a strategic doctrine that emphasizes deterrence, early
warning systems for potential attacks, protecting the home front, and achieving
decisive victories in conflicts.
Over
the course of the past two decades, Israel seemed to have lost sight of a
fundamental truth: that Palestinians, too, deserve a homeland of their own. It
was a period marked by a complex and often challenging political landscape.
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, there was a strategy
that inadvertently ended up strengthening Hamas, a militant group, and in the
process, it undermined the more moderate Palestinian voices. This approach, in
hindsight, appeared somewhat cynical, as it aimed to argue that there was no
genuine partner for peace negotiations on the Palestinian side. Instead of
addressing the core issues, the Palestinian people's suffering became a matter
of management, involving a mix of financial incentives and deterrence
strategies, all of which were repeatedly tested by short-lived conflicts.
However,
everything took a dramatic turn on October 7th when Hamas carried out a series
of actions that shattered Mr. Netanyahu's already fragile strategy. In an
unprecedented move, Hamas militants disrupted the social fabric in Israel by
dismantling the security doctrine that had been painstakingly built to protect
the nation. The previously reliable deterrence strategy proved ineffective,
there were no early warnings of attacks, home-front protection faltered, and,
tragically, Hamas managed to claim the lives of 1,400 people in Israeli
communities. This incident resulted in a profound humiliation for Israel's
military and intelligence forces.
The
collapse of Israel's security doctrine subsequently unleashed a fierce and
relentless bombardment against the people of Gaza. This forceful response was
driven by the need to restore Israel's fundamental principle of security.
Israel was determined to allow its approximately 200,000 evacuees to return to
their homes, demonstrating to its numerous adversaries that it retained the
capacity to defend itself. Most significantly, Israel came to recognize that
Hamas, by consistently targeting Israelis without regard for the well-being of
Palestinians in Gaza, had demonstrated an unyielding commitment to its
objectives and proved itself undeterrable.
In
essence, recent events have forced Israel to reassess its approach to the
Palestinian issue, recognizing the need to address the aspirations of
Palestinians for statehood while also safeguarding its own security. This
delicate balancing act remains a formidable challenge, one with far-reaching
implications that extend beyond the borders of Israel and Palestine, impacting
the entire Middle East region. The human element in this complex narrative is
essential, as it underscores the profound impact of these events on the lives
of ordinary people caught up in the midst of a long-standing conflict.
War
for Peace
The
only way to break free from the cycle of violence is by dismantling Hamas's
rule, which necessitates the elimination of its senior leaders and the
destruction of its military infrastructure. The idea that a conflict causing
the deaths of numerous innocent civilians can lead to peace deeply troubles
many people, as it reminds us of the devastating human cost involved.
Historically, one act of violence has often triggered another, and this remains
a significant risk today, emphasizing the urgent need for change.
However,
as long as Hamas continues to govern Gaza, achieving peace becomes an
impossible task. Israelis continually grapple with a sense of insecurity, which
leads their government to launch preemptive strikes against Gaza whenever Hamas
poses a threat. The Palestinians, caught in the crossfire and often used as
human shields during Israeli raids, suffer unimaginable hardships, which only
further fuels their radicalization. The only way forward is to totally dismantle
Hamas's control while creating the conditions for something new to emerge.
This
process must begin with new leadership on both sides. In Israel, the pressure
on Mr. Netanyahu to step down due to his tenure on October 7th and his
tarnished reputation as Israel's staunchest defender is a reflection of the
evolving human sentiment. The sooner this transition occurs, the better it will
be for the people involved. His successor will need to secure a mandate for a
new security doctrine that includes a comprehensive peace plan and measures to
rein in Israeli settlers who are currently causing harm to Palestinians in the
West Bank, all with the aim of improving the lives of those living in the
region.
It
is no secret that the Palestinians need moderate leaders who have a clear
democratic mandate. Unfortunately, at the present moment, such leaders are in
short supply. This situation can be attributed, in part, to the actions of Mr.
Netanyahu, which inadvertently bolstered the influence of Hamas. Additionally,
the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has taken steps that
sideline potential rivals within the Palestinian leadership. The critical
question that arises is how to prevent Hamas, or any potential successor, from
regaining control of Gaza before fresh leaders can emerge through fair and
transparent elections.
This
leads us to the second crucial condition for achieving lasting peace in the
region: the establishment of a security force in Gaza. Given Israel's status as
an occupying power, it is not in a position to provide the necessary security
independently. Instead, the Gaza Strip requires the support of an international
coalition, one that may include Arab nations with a shared interest in
countering Hamas and its supporter, Iran. Without putting it in may words,
creating such a coalition that garners consensus among all parties will demand
dedicated leadership from the United States and a significant leap of faith
from the regional actors involved.
This
brings us back to a fundamental condition that can pave the way for a brighter
future: a concerted effort to weaken Hamas to a point where a more constructive
alternative can emerge. The approach taken by Israel in this conflict holds
immense significance. It is imperative for Israel to uphold its commitment to
honoring international law not just because it is morally right but also
because it is essential for maintaining broad support throughout the course of
the conflict. Ultimately, Israel's ability to garner backing for peace
initiatives in the aftermath of the conflict will largely depend on
demonstrating a willingness to change. Currently, this entails allowing
increased humanitarian aid and establishing genuine safe zones in locations
such as southern Gaza, Egypt, or even within Israel, particularly in the Negev,
as a tangible demonstration of its sincerity in seeking a peaceful resolution.
As
a practical matter, fostering peace in this challenging situation requires a
combination of factors, including the emergence of moderate Palestinian
leaders, the formation of an international security coalition for Gaza, and a
strategic approach to dismantle and destroy Hamas while adhering to
international norms and signaling a genuine commitment to change.
Thus
a ceasefire at this point is a real obstacle to achieving peace. It would
essentially allow Hamas to maintain its control over Gaza, whether the people
there agree or not, and they would get to keep most of their weapons and
fighters. The idea of humanitarian pauses might seem more reasonable, but even
those come with a downside. They could actually increase the chances of Hamas
surviving and staying in power. While nobody can predict the future, we all
want the best possible chance for both Israelis and Palestinians to find peace.
Unfortunately, a ceasefire at this stage would completely eliminate that chance.
Notes
Jobain, N., Magdy, S., & Nessman, R. (2023, October 25). Israeli
Airstrikes Surge in Gaza, Destroying Homes and Killing Dozens at a Time. Retrieved
from AP News:
https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinian-gaza-war-hamas-hostages-macron-c2482817f230580c20b898bd65e5a4c3
Pompeo, M. R. (2023, November 20). Israel Defeating Hamas
Aids Arab States, Even If They Are Afraid to Admit It. Retrieved from
Hudson Institute:
https://www.hudson.org/terrorism/israel-defeating-hamas-aid-arab-states-even-if-they-are-afraid-admit-it-mike-pompeo
Rigdon , R., & Choi, A. (2023, November 22). Thousands
of Homes in Gaza are Damaged or Destroyed. See the Destruction. Retrieved
from CNN:
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2023/middleeast/map-humanitarian-aid-water-power-hospitals-gaza-strip-dg/
The Economist. (2023, November 2). The Middle East: Why
Israel Must Fight On. Retrieved from
https://www.economist.com/leaders/2023/11/02/why-israel-must-fight-on
No comments:
Post a Comment