QATAR’S ROLE AS MEDIATOR BETWEEN HAMAS AND ISRAEL IS CRUCIAL

LONDON: Acting as a back channel mediator...

Akali Dal Delhi unit may announce support for I.N.D.I.A bloc

NEW DELHI: Akali Dal’s Delhi unit delays support...

Sandeshkhali: Bengal Govt moves SC against HC Order

NEW DELHI: The West Bengal government has...

Humanitarian crisis deepens as Israel and Hamas war expands to South Gaza

Editor's ChoiceHumanitarian crisis deepens as Israel and Hamas war expands to South Gaza

Until a two-state solution that is acceptable to both parties is reached, the Israel-Palestine conflict will persist.

NEW DELHI

WAR EXPANDS SOUTH
As intense fighting spreads to Southern Gaza, the people of Gaza, having being told to evacuate, find themselves in deeper crisis, as there is no safe place to go. The truce collapsed on 1 December 2023, with both sides blaming each other for it. Israeli military launches operations in Khan Younis, Gaza’s second largest city, declaring it as a combat zone, calling it “the most intense day since the beginning of the ground operation”, besides continuing strikes on northern Gaza. Hamas too is responding with rocket fire on the border cities of Israel to register its existence. Caught in the crossfire, it’s distressing news for hostages and civilians of one of the most populated regions of the world, blockaded in a landmass, left with no safe zones.


Although most rational voices condemned the brutal, barbaric, terror attack by Hamas on 7 October 2023, and felt Israeli’s actions against Hamas was justified, but the scale, cost and methodology of the Israeli response, causing 14 times more Palestinian civilian casualties (approximately over 16,000 in comparison to over 1,200 Israelis killed so far) and large-scale forced displacement of people have invited global criticism including from its closest ally, the United States, for violation of international humanitarian law. The violence and casualties in the West Bank are complicating the situation further.
Despite the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) maintaining that it doesn’t target civilians, reports of mounting casualties concern everyone, including the US, which expects Israel to do more to protect civilians in pursuance of its legitimate military objectives in Gaza. After the US announced a new visa ban on Israeli settlers involved in violence against the Palestinians in the West Bank, Israel responded with assurance of being open to “constructive feedback” from the US and the United Nations, without altering the pace and methodology of its operations.

WHY THE TRUCE COLLAPSED
The weeklong truce in Israel-Hamas war was a result of tireless negotiations by mediators including Qatar, Egypt and the Biden administration, which was feeling the heat of heavy political cost in pre-election year under domestic and global pressure, hence persuading Benjamin Netanyahu (who seems to view war as tool for his political survival) for truce made sense, in addition to internal pressure on Netanyahu by the family members of the hostages.


Although the truce was a big relief to the hostages released, their families and the civilians of Gaza Strip, but Netanyahu’s war cabinet, IDF and the hardliners viewed it as an avoidable reorganisation opportunity for Hamas fighters.
Embarrassed by the possible security lapses of 7 October, Netanyahu-led Israel was convinced that the application of total military might to obliterate Hamas, notwithstanding the cost on innocent civilians, can perhaps mitigate their loss of prestige; hence a disruption like truce was unwanted and needed to end.


Israel has mobilised over 300,000 people, most of whom were involved in various economic activities, which stand disrupted; hence early consolidation of Hamas is an economic compulsion too. It blamed Hamas for not releasing women and children as per truce terms as the cause of collapse of truce, which Hamas denies.


Hamas took hostages on 7 October to use them as bargaining chips against Israel. Israel’s announcement at the beginning of the temporary ceasefire that the war would continue once the temporary humanitarian ceasefire was over, was perceived by Hamas that it needed to retain some high value hostages till end of the war for ensuring its survival. Hamas thus announced that no further release of hostages would take place unless Israel stopped the war, as was expected.
After releasing 105 hostages (mainly ladies and children) and having scored a favourable point on released Palestinians, a disruption in truce suited Hamas too, so that it can retain the remaining hostages and blame Israel for its “predetermined decision to recommence criminal aggression”.

OPPOSING STRATEGIES AND OUTCOMES
As per Netanyahu the Israeli objective in this war is to liquidate Hamas completely, ensure that Israeli citizens are never threatened by an attack from Gaza and ensure the release of hostages. He thinks that it can be done by military action and has pulled back the Israeli team from ongoing negotiations in Qatar.


The force level used and the scale of destruction being caused indicate that his undeclared aim is to make Gaza uninhabitable and force the Palestinians out of Gaza, as it’s difficult to identify Hamas amid such high population density. To minimise own casualties, IDF has chosen the strategy of mass destruction and is pulverising targets/buildings alleged as hideouts by standoff attacks, avoiding hand to hand fighting in built up area.


The Hamas’ strategy of 7 October was to pick up the maximum hostages for using as bargaining chips, embarrass Israel and provoke it beyond limits to respond disproportionately, causing heavy casualties to innocent Palestinians in Gaza, to bring back the Palestinian issue to the front burner, besides ensuring global criticism of Israel for human right violations, which seems to have been achieved.


Hamas also expected a favourable reaction in their support from the Arab countries, the radical Islamic countries and organisations and drive a wedge in the relationship of some Arab countries and others getting closer to Israel. This has not been fully achieved as Arab countries have voiced in favour of Palestinians (not Hamas) and have not intervened beyond diplomatic and moral support.


In terms of outcome, Israel had finished the war in six days in 1967, Yom Kippur war in 19 days, but against Hamas, the war is nearing two months and the obliteration of Hamas is nowhere in sight. Despite Israel’s efforts to eliminate Hamas, the group seems to have survived the initial onslaught, with only about 5,000 Hamas fighters killed in the conflict out of 30,000 soldiers of its military wing. The total elimination of Hamas is overambitious because it’s an ideology, brewed out of subjugation of population confined into bounds of Gaza, with airspace, maritime space, six exit points and inflow of essential services controlled by Israel.


With growing hatred towards Israel due to unprecedented casualties, Hamas’ ideology is unlikely to die down. Moreover, many Hamas leaders are outside Gaza, away from Israel’s striking distance; hence, Hamas will survive even after the destruction of Gaza. While Israel may be able to comb Gaza to reduce the striking capabilities of Hamas, in the long term it will make itself and its people more insecure to terror attacks within and outside Israel, as the US Defence Secretary rightly warns Israel that failure to protect Palestinian civilians could lead to “strategic defeat”.

WHO WILL CONTROL GAZA AFTER WAR?
While Israel is planning to have a buffer zone or a security envelope along Gaza border, inside Gaza to prevent Hamas from being positioned on the border, but this may not be easy as world opinion is shifting against Israel and is inclined towards a two-state solution.


Even Israel’s closest ally, the US is insisting on a two-state solution, and has laid down five principles for the future of Gaza, as the US Vice President said: “No forcible displacement of the Palestinian people, no reoccupation of Gaza, no siege or blockade, no reduction in territory, and no use of Gaza as a platform for terrorism”.


The idea of Gaza to be ruled by Palestinian Authority (PA) has its own drawbacks due to the lack of credibility of the PA leaders, who do not represent the people of Gaza. Governance under a UN stabilisation mission till elections are held could be an option, but will Israel agree to completely vacate Gaza?

A TWO-STATE SOLUTION
While Israel and Palestinians both have the legitimate right to live, have a homeland, govern and defend themselves, the lack of accommodation of these rights within the boundaries of Israel, West Bank and Gaza Strip has been problematic, leading to bloodshed for decades. While every peace propagator including the US is talking of a two-state solution, but no such solution succeeded due to the competing claims on Jerusalem, which is crucial to Christians, Jews and Palestinians.


The problem, therefore, remains how to divide that landmass into two states, as both sides want East Jerusalem, because Palestinians can’t compromise on al-Aqsa Mosque (third holiest shrine for Islam) and Jews can’t compromise on Temple Mount or Western Wall (the holiest site in Judaism). The complexities of Palestinian enclaves embedded by Israeli settlements in the West Bank and their continued encroachment, makes it impractical to vacate the enclaves, complicating the situation further.

WAY AHEAD
The war may end with Israel’s combing operations over destroyed Gaza, claimed as a victory by Israel. It may work as a face-saver for the Israeli government, but Israel can neither hope to be safe nor peaceful in the long term. In counter-terror operations, people are the centre of gravity. The next generation of Hamas will arise, with a frustrated populace demanding revenge. Until a two-state solution that is acceptable to both parties is reached, the Israel-Palestine conflict will persist, albeit in an active insurgent form, for an extended period of time.


Major General (Dr) S.B. Asthana (Retd) is an international strategic and military analyst, well versed with the area of conflict, having served in UN Peacekeeping Force. The views expressed are personal views of the author, who retains the copyright.

- Advertisement -

Check out our other content

Check out other tags:

Most Popular Articles