The Horrific Week in Israel and the Palestinian Territories
The past week in Israel and the Palestinian territories has been truly horrific. Sadly, the next few weeks promise only more misery and pain. Every shooting war is a battle not just between armed forces, but also between competing narratives. Each side has its preferred way of framing the conflict, and few have been as hotly contested as the war between Israel and the Palestinians. As we reflect on the past week, let’s examine some of the statements made by combatants and analysts.
Hamas is ISIS
Following the attacks on Israel, which included the murder of innocent children and elderly, Israel and its defenders have drawn a comparison between Hamas and the Islamic State (ISIS), the violent Islamist movement that terrorized Iraq and Syria. While this comparison is understandable, it is also misguided. Having served as the senior Pentagon official responsible for the Middle East during the campaign against ISIS, I recall the reports that highlighted the group’s ruthlessness. While Hamas is certainly guilty of committing ISIS-like crimes, including atrocities on Israeli soil, some of these acts seem to reflect Hamas’s disorganization as much as its brutality, when compared to the calculated strategy employed by ISIS.
The images and videos from Israel appear to support the assertion made by Hamas and others that the initial incursion into Israel resulted in a mass breakout. It seems that other Palestinians, who weren’t under direct command and control of Hamas, took advantage of the situation, shocking the world with acts of murder and kidnapping. The idea that some of the worst atrocities were driven by disorganized, impulsive behavior is even more unsettling than the assumption that they were part of an explicit strategy.
However, I heard from a well-informed observer that Hamas was initially uncertain about the number of Israelis kidnapped. This suggests that, perhaps, the random nature of whether an Israeli mother or child was met with indifference or slaughter was determined by chance rather than a deliberate plan. Hamas appears to have been surprised by its own success in the early stages of the conflict, as their helmet-cam-style videos do not portray a force capable of overwhelming the Israeli Defense Forces. This lack of planning for how to handle innocent lives, and the prevalence of brutality over mercy, is concerning.
The war in Gaza bears some unfortunate similarities to the last phases of the war against ISIS. By late 2016, the U.S.-led coalition had pushed ISIS out of its more recently captured territories and into Raqqa and Mosul, their last strongholds. The human cost of recapturing these cities was immense, as ISIS enjoyed significant local support there, much like Hamas does in Gaza. Additionally, both Gaza and these cities are large urban areas, making it impossible to avoid large-scale civilian casualties. Now Israel marches into Gaza where most residents, although ruled by Hamas, prefer it to Israeli occupation. The campaign against ISIS required finding and killing their leaders, which resulted in the deaths of countless innocents. This parallels the situation in Gaza, where the same strategy would inevitably cause extensive civilian casualties.
Iran’s Role in the Conflict
Both the supreme leader of Iran and Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, share a risk-averse approach that has often been criticized as cowardly. Netanyahu has generally avoided direct confrontation and prefers using airstrikes and tough rhetoric. Iran similarly operates covertly through proxies like Hamas to avoid direct responsibility. Although Iran may not want the conflict to escalate, reports suggesting their knowledge of Hamas’s operation should be approached with caution. It’s hard to determine who in Iran knew and what exactly they knew. The successful execution of last week’s operation by Hamas reflects a failure of Israeli intelligence and a victory of operational security for Hamas. It is unlikely that many individuals in Iran or Hezbollah had detailed information about the timing of the operation.
There is a well-funded industry of think tanks that have long been pushing the United States and its allies towards war with Iran. While these experts are not wrong about the despotic nature of the Iranian regime, we must be cautious about reckless rhetoric that could lead to a broader conflict.
The Spillover towards Lebanon
There has already been exchange of shelling and rocket fire between Israel and Lebanon. However, a full-scale war between Israel and Hezbollah seems unlikely, and I remain cautiously optimistic on this matter. If Hezbollah had attacked simultaneously with Hamas, they could have captured significant Israeli territories, potentially reaching as far south as the West Bank, before Israel could mount a counterattack.
However, that opportunity has passed. The Israel Defense Forces and the Israeli people are on high alert, and Hezbollah would find it much harder to fight offensively against Israel than to defend Lebanese territory. Furthermore, the Israeli air force, which has already conducted extensive bombing in Gaza, will likely shift its attention to deterring threats from the northern border, since their objective in Gaza has been largely achieved.
Moreover, Hezbollah and the Lebanese people are exhausted. Hezbollah has been engaged in a decade-long war in Syria, and Lebanon as a whole has experienced economic devastation. While Hezbollah and its Iranian supporters claim that Lebanon’s situation won’t influence their decision to intervene, the consequences of such a move are uncertain. Would Hezbollah truly risk an escalation that could result in Israeli attacks on Beirut’s southern suburbs, as threatened since 2008?
For now, I expect Hezbollah to continue supporting Palestinian militant groups in Lebanon to launch rockets across the border and possibly engage in minor confrontations, but direct involvement on a large scale is unlikely. Should they choose to commit ground forces or utilize their advanced rocket stockpiles in the future, they may find that their window of opportunity has closed.
The Perception of U.S. Weakness
There is a theory that certain pundits feel compelled to comment on global events, even if they lack expertise or a compelling local angle. These pundits often attempt to explain conflicts with sweeping geopolitical theories. However, it is important to note that this is not the first conflict between Israel and local adversaries. Previous conflicts such as the “Grapes of Wrath” campaign in southern Lebanon in 1996, the Second Intifada in 2000, and the July War of 2006 all took place when the United States held significant power. These conflicts were driven by local dynamics, similar to the ongoing war.
Therefore, it is best to disregard pundits who search for deeper geopolitical meaning in this conflict. The unfortunate reality is that this war is just another tragic episode in an endless cycle of violence. Once it comes to an end, we can begin to assess the damage and losses.
Denial of responsibility! Vigour Times is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
