Conflict that Never Ends

By Miljan Vešović

At the time of writing of this article, the number of victims of the terrorist attacks by Hamas on Israel on October 8th is more than a thousand. The vast majority of victims are civilians. The Israeli Government has declared a state of war in the country. The Israeli army is bombing Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip. It also causes civilian casualties on the Palestinian side.

There is a serious possibility that another anti-Israel terrorist organization, Hezbollah, will join the war and attack Israel from Lebanon. Riots in another enclave under control of Palestinian Authority - the West Bank - are also not ruled out. The possibility of negotiations and de-escalation is low for now.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu succeeded in uniting the country in the fight against the enemy. Before the October 8th attack, Netanyahu had long faced major protests over his attempt to reform Israel's judiciary. Now, however, the country is at war and these issues are losing relevance. This was confirmed by the leaders of the Israeli opposition, who expressed their readiness to join the Government.

Foreign policy – wise, the war with Hamas brought closerNetanyahu and US President Biden again, after relations were damaged due to the US administration's opposition to judicial reforms in Israel.

Therefore, it is possible that the war brought some political benefit to Netanyahu. At least in the short term.

On the other hand, the situation is full of problems for the Israeli Prime Minister. First of all, Netanyahu has built his reputation on national security issues. Many voters vote for him precisely because of his competence in these matters.

However, the largest mass murder of Jews in one day since the Holocaust took place under Netanyahu’s watch. For the man his supporters call "Mr. Security," this could be a long-term career blemish. Especially when the war is over and the question is raised of the Government's responsibility for the fact that perhaps the most skilled and capable intelligence service in the world, Mossad, missed an attack of this magnitude.

In addition, it is questionable whether Israel has any good options available after the attack. Officials of that country announced the response “never seen before”. They signaled that this meant the destruction of Hamas' ability to govern the Gaza Strip. Therefore, a ground operation in that Palestinian territory is almost certain. The logic used by Israeli officials - that any less strong reaction would be a sign of weakness and cause new terrorist attacks - is probably correct. For now, Israel has received a "carte blanche" for such an approach from its Western allies - the USA, Great Britain and EU member states.

The military incursion into the Gaza Strip, one of the most densely populated areas in the world, will, however, cause massive casualties, both in the Israeli army and civilian ones. Also, there is no guarantee that such an operation will lead to the destruction of Hamas. Previous similar attempts by Israel did not lead to that outcome. And as the number of civilian casualties increases, so will the pressure of the international community to end the conflict by reaching a ceasefire.

If the war ends and Hamas survives as an organized terrorist group, it will be a serious failure for Israel.

Saturday's events caused big problems for US President Biden as well. First of all, because of the possibility that Iran is involved in the Hamas’ operation. Certain media outlets in the US have already announced that Iran was involved in planning the attack. The American and Israeli administrations do not rule out this possibility, although for now they say that they have not yet found evidence. In any case, Iran is known to assist Hamas logistically, financially and intelligence - wise.

Because of all this, Biden is facing heavy criticism that his policy, inherited from Obama, to try to reduce the threat of Iran through negotiations, is not producing results.

American intelligence community and national security apparatus also failed to warn about the impending attack. For Biden, the statement of his national security advisor Jake Sullivan, who claimed a few weeks ago that the Middle East "has never been quieter", is especially politically harmful.

Also, the very nature of the attack (terrorist infiltration across the land border) raised alarm in the US, given the huge number of illegal migrants crossing the US-Mexico border. The logic is as follows - if Hamas was able to smuggle terrorists across what is probably the best guarded border in the world, imagine what the terrorists are able to do to America by entering across a border that is not well guarded.

This threat is especially important considering that Hezbollah has established presence in Central and South America. That terrorist group, in cooperation with drug cartels, is involved in drug smuggling, with which it finances its activities in the Middle East. The cooperation of drug cartels and Hezbollah can also be used for the infiltration of Middle Eastern terrorists into the USA.

In addition, the violence in Israel and the Gaza Strip threatens to torpedo Biden's most important diplomatic initiative in the Middle East at the moment - an attempt to mediate in the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia. The public opinion in Saudi Arabia is very pro-Palestinian. It is therefore possible that the expected Israeli ground operation (and Palestinian casualties as a result) will reduce the Saudis' motivation to reach a deal.

On the other hand, it is increasingly certain that the escalation of tensions in the Middle East suits Russia. So much so that there are even theories that the Russian security services were involved in the attack. Of course, that claim is difficult to confirm. However, the fact is that Putin and his regime have continued to maintain ties with Hamas that date back to Soviet times.

In addition, relations between Russia and Iran are on an upward trajectory. For two reasons - because of the political goals they share and because of the large amount of military equipment that Russia acquires from Iran and uses in the war in Ukraine.

It is known that former US President George W. Bush used to call Iraq, Iran and North Korea the "Axis of Evil". Opinion about Bush's foreign policy today is more negative than positive. However, it is possible that a new "Anti-Democracy Axis" is on the horizon: China-Russia-Iran.

Those countries probably do not coordinate every foreign policy move and do not have completely matching interests. However, they have in common the most important things - an increasingly authoritarian way of ruling, the desire to destabilize and destroy the rules – based international order and using all means available to reach that goal.

Also, it is certain that it suits Russia specifically to divert the attention of the Western allies from Ukraine. The attack on Israel certainly caused that. The Pentagon has already announced the sending of aid to Israel in weapons and ammunition. There is a possibility that this will reduce the capacity of the US to help Ukraine.

The Palestinian people themselves are inevitably awaiting another round of severe suffering and destruction. In the Gaza Strip for sure, and possibly in the West Bank if the conflict spreads there. Unfortunately, civilians are paying the price for decades-long practices of various Palestinian leaders to fight for the creation of a Palestinian state through terrorist means and not to recognize Israel’s right to exist.

It is indisputable that Israel sometimes excessively uses force and should improve its efforts to reduce civilian casualties. However, terrorist attacks and deliberate targeting of civilians are a tool that the Palestinian side (not only Hamas) has been using since the middle of the last century.

Recent Hamas attacks have confirmed that rule. The killing of women, children and the elderly, the massacre of peaceful participants of a music festival, the release of videos of crimes on social networks, ISIS style, the taking of children as hostages, raping, pillaging and burning houses - all this, once again, rightly horrified the international public and turned is against the Palestinians.

Also, the terrorist attack by Hamas once again confirmed the legitimacy of Israel's right to self-defense. On the other hand, the possibility of achieving lasting peace based on the Two-State Solution has been put on a back – burner.

Perhaps the most important conclusion to be drawn from the situation is that any attempt to establish moral equivalence between the two sides is blatantly wrong - because only one, Hamas and other Palestinian/Middle Eastern militants, resorts to open terrorism.

All innocent victims should, of course, be mourned. But some of those, unfortunately, also serve as a reminder of the steep price to be paid when wrong leaders are chosen and when religious and when extremist methods are used to achieve political goals.