Why did Hamas attack Israel?
The
overarching lesson for Israel is that it needs to create a strategy for
controlling the Palestinians who reside in its territory.
In
retrospect, the motives behind Hamas' astonishingly well-planned land,
sea, and air attack on Israel on Saturday were obvious.
Since
Israel evacuated its military outposts and forcibly expelled 9,000
Israeli settlers from the region in 2005, there have been four wars and
frequent outbreaks of violence between Hamas militants in Gaza.
Every
time Hamas has fired rockets at Israel or committed other provocations,
Israel has responded by heavily bombing the Gaza Strip in retribution.
However, Hamas appears to consider this to be part of doing business.
Hamas'
need to keep an eye on its flanks is a significant motivator for
violence. Other smaller, more extreme groups, such Palestinian Islamic
Jihad, are challenging its rule in Gaza.
These factions have occasionally conducted rocket assaults against Israel on their own, which result in retaliation across the whole region.
The Israeli administration led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also the most right-wing in the country's history. This administration has been open about wanting to annex the West Bank and has allowed for the substantial growth of Jewish communities there that are against international law.
Young
Palestinians from the West Bank have formed a loose organisation called
the "Lions' Den" over the past year. This has led to conflict between
settlers and them.
The Palestinian Authority, which oversees the
West Bank and is headed by the octogenarian Mahmoud Abbas, has little
regard for this coalition of autonomous militants who appear to be
operating without a central command. In the region, the Palestinian
Authority doesn't really hold much power in terms of administration,
security, or morality.
The "Lions' Den" competes with violent Gazan groups for youth support both in Gaza and the West Bank.
Additionally,
Itamar Ben-Gvir, a minister in Netanyahu's government, recently
travelled to the Temple Mount, which is home to the Al-Aqsa Mosque, one
of Islam's holiest sites. Both in the West Bank and Gaza, the
Palestinians viewed this as a provocation. Israeli visitors also visited
the location during the most recent Sukkot holiday, further infuriating
Palestinians.
Most people agree that the Second Intifada, which
lasted from 2000 to 2005, was started by Ariel Sharon's visit to the
Temple Mount in 2000. At the time, Sharon was the head of the opposition
in the Israeli government.
Jordan is in charge of keeping the
Al-Aqsa shrine complex as per an arrangement that dates back to when
Israel was founded. When it ratified the Israeli-Jordanian peace deal in
1994, Israel sought to respect Jordan's position. However, Palestinians
view the visits by Israeli officials and visitors who are not Muslims
as disrespectful of the site's sacredness and in opposition to this
initiative.
Hamas has also asserted that these trips have
resulted in the degradation of the Al-Aqsa site, an allegation made
ostensibly in an effort to win over Muslims in the Arab and larger
Islamic worlds.
Importantly, Hamas has given its operation the
moniker "Operation Al-Aqsa Flood". This sheds some light on the main
motivation behind the timing of the attack, which underscores what Hamas
perceives as Israeli defilement of a sacred Islamic place.
However,
as indicated by the 2020 Abraham Accords, which included the United
Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco, another driving force was
probably the growing propensity of Arab states to reach peace deals with
Israel.
There has recently been a lot of talk about Saudi Arabia perhaps negotiating its own deal with Israel.
This
also lessens pressure on Israel to achieve a solution with the
Palestinians, which is of considerable concern to all Palestinians, not
just those in the West Bank. In his public remarks, Netanyahu has made
it obvious that he values a lasting peace with Arab nations more than a
final settlement with the Palestinians.
Although Hamas does not
recognise Israel, it has stated that if Israel returned to its 1967
boundaries, a truce would be observed. Israel is unlikely to heed Hamas'
assurances and comply with their demand for a withdrawal. But if Saudi
Arabia reached its own agreement with Israel, there would be much less
possibility that requirement would ever be met.
The time also
almost perfectly matches the 50th anniversary of the beginning of the
Yom Kippur or Ramadan War in October 1973, when Egypt and Syria jointly
attacked Israel. Hamas would be aware of the importance of a Palestinian
entity being able to surprise Israel similarly.
Hamas had a number of goals in mind when they decided to attack at this time, and they may have combined some of them.
However,
Hamas is unlikely to receive much in the way of financial support from
the larger Arab world. Saudi Arabia would likely delay normalising
relations with Israel for the time being due to Hamas' military
operation. However, it seems unlikely that any of the Arab nations that
have ratified the Abraham Accords will do so at this time in protest of
Israel's response to the Gaza Strip.
Where the conflict is headed?
It's
uncertain where the battle is going. Israeli outposts in the north have
already come under fire from the militant Hezbollah group in Lebanon.
Its sponsorship by Iran will determine how deeply it gets involved,
though.
In general, it has been assumed that Tehran wants to
reserve Hezbollah's powerful rocket and missile capabilities in case
Israel attacks Iran's nuclear installations.
The possibility of a
third front against Israel being opened up by "Lions' Den" terrorists
in the West Bank also needs to be considered. Attacks on Jewish Israelis
by Arab Israelis living in Israel could constitute a fourth front.
There
is little doubt that Israel will finally overcome these difficulties
because President Joe Biden has already pledged his support for the
Jewish state. Netanyahu predicted a protracted conflict, but if Israel
carries out its threat in full, it might turn out to be very brief.
The
fact that an undetermined number of Israeli nationals have been
abducted by Hamas terrorists and transported to the strip will be the
biggest obstacle to Israeli action against Gaza. Israeli bombardment
without discrimination would undoubtedly endanger those lives.
Israel
will be hesitant to send its defence forces into Gaza due to the
possibility of suffering significant losses. However, if it receives
information on the whereabouts of its abducted citizens, it might
dispatch special forces.
Israeli reaction also runs the danger of
alienating the West if its attack on Gaza is too severe. But up to this
point, Western countries have been staunchly in favor of Israel and
hostile to Hamas.
The overarching lesson for Israel is that it
needs to create a strategy for controlling the Palestinians who reside
in its territory.
For many years, the Israeli government has
found comfort in the existing scenario, which sees hard-line militants
held in Gaza while Israeli authorities restrain the behavior of
Palestinians residing in Israel and the West Bank. It has been able to
defy pressure from the Arab world and other nations to negotiate a
two-state settlement or accept a one-state option.
The real impact of Hamas' actions is that they put an end to such non-policies.
Post a Comment