by Ron Raskin
More than eight months after October 7th, the war is still far from over. The debate about whether Israel should end the war, withdraw all its forces from Gaza, or continue fighting until its war goals are achieved is growing louder and louder.
Those who support the first concept believe that destroying Hamas is impossible, as you can’t eliminate an idea through military means. Currently and in the near future, Hamas’s military does not pose a real threat, so there is no justification for continuing the pursuit and paying a high military, diplomatic, and economic price. Instead, they argue that Israel should cut its losses and focus on changing the surrounding conditions, such as by signing a peace deal with Sunni Saudi Arabia (see also: https://www.omerdank-strategy.com/?p=5342) .
They also view the Palestinian Authority as part of the Sunni world, hoping that normalization with the majority of Sunni nations will eventually lead to a peace deal with the Palestinians. Many Israelis, as well as the US and Europe, support this perspective (the US and Europe have additional reasons, more on that here: https://elusive-world.com/the-game-of-the-century/ ).
Those who support the second concept believe that nothing will change in the near to mid-term in the Middle East. They argue that Saudi Arabia is not truly an ally but has its own interests, and a peace deal with Sunni nations doesn’t guarantee a peace deal with the Palestinians in the short to medium term. They believe there is a significant chance such peace attempts will fail, leaving Israel facing a Hamas-dominated Gaza and renewed threats in 3-5 years.
No one in Israel wants another October 7th war, which would be inevitable under these circumstances. Given that the Palestinian Authority lacks the power to control Gaza or any other territory, it leads to the conclusion that Israel must handle the situation itself.
The approach here splits into three variations:
- Supporters of the first variant don’t believe in the possibility of deradicalizing Gaza and seek only military freedom and control over the area.
- Supporters of the second variant believe deradicalization is possible, requiring either an international or Israeli-imposed civil administration.
- Supporters of the third variant see the solution in establishing settlements to create long-term military control, alter communication and trading environments, and reinforce negative feedback by tagging the price of each attack on Israel.
History does not tolerate the subjunctive mood, so we may never know which of these concepts and their variations is correct unless the chosen one succeeds…