Israel's Gaza War Grinds On

The Western world’s preeminent strategist, Carl von Clausewitz, famously declared that war is a continuation of politics by other means. For him wars were instrumental, being fought to achieve defined political objectives and not simply to kill people and break things. This logic is not informing how Israel and Hamas are fighting in Gaza. Instead, the war is perceived by both as a war of existence. In such wars, there are no considerations about whether the costs are worth the gains.

The US is trying to steer Prime Minister Netanyahu towards allowing a sovereign Palestinian state, but his political career has been built on stopping this. Given this, the default as Israel’s National Security Minister sees it is to “encourage the emigration” of Palestinians to other countries. Some Israeli media see “voluntary resettlement…becoming a key official policy of the government” with the Congo mentioned as a possibility. The logic is that Palestinians who emigrate elsewhere cease to be Palestinians. Over time the Palestine nation as an entity will then vanish, solving Israeli concerns.

Several implications arise from Israel’s non-political war of existence.

Firstly, the war ends the myth of IDF military prowess that dates back to 1973 and its last decisive military victory. The IDF has been preparing for this specific war for years, including fighting earlier wars in Gaza, but its performance now looks mediocre. Intelligence warnings were ignored, the response to the incursion was slow, the IDF’s large-scale air/ground offensive is proving indecisive, only one of some two hundred hostages has been rescued and three were inexplicably killed. The IDF’s ability to deter adversaries has been badly damaged.

Secondly, in being an existential war, Israel is unconcerned by the possibility of unintended escalations. The costs that might arise from starting new wars on new fronts are deemed irrelevant. Israel has not tried to tamp down unrest in the West Bank rather the reverse, the government was apparently keen to launch a full-scale attack into Lebanon early on, and it remains launching air raids into Syria. If the US is trying to avoid a major regional conflict, Israel seems not.

Thirdly, Israel’s inability to adequately address the Palestinian question will continue troubling international relations. The Houthi’s anti-shipping attacks, problems on Lebanon’s border and attacks on US forces on Iraq highlight that the Palestinian issue could cause a regional crisis to erupt at short notice.

Fourthly, the issue could reenergise global terrorism. Even in Gaza, support for Hamas and by implication its terrorist acts are growing. In a worrying indicator, Bin Laden’s 9/11 related letter that justified terrorism partly based on Palestine went viral on Tik Tok in early November. Palestine is a poly-crisis that left unsolved will continue to indefinitely threaten global peace.

Lastly, given this is a problem that Israel hasn’t solved but which can harm others, how can the damage these nations may suffer from it be limited. Defensive measures need active reconsideration. Indeed, the Houthi's Red Sea attacks that are interfering with global shipping suggest the risks may be more extensive than earlier thought.

More proactively, engagement with Israel may need stepping up. If Netanyahu is unable to solve the problem, should others who might be instead supported? There are strong counterarguments and in this, Netanyahu simply losing office may not be enough. However, it’s been almost 75 years since the problem first arose and the Palestine issue is still not going away. Is continued global apathy the best solution? Israelis for years have argued their problem is our problem. Maybe we should agree and take action.

Dr. Peter Layton is a Visiting Fellow, Griffith Asia Institute, and a RUSI (UK) Associate fellow.