Opinion

Israel’s war of vengeance

Hamas, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, will more likely walk stronger, taller and more confident from this war

Inam Ul Haque May 30, 2024

The writer is a retired major general and has an interest in International Relations and Political Sociology. He can be reached at tayyarinam@hotmail.com and tweets @20_Inam

Wars are never prosecuted with vengeance, as a war of vengeance is genocide for the weaker side. The ICJ is yet to decide if the prosecution of war by the Israeli Military (IDF) under political direction of Israel’s right-wing extremist government is genocide; and the evidence is overwhelming. Legal experts believe that for genocide, ‘intent’ and ‘actions’ are taken into account. First the ‘intent’. The language of hate that has been consistently coming out of the Israeli leadership against Palestinians…from ‘human animals’ to ‘nuking them’ to more recently ‘driving them into Sinai being the will of God’, is dehumanising, racist at core, and stigmatic to the rule-based-order in the 21^st Century world.

As far as ‘actions’ go, the recent bombing of Rafah refugee camp, the last option of refuge, forcing Palestinians into Egypt’s Sinai desert under sweltering heat; the killing of around 36,000 men, women and mostly children by a professional IDF, using the US-supplied 2000 pounds bombs; the obliteration of once thronging cities in Gaza and the West Bank; the repeated displacement of people into cramped spaces with fast deteriorating conditions; blocking humanitarian aid to this hapless humanity; arbitrary detention and execution of Palestinians without mercy by ‘gleeful’ IDF soldiers posing with corpses and devastation; and the consistent defiance of humanitarian laws are actions justifying ‘genocide’ and ‘war crimes’. And this will haunt Israel and the World Jewry…in not-too-distant future. The present Israeli state will take down a lot with it.

Israel’s declared war objectives are: a) safe release of its remaining hostages, and b) military defeat (rather extermination) of Hamas. The implied objectives could be land grab, reviving Egyptian-Palestinian discord by pushing Palestinians into Sinai desert, mocking Arab impotence by continuing to dominate the ‘escalation ladder’, killing of the two-state solution, and political survival of Netanyahu by escaping indictment on corruption charges etc…in whatever order.

Let’s cross-check the results so far. Military defeat of Hamas. After over seven months of the most brutal one-sided conflict where the IDF is having overwhelming military superiority, Hamas is far from being defeated. Its leadership is intact and in communications, hostages are still in Hamas custody, and its fighters are facing off IDF. And Hamas still rules, sort of, the bombed wasteland of Gaza. And militarily speaking, Hamas extermination, if and when, will never enhance Israel’s security. The barbarity of this conflict will create hundreds of Hamas, in not-so-distant future. One is aghast as to why a professional military like IDF cannot see the obvious, and make it seen by the vengeful politicians in Knesset.

Second, hostages. The 252 mostly civilian hostages, consequent to the Hamas’s October 7 operation (reprehensible), are now down to 125. For all its technological superiority, Israel with full American and Western intelligence support has not been able to sieve its nationals from a narrow strip of land. And with an angry Israel, bent upon vengeful destruction, the chances of safe release of these innocent people are getting remote. One cannot avoid thinking Netanyahu using these hostages as pawns in his sinister game of political survival, by preferring war over negotiations.

So, on both accounts, IDF’s military campaign is faltering. Militarily speaking, if the weaker side denies the attainment of objectives to the stronger side, the weaker side wins the conflict. So, Hamas, like Hezbollah in Lebanon, will more likely walk stronger, taller and more confident from this war.

Third, the failure of Israel’s geo-strategy. IDF always used ‘domination of the escalation ladder’ as a strategy, successfully in dealing with a hostile neighborhood. This envisages unacceptably high retaliation for any action against Israel by an aggressor. And this created a ‘deterrence’, which had ensured relative peace for Israel. Hamas’s October 7 offensive shattered that deterrence, rubbishing Israel’s traditional ‘domination of the escalation ladder’ for future. Because unacceptably excessive retaliation, under the full glare of social media, has more disadvantages for Israel, as being witnessed.

Fourth, Israel’s isolation. The cited retaliation against unarmed Palestinians has hit at response-legitimacy, triggering profound sympathy for Palestinians, and Israel’s overwhelming isolation. This has far-reaching consequences for the World Jewry and the American power. Additionally, it has put the two-state solution squarely back on the table. Today 140 out of 193 UN member states recognise the Palestinian statehood, with Ireland, Spain and Norway the recent ones to do so.

The ICC outlawed Israeli incursion into Rafah in its verdict on May 24, and Israel’s persistence in proceeding with the attack, puts it on the wrong side of International Law. Technically the IDF after the verdict can also not restrict aid supply to Gaza. This in turn puts Israel’s very few international friends in a quandary…to uphold a rule-based-world-order or go with the Israeli defiance. To save some moral space, most Western commentators scapegoat Netanyahu for all of Israel’s troubles, arguing his removal will resolve the deadlock. Whereas in fact, support for Israeli brutalities runs deeper into the Israeli body politics, substantiating this being a war of vengeance.

Fifth, the future of US-Israel ‘special relationship’ is under greater stress today than ever. Campus sentiment in the US is clearly in favour of Palestine and will likely force a major rethink on American voters during the coming elections. Although Israel still enjoys bipartisan US support, the younger Democratic Party voters and leaders are drifting away from the pro-Jewish cause and caucus. The effects of Israel’s persistent recalcitrance to change course, and America’s fateful appeasement would likely set the future direction of this ‘special relationship’, for which the die is cast. Likewise, today public opinion in most Western capitals drives the Israeli-Palestinian discourse.

Sixth, anti-Semitism is rearing its ugly head not because of steps taken by the non-Jewish gentiles, but by the missteps of Jews and Semites. Four US university chancellors were forced to resign for failing to stem on-campus pro-Palestine protests. Thirteen Harvard University pro-Palestine students were denied degrees during May 23 graduation. During the event, it was ironical to see Rabbi Hirschy Zarchi, walking off the stage in protest, after another speaker, the Nobel laureate Maria Ressa, referred to ‘power and money’, that the Rabbi considered as anti-Semitic.

Imposition of gags and restrictions seem to have backfired. It seems that under the largely gullible top of pro-Israeli Gentiles in the West Plus, a massive wave of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism is bursting banks. And the World Jewry is not genuinely helping the situation, other than browbeating, intimidating and using leverages negatively.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 30^th, 2024.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

COMMENTS (1)

Saleem Akhtar Malik | 5 months ago | Reply Writing in his Op-Ed dated 30 May 2024 Major General Inam Ul Haque expresses his concern over ICJ s inability to decide if the prosecution of the war by the Israeli Military IDF under the political direction of Israel s right-wing extremist government is genocide . After cross-checking with the results of the Israel- Hamas War the general concludes that Israel has not been able to achieve any of its declared war objectives 1 The safe release of its remaining hostages and 2 The extermination of Hamas. In addition the war 1 Dented the Israeli strategy of dominating the escalation ladder against the Arab states 2 Increased Israel s isolation particularly in its traditional support base in the West and 3 Brought the future of the US-Israel special relationship under greater stress than ever. I had written earlier that the nature of warfare is gradually shifting in favour of irregular militant outfits. Looking back one finds that Israel defeated the regular Arab armies in the 1948 and 1967 wars but could not as effectively confront the militant groups like Hezbollah and Hamas that arose out of the ashes of the 67 and 73 Wars. In 1967 the IDF defeated the combined Arab armies through sheer force of armour and air power and also because of the incompetence and unprofessionalism of the Arab armies. Mohamed Abdel Hakim Amer the UAR defence minister in 1967 was an army major when Jamal Abdel Nasser led the 1952 coup against King Farouk. Amer was promoted directly to the rank of field marshal immediately after the coup. In 1973 the impact of the Israeli shock effect was somehow diluted when IDF for the first time confronted the Egyptian soldier with his shoulder hand-held anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons. The 1973 War was a strategic defeat for Israel because consequently Israel had to vacate the Sinai Peninsula Sharm el Sheikh and part of Golan Heights. Whenever discussing the Arab-Israel wars we sift through many myths on both sides to separate the grain from the chaff a process called winnowing. This is because the historical narratives are always hidden behind tribal prejudices political narratives and half-truths. Zionism began in the late 1800s as a nationalist movement among European Jews who advocated forming a Jewish national state in Palestine. Those were the days when Palestine was part of a decaying Ottoman Empire. Under the leadership of David Ben Gurion and the money provided by the French Jewish banker Baron Edmond de Rothschild the Zionists systematically began colonizing Palestine. The Hovevei Zion or the Lovers of Zion were responsible for 20 new Jewish settlements in Palestine between 1870 and 1897. Continuing their colonization efforts they built agricultural settlements at strategic locations throughout Palestine on the land bought from the Arabs. Those settlements would form the contours of the future Jewish state. Not only this but they also created the framework of two well-organized and trained paramilitary organizations- Haganah and Palmach Histadrut the general organization of Jewish workers and a Jewish educational system in British-mandated Palestine. Resultantly in 1948 the Zionists possessed all the institutions needed for the establishment of a modern nation-state. On the other side the Palestinians were a disorganized people without visionary leadership. Seeing an opportunity to liberate Arab lands from Ottoman rule and trusting the honour of British officials who promised their support for a unified kingdom for the Arab lands Sharif Hussein bin Ali Emir of Makkah and King of the Arabs and great grandfather of King Hussein of Jordan launched the Great Arab Revolt against Ottoman rule. In the movie Lawrence of Arabia Sharif Hussein of Makkah the patriarch of the modern Hashemite dynasty is depicted as a petty thief a schemer and a greedy person who held back his troops from attacking Bir Sheva the southern-most Ottoman outpost in Palestine till Lawrence gave him a written undertaking on a piece of paper that once WWI ended the British occupation force in Cario would pay Sharif Hussein ten pounds of gold for his services to the British war effort. From a larger perspective the modern Arab states owe their existence to the secret Sykes-Picot Agreement negotiated between Britain and France during WWI. The dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire as a result of the war allowed Britain and France to divide the former Ottoman possessions into their respective spheres of influence and arbitrarily redraw the boundaries of the Arab Middle East. The Ottoman province of Syria was divided into three separate territories Palestine Lebanon and Syria. Palestine was put under the British mandate whereas Lebanon and Syria went under French occupation. The UN in 1947 voted for the partition of Palestine into an Arab and a Jewish state. Jerusalem was to have the status of an international city. Whereas the Arab states rejected the UN plan Jews accepted it as a stop-gap measure as they eyed the whole of Palestine . The Arab support for the Palestinian cause remains hidden behind intra-Arab prejudices Arabs hate each other as much as they hate the Jews. Their support for Palestinians likewise is grounded in cliches. The 1949 Armistice Agreements which ended the 1948 Arab-Israel War by delineating the Green Line as the legal boundary between Israel and the Arab countries left Egypt in control of a small swath of territory that it had captured and occupied in the former British Mandate for Palestine the Gaza Strip. During the Egyptian control over the Gaza Strip the Palestinians continued to be denied Egyptian citizenship and kept in refugee camps. Under Israeli occupation since 1967 Gaza is still a huge refugee camp. When Donald Trump the former U.S. president negotiated the so-called Abraham Accords between the Arab states and Israel the Palestinians were kept out of the process. It was reported that KSA UAE and Egypt confronted the Palestinian leadership with ground realities and asked them to Accept the status quo or shut up. The peace process between Arabs and Israel is not a recent phenomenon. Egypt had recognized Israel in 1979 as a quid pro quo for the return of Sinai and Sharm el Sheikh. As a result of the peace process initiated after the Second Gulf War Israel was formally recognized by Jordan in 1989. The Gulf states and Morocco ended Israel s economic boycott the same year and established mutual trade relations with her. Although the Israeli trade missions in Bahrain Oman and Morocco were closed in 2000 due to Israel s harsh treatment of the Palestinians trade and economic ties continue. Also Israeli tourism to Morocco is encouraged by the World Federation of Moroccan Jewry a Jewish NGO. Whereas Saudi Arabia does not have diplomatic ties with Israel this does not deter it from continuing with a back door diplomacy with the latter on how to deal with Iran. The friction between Israel and Palestinians as highlighted by General Inam will continue. However The U.S. and its European allies supported by the Arab monarchies will find a way out for the Palestinians to survive even as Muslims survive as second-rate citizens in the Bosnia-Herzegovina non-state. General Inam has identified important issues in his op-ed.

Replying to X