Israel’s Struggle: Why the Palestinian Cause Remains Unstoppable Despite Military Efforts

In the wake of Israel’s ongoing conflict with Gaza, it remains uncertain who will ultimately emerge victorious, especially with the ceasefire yet to be established. However, a preliminary analysis suggests that Israel has not met its stated objectives in this protracted war. The primary goals of eradicating Hamas and securing the release of captives through military action have not been fulfilled, leading many to question the efficacy and implications of Israel’s strategy.

Moreover, the unspoken aim to significantly diminish the Palestinian presence in Gaza has also failed. Despite the extensive destruction and tragic loss of life over the past 15 months, the Palestinian populace continues to assert their existence and claim to the land. The reactions in Gaza following the announcement of a ceasefire indicate a profound resilience among the Palestinian people, celebrating their survival against what they perceive as harsh Israeli aggression. This resilience speaks volumes about Israel’s apparent failures in their military campaign.

While it is difficult to declare a definitive Palestinian victory, given the catastrophic toll of over 50,000 Palestinian lives lost—predominantly women and children—any assertions of triumph seem disconnected from the stark reality of devastation. However, if the Palestinian objective was to demonstrate “sumud,” or steadfast perseverance, then this goal has been realized amidst the turmoil.

Why Did Netanyahu Agree to a Ceasefire Now?

The motivations behind Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s decision to consider a ceasefire are complex and multifaceted. Persistent pressure from former President Donald Trump likely played a significant role, but Netanyahu also faces mounting challenges domestically. Recent polls reveal that a substantial majority of Israelis favor a deal to secure the release of around 100 captives in exchange for halting the conflict, a sentiment that reflects growing public discontent with the ongoing war.

Poll results indicate that Netanyahu’s coalition, previously commanding a majority, would likely see a significant loss—nearly 20 seats in the parliament—if elections were held today. By agreeing to the initial stage of the hostage deal, Netanyahu may be attempting to regain favor among center-right voters while simultaneously appeasing the hard-right factions within his coalition who are eager for continued military action.

Historically, Netanyahu has resisted a ceasefire deal largely due to political pressures from his right-wing allies, such as Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir, who have threatened to destabilize his government if he pursues peace. However, the persistent threat of internal dissent, coupled with the prospect of a return to peace negotiations, has forced Netanyahu to reconsider his stance.

Is a Permanent Ceasefire Possible?

Irrespective of the outcomes of this conflict, Israel’s current landscape is markedly different from what it was prior to the Hamas-led attacks on October 7, 2023. The traumatic impact of these events has left a lasting imprint on Israeli society, and the extensive destruction in Gaza has done little to alleviate this trauma. Research conducted by the Forum for Regional Thinking has revealed that Israel’s previous strategy of conflict management has failed, leading to devastating results on October 7.

In the aftermath of this realization, Israel shifted its approach towards the elimination of Palestinian presence, guided by Smotrich’s controversial “decisive plan,” aimed at consolidating control over historic Palestine. However, this strategy has proven equally ineffective, and there are indications that Smotrich and Ben Gvir continue to advocate for renewed military action against Gaza once the current hostilities cease.

The potential for renewed conflict remains uncertain, especially considering the external pressures from Trump, who appears disinclined towards further military escalation, favoring a political resolution instead. Additionally, a return to hostilities could jeopardize Israel’s relationship with Egypt, which has played a crucial role in brokering the ceasefire.

Internally, returning to war would risk the lives of 66 hostages not included in the initial deal, a move that could provoke public backlash against the government. Recent polling indicates that 73% of Israelis support the release of all hostages in exchange for peace, highlighting a desire for normalcy rather than continued conflict.

Moreover, the Israeli military faces its own challenges, with troop morale waning and reservist participation on the decline. If the ceasefire holds, the potential influx of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians back into northern Gaza will present significant operational challenges for the Israeli Defense Forces, which may find itself fighting in densely populated areas once again.

As Hamas has demonstrated its capacity to regroup, there is skepticism about the feasibility of a second phase of the ceasefire that could facilitate the release of all hostages and establish a lasting truce. The desire for stability and normalcy prevails among the Israeli populace, who yearn for a return to the pre-October 7 status quo, characterized by a semblance of internal Jewish reconciliation.

The international community’s perspective on the Palestinian issue has evolved since the onset of the conflict, with heightened awareness and urgency on university campuses and within foreign ministries worldwide. The notion that Israel can manage this issue unilaterally is increasingly untenable.

In conclusion, while it is premature to predict the emergence of a cohesive political perspective post-war, historical precedents suggest that societal shifts are possible. Just as the aftermath of the 1973 Middle East war led to unexpected diplomatic outcomes, current circumstances may similarly pave the way for new dialogues and resolutions.

As the situation continues to develop, it remains crucial to closely monitor the evolving dynamics of Israeli-Palestinian relations, the impact of public sentiment, and the broader implications for regional stability.

Source: Middle East Eye