Only strong international intervention or a surge in public opinion in Israel against its military option can change the tide quickly. Till then, this conflict will continue
As the three-day humanitarian ceasefire brokered by Egypt commenced on August 5 and the indirect talks between the Palestinian groups and Israel commenced in Cairo, there was a sense of cautious optimism in the embattled, bruised and battered Gaza strip. Coupled along with it was growing apprehension that this ceasefire would also fail like the earlier attempts. Hamas rockets had stopped firing across Gaza into Israel and Israel too withdrew its ground troops to a line along the Gaza border. While the guns were silent, at least for the time being, the question being asked was whether this temporary truce could hold and can it actually signal an end to this war. Too often conflicts in Gaza have ended in truce, but all have unfortunately proved temporary with resumption of hostilities shortly thereafter. True to previous experiences, the hopes of an extended ceasefire or a permanent truce were shattered as Hamas commenced firing of rockets on Friday, August 08, rejecting any extension of the truce, saying that Israel had failed to meet its demands while Israel pulled out of the negotiations with Hamas and Palestinian factions, stressing they will not “negotiate under fire”. As the two parties re-engage in a bloody battle again, the cost of the conflict is to be borne unfortunately by civilians in Gaza.
The present conflict takes its immediate roots in the kidnapping and killing of the three Israeli teenagers on June 12, 2014. Israel blamed the Hamas, which denied any role in it. Israel launched “Operation Brother’s Keeper” and rounded up a large number of Hamas leaders and cadre besides targeting Hamas military targets. The bodies of the three teenagers were finally found on June 30 in a village near the West Bank. Infuriated, some Israeli citizens caught and killed a Palestinian teenager on July 2. Israel, on its part, intensified its crackdown on the Hamas leadership and conducted strikes over the Hamas targets. By July 7, there were reports of increase in rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel too. Israel formally launched an offensive in Gaza on July 8, code-named ‘Operation Protective Edge’, commencing with air strikes and artillery shelling. On the night of July 17, Israel moved the offensive into a higher gear by moving in troops into Gaza and launching a ground offensive.
While the immediate cause has been stated above, the primary causes of the conflict could, however, be debated. One of the primary reasons could also be the failed peace talks, which ended abruptly in April this year when Israel broke off from the talks once Hamas and Fatah announced the formation of a unity government. The unity government, which finally came about on June 2, was viewed as a potential threat in Israel as it not only strengthened the intra-Palestinian unity but also led to increased calls for a separate Palestinian state. The prevailing regional security situation too may have been one of the reasons prompting Israel to take this step. Syria has been battling rebels for past three years and is in a state of civil war; Iraq has imploded under the weight of assault from the ISIS; and lebanon too is in a state security chaos as it battles jehadis on its border with Syria as also threat from ISIS inside its territory. President Al Sisi in power in Egypt was a welcome step for Israel as the former Muslim Brotherhood Government was sympathetic to Hamas. In turn, Hamas had been weakened considerably due to the removal of support from Egypt after the ouster of President Morsi in July last year; and there was strain in ties with Iran over the Syrian conflict. In such a situation, Israel found itself in a ‘geo-political sweet spot’ where it thought it could eliminate the threat from Hamas in Gaza once and for all.
The initial international reactions were mixed. While the US, the UK and the EU initially stood by Israel in its right to defend itself against rocket attacks, Turkey, Iran and Qatar were some nations in the region, which stood solidly behind Hamas. Iran’s Supreme leader in his Eid address called for destruction of Israel as the only way forward. Egypt under a new regime, while blaming Hamas for the rocket attacks did not even name Israel for causing civilian casualties in Gaza. However, the most surprising response (or lack of it) was from majority of the Arab nations. There was a deafening silence on the issue for almost three weeks until, presumably under pressure at home especially from prominent clerics, King of Saudi Arabia issued a statement calling the conflict in Gaza as a “war crime” condemning the international community over its silence. He, however, did not mention “Israel” in his statement.
The UN was critical of the large number of civilian casualties and targeting of UN facilities in Gaza by Israel. It, however, proved incapable of taking any viable steps to stop the conflict. India on its part continues to maintain a delicate balancing act between Palestine and Israel, clearly reflected in the MEA statement on July 10 stating “India is deeply concerned at the steep escalation of violence between Israel and Palestine, particularly, heavy air strikes in Gaza, resulting in tragic loss of civilian lives and heavy damage to property. At the same time, India is alarmed at the cross-border provocations resulting from rocket attacks against targets in parts of Israel. India calls upon both sides to exercise maximum restraint and avoid taking actions that may further exacerbate the situation, and threaten the peace and security of the region”.
The conflict has so far resulted in over 1,900 Palestinian deaths, including over 400 children, destruction of over 5,000 homes, 30 schools and damage to three UN school-cum-refugee camps. Over half of population in the tiny Gaza Strip has been displaced. On the other hand, Israel has lost 64 soldiers and three civilians till now. Israel has claimed to have destroyed 32 underground tunnels, the primary objective of its military campaign. There has been widespread international condemnation of the conflict. Mass protests took place in New York, london and Paris besides other cities in the West. Some of the latin American countries recalled their envoys from Israel in protest. One of the ministers in UK Government Baroness Warsi resigned calling the stance of her country as ‘indefensible’. Even the US, the UK, France and other nations, which had initially supported Israel’s right to defence against rocket attacks, have condemned Israel over the disproportionate killings of civilians and targeting of UN facilities. The most significant reactions are however the ones from inside Israel where the social media, prominent Rabbis, Jews, and even some film stars and musicians who generally stay away from politics have questioned Israel’s justification behind the disproportionate killing of civilians.
As the two parties re-engage, it is clear that the battle is far from over. Hamas, which is seeking permanent peace guarantees from Israel, has called for lifting of blockade, opening of crossing points and release of some prisoners. Israel on its part is seeking complete de-militarisation of Gaza. Both are unlikely to cede fully to each other’s demands. Hamas and the Palestinians have clearly indicated that they have the “right to resistance” till the time blockade is in force while Israel does not trust Hamas enough to let go of the blockade. Prime Minister Netanyahu had issued a veiled warning already on August 6 saying that it would be “a moral mistake” not to hit back at terrorist strongholds in mosques and schools while the Israeli military chief had stated that the military action could be restarted if needed. In such a situation, any chances of a lasting truce look distant.
The conflict on the other hand could take an ugly turn resulting in more civilian casualties now that both parties to the conflict can claim that they gave peace a chance. Only strong international intervention or a surge in public opinion in Israel against its military option can change the tide quickly. Till then, this conflict could continue as an “unending war”.
(Colonel Rajeev Agarwal is Research Fellow, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses, New Delhi)