After failing to guide its Israeli friends to a military triumph, the US is allowing a risky escalation and rejecting a diplomatic settlement that might stop more suffering for civilians.
Any US assistance at this point, however, does not guarantee that Israel could win the war against Hamas, nor against a Third Force outside of the UN to initiate the full acknowledgment of an established Palestinian State.
The Israeli military has not shown any indication that it has significantly weakened the military capabilities of Hamas and the other Palestinian armed organizations in the besieged coastal enclave, despite six weeks of fighting that is estimated to have killed over 20,000 Palestinians.
Although Israel broke into the main hospitals in northern Gaza, saying that Hamas was using these locations as barracks and command-and-control centers, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) produced evidence that refutes these claims.
The Israeli soldiers entered the hospital grounds and displayed weaponry they claimed to have found inside, along with an empty tunnel. The US government supported the concept that a command node had existed at the Shifa Hospital.
The Israeli army curates and edits any such photos that are made public, but if they are independently confirmed, they may provide confirmation of the existence of militants rather than a control center or node.
Other hospitals yielded little of note, and American claims of possessing solid intelligence supporting Israeli claims are questionable in light of prior public statements made by US President Joe Biden—which the White House was later forced to retract—that he had seen “confirmed pictures of terrorists beheading children.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared at the outset of this conflict that his government would “crush Hamas,” an objective that the US government openly supported. But in addition to dealing Israel the biggest blow in its history, Hamas has successfully repelled Israeli forces in numerous recorded instances while defending Gaza on the ground.
25 Israeli military vehicles are destroyed in Khan Yunis by Al-Qaasam Brigades
According to the Safa news agency, the Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam Brigades declared yesterday that its fighters had hit 25 Israeli military vehicles in different parts of the besieged Gaza Strip city of Khan Yunis.
The Palestinian resistance group said in a statement that its fighters used Yasin 105 shells to target eight Israeli military vehicles, three tanks, a military bulldozer, and an army personnel carrier in the eastern part of Khan Yunis. Several Israeli soldiers, including eight members of a special unit, were killed in the attack.
In the Al-Zana district of eastern Khan Yunis, the group’s militants also wounded several Israeli soldiers with improvised Ghoul rifles. Meanwhile, in the northern section of the city, the fighters used Yasin 105 missiles to strike three military bulldozers, a tank, and a personnel carrier.
Additionally, al-Qassam forces used barrel bombs and multiple TBG explosives to booby-trap and blow up a house where soldiers were holed up. This caused the building in eastern Khan Yunis to completely collapse.
Al-Qassam militants also destroyed a minefield east of the city that had been set up beforehand with four anti-personnel bombs, killing and wounded numerous soldiers.
Israel Is Incapable Of Handling A Protracted Conflict In The Gaza Strip
Israel cannot endure a protracted attack on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, according to the chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), who also emphasized that the prime minister of the state is determined to carry on the war just for personal gain.
The statements were made on Wednesday by Major General Hossein Salami during a speech to a group at the Iranian Foreign Ministry’s headquarters in Tehran.
The general made the argument that the occupying regime is unable to sustain a war from both a military and political standpoint.
Salami continued, stressing that Israel’s battle against Hamas and other resistance organizations based in Gaza has resulted in the loss of 30% of jobs in the occupied territories and that the assault is costing the Israeli regime’s economy some $260 million every day.
The head of the IRGC stated that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s personal interests are the primary cause of the ongoing Gaza conflict, pointing out that Israel’s response to Operation Al-Aqsa Storm was feeble and dehumanizing.
He emphasized that Palestinian resistance organizations had only used a small portion of their potential up to this point.
“Zionists and Americans do not act rationally … Palestinian generations have learned whom they should fight against… The oppressed Palestinian nation will win final victory,” Salami said.
The US Has Provided Israel With 10,000 Tons Of Military Hardware
Israel’s ministry of military affairs announced in a statement on Wednesday that the 200th cargo plane—which has been delivering army gear to Israel since October 11—had touched down in Israel.
It stated, “Since then, Israel has received over 10,000 tons of military hardware since the start of the conflict.”
The ministry lists “armored vehicles, armaments, personal protective equipment, medical supplies, ammunition, and more” as part of the US military’s arsenal.
American President Joe Biden has asked for almost all limitations on Israel’s use of US-stored weapons and ammunition in Israel to be lifted, according to a report published last month by the non-profit news site The Intercept in the United States.
However, this is not enough to win the battle in the Gaza Strip, or the entire war to prevent the legitimate acknowledgment of the long established Palestinian State.
No Clear Achievable Aim; No Exit Plan
Such a military operation needs to include an exit strategy in addition to a specific, attainable goal. Is Israel’s war goal in Gaza well-defined and attainable on the ground? is the key question here.
According to Tel Aviv, its military campaign won’t end until Hamas is totally destroyed. Although it seems like a lofty goal, it is practically unachievable.
The planning, carrying out, and reviewing of military actions all depend on having a defined goal. It gives military operations a clear strategic direction, guarantees effective resource allocation, aids in risk management, and promotes responsibility and communication. All of these things enhance the effectiveness and legitimacy of military operations. Sadly, Israel does not have that specific goal.
Extremism Gaining Inroads
Though many Hamas terrorists and its operational infrastructure may be destroyed by Israel’s relentless military strikes in the air and on the ground, Hamas will still exist.
The gang may become stronger in the near future as a result of the temporary setbacks. More radicalism may most certainly result from the widespread fatalities and destruction.
Even while Israel is doing everything in its power to eliminate Hamas in Gaza, extremism may be able to spread throughout the West Bank as a result of Israel’s continuous provocative military operations as well as the physical abuse and humiliation of Palestinians by illegal settlements.
The Palestinian Authority, which was tasked with running the West Bank, has virtually completely lost credibility and is no longer able to offer the populace any kind of security. Mahmoud Abbas, the president of the Palestinian Authority, has an approval rating that is barely in the double digits.
No Clear Exit Strategy
As a psychotic bully, Bibi Netanyahu wants nothing more than to watch Palestinians go through the worst horror of their lives for supporting Hamas – his own virtual pet project to divide and conquer both sides that is the Palestinian West Bank and Gaza.
By employing excessively violent tactics and causing a catastrophic humanitarian crisis, Israel lost a significant chance to undermine the legitimacy of the Palestinian cause in the eyes of the international community. Large-scale pro-Palestine protests taking place all over the world demonstrate that, in comparison to Israel, Gaza has significantly won the war of public opinion.
Israel’s claimed goal of the “total” destruction of Hamas in this continuing battle is implausible, as any logical analysis can show. In situations where the goal appears lofty but improbable to materialize, Israel needs to have a well-planned withdrawal strategy.
To maintain a military occupation in some way compliant with international law and strategic goals, an exit strategy is essential. It supports the eventual transition to a more stable and peaceful state, helps manage resources, and keeps the public’s and political support.
Military occupations can become lengthy, expensive, and politically untenable in the absence of a clear exit strategy. Israel is more likely to encounter resistance from the occupied Palestinian population as well as the international community the longer the military occupation lasts without a clear departure strategy.
Israel is unable to hold Gaza under its security forces’ authority for very long. Tel Aviv is in no way going to succeed now; it had not been able to do so in the past.
Israel vs. United Nations
To its credit, the majority of UN members have repeatedly denounced the ongoing genocide in Gaza, and UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has denounced the onslaught in the strongest terms imaginable, even going so far as to invoke Article 99, calling on the UN Security Council to take action regarding the conflict in Gaza.
The Security Council has not yet adopted a resolution requesting a truce between Israel, Hamas, and their allies, prompting the secretary general to take the unusual action.
The 15-member Security Council, regarded as the most powerful body within the UN, is in charge of preserving world peace and security.
Asserting that the circumstances in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories “may aggravate existing threats to the maintenance of international peace and security,” Guterres cited this duty in a letter to the president of the council.
In addition to describing “appalling human suffering, physical destruction, and collective trauma across Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories,” Guterres has been advocating for an “immediate humanitarian ceasefire” since October 18.
The United Arab Emirates, a member of the Security Council, tweeted on X in response to Guterres’s letter, announcing that it had sent a fresh draft resolution to the council and “called for a humanitarian ceasefire resolution to be adopted urgently.”
The council does have additional authority to guarantee the implementation of a ceasefire resolution, should it decide to follow Guterres’ advice and adopt one. This authority includes the ability to apply sanctions or approve the deployment of an international force. But the council’s five permanent members – China, Russia, the US, the UK and France – hold veto power.
The Secretary-General may “bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security,” according to UN Charter Article 99.
“Here in New York, the fact that this tool has not been used since 1989 does resonate diplomatically and symbolically,” Daniel Forti, a senior analyst at the International Crisis Group specializing in UN advocacy and research said.
Therefore, where should the drive for the creation of a Palestinian State must originate?
Leading The Charge is A Former Apartheid State
With a vote in parliament to close the Israeli embassy, remove the Israeli ambassador, and sever diplomatic ties with Tel Aviv, the South African government cleared the way for the world’s appropriate response to a genocide in progress. Indeed, South Africans are somewhat knowledgeable about apartheid.
South Africa showed bravery by venturing where few Arab and Muslim nations have dared. As things are, a large portion of the Arab world remains comfortable spurting rhetorics, especially the US client states.
For Washington, the “truce” mediated by Qatar arrived at the ideal moment. It took the lead from the group of foreign ministers from Islam and the Arab world who were visiting certain cities to advance their proposal for negotiations for an independent Palestinian state as well as a comprehensive ceasefire in Gaza.
The countries that make up this Gaza Contact Group include Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Palestine. They met with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi in Beijing before moving on to Moscow to meet with Sergei Lavrov. That was undoubtedly an example of BRICS 11 in operation prior to their official launch on January 1st, 2024, during the Russian presidency.
Concurrent with the meeting with Lavrov in Moscow, the current South African presidency scheduled an unusual online BRICS session on Palestine. President of Iran, Ebrahim Raisi, backed the South African measures and urged the BRICS nations to exert pressure on Tel Aviv using all political and economic means at their disposal. Iran is the leader of the region’s Axis of Resistance and has severed all ties with Israel.
Furthermore, it was significant to hear Chinese President Xi Jinping state emphatically that “a just solution to the Palestine question is necessary for Middle East security.” Xi reiterated that an international conference should be the first step toward “a two-state solution,” “the restoration of the legitimate national rights of Palestine,” and “the establishment of an independent state of Palestine.”
Practically speaking, though, the Oslo Accords marked the beginning of the Two State Solution; unfortunately, radical right-wing Israelis dispatched an assassin to eliminate “traitor” Yitzhak Rabin. Thus, it is not feasible to maintain the two states adjacent to each other.
One group of people ought to be repatriated to Khazaria (now Ukraine), in Europe, where they originally came from, in order to definitively expose Zionists and Nazis as two sides of the same insane, psychopathic organization.