War in the Middle East, again

[Linguoboy]

In all the breathless media coverage of the recent outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas into open warfare, I'm not finding much in the way of analysis. I'm not interested in judgments of the morality of Hamas' actions (many of which--such as massacring attendees at a music festival, are indefensible under pretty much any moral code there is) but in what they are trying to accomplish with them.

I understand that, after 16 years of blockade, they're extremely desperate at this point, but they must know they can't defeat Israel militarily. Were they hoping for a replay of the Yom Kippur War with a different outcome this time? Because that seems like magical thinking at best. Or did they launch this offensive knowing full well that it would lead to Israel reoccupying Gaza with the aim of bringing greater international scrutiny to the plight of the Gazans (who have all but disappeared from the news cycle) and increasing political pressure on Israel? Because that seems unrealistic even if your tactics don't include indiscriminate killings of noncombatants.

What are the other possibilities here that I'm not considering? It seems to me that the surest long-term beneficiaries from the current phase of the conflict are right-wing elements within the Israeli state which, to put it mildly, hardly needed the boost.

[Raphael]

Perhaps they're simply thinking more tactically than strategically? "Here is a plan for something really big that we might do, and if we do it, it will look really good to our supporters." - "Sounds good, let's do it."

Edited to add: A related possibility might be that Hamas of all people ended up using a very brutal form of "Politician's Logic": "We must do something; this is something; therefore we must do this."

And, Palestinian domestic politics might have played a role. Hamas might have worried that if they didn't do something big, and soon, they'd lose support to other groups, like PIJ.


Only indirectly connected to all this, I find it interesting how the Russian government, instead of their usual "Tremble before our might, Mortals!"-rhetoric, is doing the kind of bland "everyone should really stop fighting"-waffling usually more associated with some Western governments. I guess that's the best they can do, given that 1) they're close to both Orbán and Trump, who are close to Netanyahu, and at the same time 2) they're even closer to Iran.

[zompist]

In all the breathless media coverage of the recent outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas into open warfare, I'm not finding much in the way of analysis. I'm not interested in judgments of the morality of Hamas' actions [...] but in what they are trying to accomplish with them.

One possibility: blocking normalization with Saudi Arabia. The attacks may make it much harder or impossible for Arab states to forget the Palestinians and do business with Israel. And maybe a little harder for the West to ignore the Palestinians and pretend, Trump style, that "peace" can be created without Palestinian involvement.

Second: possibly gaining ascendancy over Fatah once and for all. Netanyahu has been brutalizing the West Bank more than usual— indeed, I saw one report that that's why the border with Gaza wasn't strongly defended, because the troops are supporting settler violence. It's not in the Palestinians' interest to have Hamas control the West Bank Palestinians— but it's in Hamas's interests.

And third, grabbing a bunch of hostages, ugly as it is, is one way of making an Israeli reconquest of Gaza very painful. Israel routinely frees hundreds of prisoners for a single Israeli; what are the news cycles going to look like when Israeli forces are killing their own people?

We'll see what happens, but I've seen reports that the IDF and Mossad have taken a big hit here. Also conspiracy theories that Netanyahu knew about the attack and decided to let it happen, but that seems less likely. Netanyahu's approach has been "If we are brutal first, we will have security." And that's not looking too solid right now. The rah-rah politics are not going to entirely hide the question of such complete failure in intel.

None of this is to say that Hamas— or Netanyahu— really know what they're doing. The one sure prediction is that Gazans will be even more miserable. But Israel isn't going to look good either.

[Linguoboy]

And third, grabbing a bunch of hostages, ugly as it is, is one way of making an Israeli reconquest of Gaza very painful. Israel routinely frees hundreds of prisoners for a single Israeli; what are the news cycles going to look like when Israeli forces are killing their own people?

Not to mention other foreign nationals. (Reports are that citizens of a half-dozen other countries--including the USA--are among those missing and presumed or confirmed taken.) Hamas has threatened to begin killing hostages on camera if its demands are not met, which will be incredibly demoralising for Israelis.

We'll see what happens, but I've seen reports that the IDF and Mossad have taken a big hit here. Also conspiracy theories that Netanyahu knew about the attack and decided to let it happen, but that seems less likely. Netanyahu's approach has been "If we are brutal first, we will have security." And that's not looking too solid right now. The rah-rah politics are not going to entirely hide the question of such complete failure in intel.

Yeah, I can't recall the last time there were such a high military casualty figures on the Israeli side. It may well end up being more than the number killed in both Intifadas combined.

I also haven't seen a good explanation for the dramatic intel failures. "They were distracted by the West Bank" hardly seems like an answer. After all, they've been managing simultaneous conflicts in both occupied territories for decades. They have incredible surveillance technology at their disposal plus an almost complete blockade of Gaza. How could they have missed this? No wonder conspiracy theories are rife.

[Travis B.]

Yeah, I can't recall the last time there were such a high military casualty figures on the Israeli side. It may well end up being more than the number killed in both Intifadas combined.

What is remarkable about this is that the last time Israel fought a conflict at all comparable to this, they were fighting against multiple nation states who had materiel supplied by the Soviet Union, whereas Hamas is a comparably small militant group blockaded in a tiny strip of land for around a decade and a half now.

[masako]

In all the breathless media coverage of the recent outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas into open warfare, I'm not finding much in the way of analysis. I'm not interested in judgments of the morality of Hamas' actions [...] but in what they are trying to accomplish with them.

One possibility: blocking normalization with Saudi Arabia.

This.

A close friend who works at a very specific organization explained to me that the possibility of Saudi and Israel normalizing relations is absolutely terrifying to Tehran, and their recent domestic issues only added to their need/desire to thrust themselves into a conflict they believe can help them in their unceasing fight against "The West."

But Israel isn't going to look good either.

Unfortunately, as long as they have the folks in DC and London on their side, that's not really a deterrent.

[xxx]

without prejudging possible instrumentalization,
Iran remains the only country in the Middle East with an interest in chaos in the region,
while the financial donors of Sunni factions are seeking to normalize their relations with Israel,
and above all the West, where the dwindling petrodollar income could be converted into dollars for the future...

Let us spare a thought for the victims of this blind barbarism, and of the retaliation it will inevitably provoke...

[bradrn]

Let me preface this by saying: I have family in Israel. The Jewish community here, including myself, is shocked to the core by the sheer terror which has been shown in the past few days. Thank you everyone in this thread so far for condemning Hamas’s actions — alas, not everyone has.

In all the breathless media coverage of the recent outbreak of hostilities between Israel and Hamas into open warfare, I'm not finding much in the way of analysis. I'm not interested in judgments of the morality of Hamas' actions [...] but in what they are trying to accomplish with them.

One possibility: blocking normalization with Saudi Arabia. The attacks may make it much harder or impossible for Arab states to forget the Palestinians and do business with Israel.

This is what I’ve heard too.

And third, grabbing a bunch of hostages, ugly as it is, is one way of making an Israeli reconquest of Gaza very painful. Israel routinely frees hundreds of prisoners for a single Israeli; what are the news cycles going to look like when Israeli forces are killing their own people?

This is already a controversial topic in the Israeli media. If there’s one thing which has so far been certain in Israeli politics, it is that Israel will never abandon its own — indeed, in view of the Holocaust, that’s arguably the primary reason why Jews support its existence so strongly. But no-one’s yet quite sure how to respond to this level of barbarity.

And, either way, Hamas announced a few hours ago that they’re ruling out prisoner swaps until the war stops. So, given that a ceasefire will probably be intolerable to most Israelis… look, I don’t even want to think about it. It’s too painful.

[Travis B.]

My view of this is that the actions taken by Hamas are utterly reprehensible beyond a doubt, and while I despise the Israeli gov't's treatment of the Palestinians overall, I think that in this case Israel does have a right to defend itself even though I know at the same time that many innocent Palestinians - remember that the average Palestinian is no more responsible for the actions of Hamas than the average Israeli is for the actions of the Israeli gov't and the settlers - will also become victims of this war, which is just as sad as what has befallen to the Israelis killed, wounded, or kidnapped by Hamas. All in all there is no easy solution here and while many just call for "peace", the only real outcome I see coming out of this is an unjust peace following an Israeli total victory over Hamas with even more casualties before it is all over, followed by more of the same treatment of Palestinians in the Gaza strip, just like one sees in the West Bank. I am sad for the Israeli and Palestinian victims of this war, but I see Hamas as having brought this inevitable outcome onto themselves.

[Linguoboy]

I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.

[Travis B.]

I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly.

It will be ultimately even more of a bloodbath than it is already. I wonder if the people running the show in Hamas realized or cared that this would be its inevitable outcome, or whether they were willing to sacrifice the people in Gaza to the certain Israeli retribution for some hypothetical geopolitical goal - or just to make a statement, consequences be damned.

[Linguoboy]

It will be ultimately even more of a bloodbath than it is already. I wonder if the people running the show in Hamas realized or cared that this would be its inevitable outcome, or whether they were willing to sacrifice the people in Gaza to the certain Israeli retribution for some hypothetical geopolitical goal - or just to make a statement, consequences be damned.

The people of Gaza have been living for almost two decades in what Human Rights Watch calls "the world's largest open-air prison". They have very little freedom of movement and more than half of the population lives below the International Poverty Line as defined by the World Bank. Their lives are already being sacrificed, but to what end is still unclear to me, since it certainly wasn't security for Israel.

[Travis B.]

It will be ultimately even more of a bloodbath than it is already. I wonder if the people running the show in Hamas realized or cared that this would be its inevitable outcome, or whether they were willing to sacrifice the people in Gaza to the certain Israeli retribution for some hypothetical geopolitical goal - or just to make a statement, consequences be damned.

The people of Gaza have been living for almost two decades in what Human Rights Watch calls "the world's largest open-air prison". They have very little freedom of movement and more than half of the population leaves below the International Poverty Line as defined by the World Bank. Their lives are already being sacrificed, but to what end is still unclear to me, since it certainly wasn't security for Israel.

Oh, I agree, and clearly the Israeli gov't's strategy of encircling Gaza has shown its true consequences in the last few days. Had the Israeli gov't chosen a different route years ago, I bet this would not have happened.

[Torco]

as for the morality of the situation, I'll only say that if Israel has a right to defend itself, why don't the palestinians? it's all a shithow.

Unfortunately, as long as they have the folks in DC and London on their side, that's not really a deterrent.

but it's not crystal clear that they will: trump jailed or no (I have no guess on which option makes this more likely, tbh), the so-called GOP* as a whole might go alt-right, which might possibly make the US drop Israel. it's a longshot, but do the palestinians have, as it were, any shorter shots? ultimately, it might simply be as simple as that they felt (rightly or no) that the US and NATO were either weaker, busy, less able to send help, or something to that effect. if you're not supporter, but a man-willing-to-kill-other-men-for-the-cause, a Hamas militant shall we say, you're already fighting a righteous but doomed crusade, after all... you don't concern yourself with detailed from-my-pulling-the-trigger-to-israel-surrendering plans. this makes you quite vulnerable to being used as a weapon by other people: if you're just wanting to inflict damage and a foreigner hands you the keys to a tank, you start the engine.

the Gazan plight *is* desperate, maybe you just strike when you can and call that a strategy... and, come to think of it, maybe the Israeli response might avail this theses of the weak moment, though the observation might be explained just as bibi and company are going fascist... I don't know but I think that the israeli warhawks hadn't used the sort of openly genocidal rhetoric they're going for right now. Like, for real, I don't want to get all moralistic here but I think the messaging we've seen lately is... harsher than usual? and you're more likely to threaten final solutions if you're in an dangerous position yourself.

Perhaps not alternatively, if we're feeling conspirational, nothing unites a country under a conservative president better than a "terrorist" attack [whatever terrorist means, i wonder if the word is more than a way to say "bad"]. wasn't israel lately experiencing protests and significant internal opposition to Netanyahu's regime? (sheesh, it feels like that guy has been king of Israel as long as Putin's been king of Russia sometimes).

speaking of that, I wouldn't put much stock in russia's blandness on the topic: their rhetorical line, at least vis a vis the third world, is strongly commited to the song of multipolarity, which is ultimately about self-determination, non-intervention and decentralizing international trade: meddling in probably the most controversial ethnic conflict in the world... I think it isn't the right chord for that tune.

The Saudi theory is also good.

*(do non-republicans really call it the "grand old party"? that's a bit like calling your political rivals Boobby BigDick McGreat no?)

[zompist]

the Gazan plight *is* desperate, maybe you just strike when you can and call that a strategy... and, come to think of it, maybe the Israeli response might avail this theses of the weak moment, though the observation might be explained just as bibi and company are going fascist... I don't know but I think that the israeli warhawks hadn't used the sort of openly genocidal rhetoric they're going for right now.

I think that ship has sailed. Two of Netanyahu's ministers, Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, are notorious for open Jewish supremacy, Netanyahu has been busy grabbing even more power by decimating the independent judiciary, and he's sent the army to support militant settlers in the West Bank. Allowing radical Jews to move around the Temple Mount/ al-Aqsa has also been highly provocative.

Perhaps not alternatively, if we're feeling conspirational, nothing unites a country under a conservative president better than a "terrorist" attack [whatever terrorist means, i wonder if the word is more than a way to say "bad"].

I think shooting 260 civilians at a music festival counts as terrorism.

But again, I have doubts that the playbook will work this time. The whole Netanyahu strategy was "if we are just super-murderous to the Palestinians, we'll have peace." That's now been exposed as a delusion. And I don't think the intel failure can be just wished away.

speaking of that, I wouldn't put much stock in russia's blandness on the topic: their rhetorical line, at least vis a vis the third world, is strongly commited to the song of multipolarity, which is ultimately about self-determination, non-intervention and decentralizing international trade: meddling in probably the most controversial ethnic conflict in the world... I think it isn't the right chord for that tune.

Gosh, maybe they should take their own advice and stop trying to destroy their neighbors.

*(do non-republicans really call it the "grand old party"? that's a bit like calling your political rivals Boobby BigDick McGreat no?)

Nobody says "grand old party", but GOP is a useful abbreviation. It's a weird linguistic gap that we don't have one for the Democrats.

[bradrn]

Perhaps not alternatively, if we're feeling conspirational, nothing unites a country under a conservative president better than a "terrorist" attack [whatever terrorist means, i wonder if the word is more than a way to say "bad"]. wasn't israel lately experiencing protests and significant internal opposition to Netanyahu's regime? (sheesh, it feels like that guy has been king of Israel as long as Putin's been king of Russia sometimes).

I can believe a lot about Netanyahu, but not this. Remember, his brother Yonatan was the only soldier killed in the Entebbe raid. I cannot conceive of Netanyahu deliberately instigating a kidnapping and pogrom.

the Gazan plight *is* desperate, maybe you just strike when you can and call that a strategy... and, come to think of it, maybe the Israeli response might avail this theses of the weak moment, though the observation might be explained just as bibi and company are going fascist... I don't know but I think that the israeli warhawks hadn't used the sort of openly genocidal rhetoric they're going for right now.

I think that ship has sailed. Two of Netanyahu's ministers, Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, are notorious for open Jewish supremacy, Netanyahu has been busy grabbing even more power by decimating the independent judiciary, and he's sent the army to support militant settlers in the West Bank. Allowing radical Jews to move around the Temple Mount/ al-Aqsa has also been highly provocative.

I hear they’re trying to kick Ben-Gvir out of the unity government which is forming: as an unnamed Likud minister said, ‘everyone will be glad to be rid of him’. We’re probably stuck with Smotrich, though.

[Torco]

But again, I have doubts that the playbook will work this time. The whole Netanyahu strategy was "if we are just super-murderous to the Palestinians, we'll have peace." That's now been exposed as a delusion.

I mean... it was always a delusion, eppur si vota per bibi.

[Linguoboy]

Perhaps not alternatively, if we're feeling conspirational, nothing unites a country under a conservative president better than a "terrorist" attack [whatever terrorist means, i wonder if the word is more than a way to say "bad"]. wasn't israel lately experiencing protests and significant internal opposition to Netanyahu's regime? (sheesh, it feels like that guy has been king of Israel as long as Putin's been king of Russia sometimes).

I can believe a lot about Netanyahu, but not this.

The only way it would be remotely plausible is if you postulated some sort of Fargo situation where he just wanted the hired guns to "give 'em a good scare" and things got out of hand. But even that is extremely far-fetched. Reports from the field are giving shocking accounts of military unpreparedness. In one account I read, a family was only saved because they called the husband's father, a retired army officer, from their safe room and he literally drove down from Tel Aviv and joined a house-to-house search for survivors in their kibbutz.

A number of analysts have speculated that Hamas struck now in order to take of advantage of the disarray caused by Bibi's heavy-handed moves against the judiciary. But I'm also reading that an attack of this size and complexity would have had to have been planned a year to a year-and-a-half out, which well predates the current crisis. (A year ago he was still in opposition.)

[Travis B.]

I am hearing that despite the likely "emergency" gov't this is likely to hurt Netanyahu in the long run, because whenever there is a crisis that does not turn out so well for the Israelis, especially since Israel has cultivated an image both to itself and to the world as being undefeatable, it almost inevitably results in the fall of those in power, as with the case of Golda Meir and the Yom Kippur War and Menachem Begin and the war in Lebanon. In a way this is even worse than the Yom Kippur War, because then they were fighting multiple nation states armed by the Soviet Union, while now they are fighting a far smaller and poorly-equipped militant group effectively imprisoned with the Gaza Strip, which does not look so well for Israel and its intelligence bodies.

[Linguoboy]

I am hearing that despite the likely "emergency" gov't this is likely to hurt Netanyahu in the long run

The upshot to all the commentary I'm reading is "We're not talking about his fate right now, but after we win the war he's toast." He built up Hamas to weaken Abbas and wasn't sneaky about it. Despite his remarkable tenacity, I just don't see him coming back from that.