Hamas-Israeli War 2023: Deep Analysis
The Surprise Attack by Hamas and Israel’s Response
Israel finds itself once again plunged into a war with the Palestinians, and this time, it’s Hamas that initiated the hostilities. The surprise attack on Shemini Atzeret / Simchat Torah, a national holiday day in Israel, a day when Israelis were not expecting such aggression, sent shockwaves across the nation. Sirens blared, rockets exploded, and a sense of vulnerability gripped the country.
Hamas, in coordination with the Islamic Jihad, launched a massive barrage of rockets that targeted numerous locations across Israel, particularly the southern region. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) reported being bombarded by what they estimated to be over 5,000 rockets in the initial strikes, a number significantly higher than their confirmed count of 2,000 rockets. It’s a testament to the intensity of the assault.
After these initial strikes, Hamas officially declared war and named the operation “Al Aqsa Storm.” They claim that their actions are a response to Israel’s escalating activities in the West Bank, Jerusalem, and Israeli prisons, where Palestinians have been detained. This assertion is supported by various reports of Israeli raids and constant arrests, though the reasons behind these actions remain unclear.
Mohammad Deif, the leader of Hamas’s military wing, the Al-Qassam Brigades, framed this conflict as the “greatest battle to end the last occupation on Earth.” While such a statement is hyperbolic, it underscores the significance Hamas attributes to this confrontation.
Unusually, Hamas broadcasted the call to arms not just through social media but also through loudspeakers in Gaza mosques. This departure from the norm suggests a high level of coordination and urgency.
Islamic Jihad joined the fray, expressing their determination to resist the Israeli regime and achieve victory. They criticized the Palestinian authorities in the West Bank for aligning with the U.S. and Israel, accusing them of complicity in Israeli actions against Palestinians.
Additionally, both Hamas and Islamic Jihad condemned the normalization deals between Arab countries and Israel, viewing them as betrayals of the Palestinian cause. They criticized the Arab regimes for aligning with what they called the “Zionist project.”
Israel swiftly declared war on Hamas, launching “Operation Iron Sword” in response to the surprise attack. Prime Minister Netanyahu asserted that Israel was engaged in a war and vowed that the enemy would pay a significant price. The IDF engaged in battles near Gaza and various towns, emphasizing their determination to win the war.
This operation showcased Hamas’s tactical prowess, with a combination of naval, amphibious, airborne operations, coordinated strikes, massive bombardments, infiltration, breaching of fences, and commando raids. While impressive, these efforts couldn’t change the fundamental military mismatch between Hamas and Israel. History has shown that such groups are unlikely to achieve victory against Israel through conventional means.
One of Hamas’s primary objectives in this offensive is the capture of Israeli soldiers. They currently hold numerous Israeli prisoners, including senior officers, with the intention of using them in potential prisoner exchanges. However, the longer the conflict persists, the more precarious the situation becomes for these prisoners.
Israel has already suffered its first major casualty, the mayor of the Sha’ar Hanegev regional council, who bravely defended his town during the attack but tragically lost his life.
As the conflict unfolds, both sides remain steadfast in their objectives. Hamas seeks to hold Israel accountable for its actions and views this as an opportunity to weaken the Israeli occupation. Israel, on the other hand, is determined to quell the aggression and protect its citizens.
Anti-Israel Factions Reactions
One interesting development comes from the Palestinian Authority’s President, Mahmoud Abbas. He made a statement asserting the Palestinian people’s right to self-defense against what he perceives as terrorism from Israeli settlers and forces. This statement is noteworthy because Abbas’s influence is largely confined to the West Bank, while Gaza is under the control of Hamas. It’s almost like a powerless figure making a stand. However, this could be seen as an attempt to regain some relevance and show that he can protect Palestinian rights as effectively as Hamas.
Accusations have also been directed towards Iran, suggesting their involvement in orchestrating the conflict. Iran’s high-ranking officer, Yahya Rahim Safavi, publicly congratulated the Palestinian fighters for their attacks on Israel. This only serves to fuel suspicions about Iran’s role in these events and how it might be exacerbating the situation.
Hezbollah, while not directly entering the conflict, offered vocal support to the Palestinian factions. Their message echoes the sentiments of solidarity with the Palestinians. However, it’s important to recognize that such declarations often carry more symbolic than practical weight.
The Yemeni Houthi rebels have also weighed in, offering their blessings to the Palestinian fighters. They emphasize the right of Palestinian and resistance factions to combat Israeli occupation.
At the heart of these regional dynamics is a recurring theme: opposition to normalization. The concern over Arab states’ normalization of relations with Israel continues to be a driving force behind these events. The fear of losing international support and facing isolation appears to be a potent motivator.
International Reactions
The unfolding crisis in Israel and Gaza has not only captivated regional actors but also attracted attention from around the world. As we explore the international responses to these events, we see a diverse range of positions and interests coming into play.
One of the notable stances comes from Qatar’s foreign ministry, which expresses deep concern about the situation. They call for an immediate halt to the escalation and the exercise of restraint. Qatar’s stance is clear: they blame Israel alone for the ongoing conflict, citing repeated raids on the Al Aqsa Mosque and the violation of Palestinian rights. This perspective underscores Qatar’s commitment to the Palestinian cause and their belief in Israel’s responsibility to abide by international law.
Saudi Arabia joins the chorus of countries calling for an immediate end to the violence. They, too, emphasize their warnings about a possible escalation due to ongoing occupation and provocations against Palestinian sanctities. Saudi Arabia underscores the international community’s failure to uphold the two-state solution, highlighting the frustrations surrounding the conflict’s intractability.
However, not all nations are aligned against Israel. India, a country currently undergoing a cultural shift towards Hindu centrism, stands in solidarity with Israel. This stance raises intriguing questions about the influence of religious dynamics on international politics. While Muslim-majority countries rally behind Palestine, India’s alignment with Israel showcases a different narrative.
Ukraine’s President, Volodymyr Zelensky, makes a surprisingly strong statement, condemning terrorism and expressing solidarity with Israel. He explicitly states that terrorists should be eliminated worldwide, and those who sponsor terror commit crimes against humanity. Zelensky’s words suggest a belief that Iran may be behind the conflict and that Israel’s right to defend itself is unquestionable. This stance may have implications for Ukraine’s relationships with the Arab/Islamic countries in the near future, at a time where Ukraine is desperate for support to combat Russia’s invasion of their country.
The United States, under President Joe Biden’s leadership, reaffirms its unwavering support for Israel. They promise to provide Israel with whatever it needs to defend itself, a commitment echoed by Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. This gesture raises questions about the balance of U.S. support for both Israel and Ukraine, especially in light of budget constraints.
Russia, in contrast, maintains its usual diplomatic position, urging both sides to cease violence, renounce force, and engage in peaceful negotiations. Russia emphasizes the role of the international community in facilitating lasting peace through diplomatic means. This position mirrors their longstanding advice, however, contradicting their own complex situation in Ukraine.
The Complex Political Calculations
Hamas, for all its fiery rhetoric, is well aware that a military victory is unlikely. Their position, just outside of Gaza, is precarious, with Israeli forces surrounding them and airstrikes pounding Gaza’s territory. Recent live footage attests to the continued hostilities, with rockets launched from Gaza into Israel. It’s a bleak scenario, and even those who support Palestine understand that a military solution is improbable.
However, this operation serves a purpose beyond military victory. It forces Israel’s hand. The Israeli government must demonstrate its commitment to protecting its citizens against what it labels as terrorism. Prime Minister Netanyahu minced no words, promising that Hamas would pay a price like never before. This strong stance not only sends a message to the Palestinian factions but also complicates Israel’s geopolitical and diplomatic relationships.
Before this conflict, Saudi Arabia and Israel were cautiously exploring deals and negotiations. Rumors even circulated about Saudi Arabia increasing oil output to improve relations with Israel. Yet, in the current climate, no Arab or Muslim country dares to associate with Israel, fearing backlash from within their own regions.
This operation is designed to shock the world, pushing Israel to react strongly against the Palestinian people. It’s a tragic consequence because, amidst all the geopolitical maneuvering, it’s the people of Gaza who bear the brunt of the suffering. They are pawns in this deadly game, caught between militant groups’ ambitions and the Israeli airstrikes they know are inevitable.
Gaza’s inhabitants have no say in the matter. There’s no government, no elections, and no escape. Their lives are expendable in the pursuit of political objectives. Any civilian casualties from Israeli airstrikes are exploited by Hamas as examples of Israeli brutality, further isolating Israel on the international stage.
This conflict could undo the progress made with the Abraham Accords and disrupt Israel’s hard-earned diplomatic relationships in the Middle East. However, it also plays into the hands of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, strengthening his political standing. In times of war or tension, leaders often see a boost in popularity, even if it’s somewhat artificial.
Netanyahu’s policies, aimed at suppressing potential threats, receive validation through this conflict. It’s as if both Hamas and Netanyahu are in cahoots, benefiting from the status quo. It’s a grim truth, but this war is unlikely to endure. Similar to past conflicts in the region, it may fizzle out quickly. Within a week, we might witness a de-escalation, just as we did in previous engagements.
We will continue to monitor the developments of the situation over in Israel and Palestine.
Full Video Report:
Israel-Hamas War SITREP Day 1: