The Israel-Hamas conflict is looking more and more ominous. Israel is bent on seeking ruthless revenge. The outrage in Israel provoked by the horrific Hamas killings of Israeli civilians and the taking of hostages is understandable, but how far will Israel go?
The immediate response has been to inflict terrible punishment by destroying buildings in Gaza city, cutting off supplies of food, water and fuel, and force Gazans to move from the north to the south of the Strip in order to have a freer hand in operations and avoid large-scale indiscriminate civilian casualties. Israel's land invasion of Gaza, which seemed imminent at one time, has been delayed. Whether this is on account of the US' dissuasion or to give time for the deployment of US military in the area to be completed, or to make room for behind-the-scene diplomacy to get hostages freed, or hesitation because of huge casualties Israel will inevitably suffer in urban warfare is not clear.
The US is giving Israel full support, but has tried to balance it by calling for restraint in order to limit civilian casualties and has backed the supply of humanitarian aid to Gaza. How far this balancing can work in attenuating anti-US sentiments in the region is open to doubt, as the US is seen as the principal supporter of Israel for geopolitical reasons as well as those linked to America's domestic politics.
The US has been working successfully for the regional acceptance of Israel through the normalisation of its ties with the UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan, crowned by Saudi Arabia ties, as part of the Abrahamic accords. The Palestinian cause, which had already lost its centrality in Arab politics, would have been further marginalised with these accords. This was happening even as Israeli settlements were being expanded in the West Bank and the Benjamin Netanyahu government's determination to bury the two-state solution was manifest. The Hamas attack has arrested this normalisation process and has brought the Palestinian question back to the centre of regional politics.
Major western leaders - from Germany, UK and France - have also shown full solidarity with Israel, supporting its right to defend itself, while also, as in the case of the US, reminding it, as a democratic country, to respect the laws of war. Israel, however, is continuing to bomb Gaza, and civilian casualties continue to rise. Israel is determined to decimate the Hamas as a fighting force once and for all, though it is not clear how long that operation will take and whether the costs Israel will incur in the huge war losses will be sustainable. If Israel succeeds, the issue of who will govern Gaza will arise.
The Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, already in disrepute as being ineffective, may not want to enter Gaza on the back of an Israeli victory coming at a great human cost for Gaza's population. In the past, the idea of an Arab peacekeeping force in Gaza to ensure security for all was rejected by Arab countries. Whether that idea can be revived without resolving the larger question of an independent Palestinian state seems most unlikely. For Israel to demand security against threats from Gaza while keeping its hold on Arabs in the West Bank would not be a workable political proposition.
The UN Security Council, predictably, has not been able to act. The Brazilian resolution for a "humanitarian pause" was vetoed by the US. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken opposes a ceasefire as that would allow Hamas to "refit". The White House spokesperson has taken the position that in war loss of civilian lives is inevitable. The US is also questioning the accuracy of the numbers of civilians killed in Gaza.
To prevent the conflict from becoming regional, a ceasefire would seem an essential first step, but on this, there is no agreement in the UNSC. The Russian proposal for a ceasefire and return of hostages failed to secure a majority, besides being rejected by the US, UK and France. The US resolution, which called for a humanitarian pause but not a ceasefire, has been rejected by Russia, China and the UAE. China has taken a markedly pro-Palestinian position, calling the US resolution evasive and unbalanced and failing to call for a ceasefire. The UN General Assembly is now set to vote on a draft Arab resolution calling for a ceasefire and the revocation of the Israeli order to evacuate North Gaza.
The irony in all this is that the US realises the danger of the conflict spreading, which is why it has decided to send two aircraft carrier strike groups and a marine unit to the Mediterranean. It fears that regional actors like the Hezbollah in Lebanon, backed by Iran, may open a second front against Israel from the North where already some exchange of fire has taken place. The US wants to deter Hezbollah and Iran by a show of military strength and stern warnings to both to stay out of the conflict. Iran is engaged in active diplomacy with a mixture of defiance and diplomacy to effect the release of hostages.
The US has begun to supply more arms aid to Israel. The option is not to prevent war but to stop others from joining it in support of the Palestinians. If under this US military cover Israel continues to bombard Gaza and, at some stage, send its land forces in, the likelihood of a blow-up could well increase.
The spectre of the daily bombardment of Gaza, buildings being reduced to rubble, and civilians being killed, the collective punishment imposed on the Gazans is turning international opinion against Israel. The Arab street is of course inflamed, but big public demonstrations against Israel by local Muslim populations and others are taking place also in European and American cities. France has sought to ban pro-Palestinian demonstrations to avoid street violence. Amazingly, protestors including American Jews have intruded into the US Capitol to express their opposition to Israeli actions. The bombing of the al Ahli hospital in Gaza has further turned the narrative against Israel, even if it is unclear who was responsible for it, whether it was Israel or the Islamic Jihad.
The UN Secretary General has been focusing on the issue of humanitarian aid for the Gaza population, to the point of being personally present at the Rafah crossing in Egypt to supervise the entry of relief trucks into Gaza. His statement at the most recent UN Security Council meeting condemned the Hamas terror attacks as well as the act of inflicting collective punishment as a war crime. He stressed that the action of Hamas had not occurred in a vacuum as the Palestinians have seen their land "steadily devoured by settlements and plagued by violence; their economy stifled; their people displaced and their homes demolished", with their hopes for a political solution vanishing. He sees a two-state solution as the only realistic foundation for true peace and stability. The Secretary General's statement has been violently criticised by Israel, with calls for his resignation, a reaction that does not help Israel's case in international public opinion.
The mantra of a two-state solution can be recited politically by world leaders but the reality on the ground argues against it in practical terms.
The size of Israeli settlements on the West Bank is massive, with over 4,50,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank and an additional 2,20,000 living in East Jerusalem. Can they be uprooted without a huge internal crisis in Israel? Who would impose such a solution? The manner in which Israel, for security and other reasons, has broken the West Bank into enclaves raises the question of whether the Palestinians will accept an unviable state.
India has taken a carefully balanced position in the UN Security Council that responds to the developing situation after the initial horrific terrorist attacks that Israel suffered. Our statement recalls that India at the Prime Minister's level had unequivocally condemned these terror attacks and had stood with Israel in their moment of crisis. The statement expresses deep concern about the deteriorating security situation, the large scale loss of civilian lives and the alarming humanitarian crisis. It urges all parties to protect civilians and also work to create conditions for peace through de-escalation. It calls for immediate resumption of direct and credible negotiations between Israel and Palestine for a lasting two-state solution leading to the establishment of a sovereign, independent and viable Palestinian state living within secure and recognised borders side by side in peace with Israel. The statement underlines India's supply of humanitarian assistance to Gaza.
The last word has, however, not been said on this highly dangerous ongoing conflict.
(Kanwal Sibal was Foreign Secretary and Ambassador to Turkey, Egypt, France, and Russia, and Deputy Chief Of Mission in Washington.)
Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author.