An Israeli soldier searches the scene after a rocket attack in the Israeli kibbutz Kfar Aza, near the border with the Gaza Strip, October 11, 2023. (Credit: AFP)
“They’re even worse than ISIS and we need to treat them as such,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Oct. 10 via X.
Netanyahu’s analogy clearly alluded to the Battle of Mosul that took place in Iraq between 2016 and 2017 to regain control of the city from IS, who had captured it in 2014.
After Hamas’ offensive Saturday left hundreds of Israelis dead, Netanyahu made clear the level of violence he was ready to use.
Israel has already begun shelling Gaza at an unprecedented scale, as was reported by many Gazans, and has mobilized 300,000 soldiers in preparation for a ground offensive with two stated objectives: eradicate Hamas and reshape the map of the Middle East.
“It’s one of the greatest humiliations in Israel’s history,” said political scientist Karim Emile Bitar. “Israel’s pride is injured, so there’s a real risk of a disproportionate response — something Tel Aviv is used to doing.”
“Given the horror caused by the fact that in less than 48 hours, more Israelis have been killed than in the last 19 years, there is no doubt that the response will be devastating,” Bitar added.
The shock and surprise element of Hamas’ attack on Israel, which was known as the region’s military-security powerhouse, are reminiscent of the 9/11 event and the swift, strong US response that subsequently unfolded in Afghanistan.
“We now know that the global war on terror has been extraordinarily counterproductive,” Bitar said. “Trillions of dollars have been spent to fight between 1,000 and 3,000 al-Qaeda men in the mountains of Afghanistan, but 20 years later, we still found ourselves with a proliferation of terrorist hotbeds all over the world.”
An analogy can be drawn with Gaza. Israel announced the formation of a unity government, which implies that the war will last for some time.
Blockade or occupation
The aim of a potential ground offensive on Gaza will be to destroy Hamas’ military capabilities and liquidate as many of its operatives as possible.
“An IDF ground offensive is likely to occupy the entirety of Gaza this time, unlike the 2014 campaign, where they only advanced a few kilometers into Gaza,” said Stephen Biddle, Deputy Senior Fellow for Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations.
These major objectives can only be achieved over the long term.
“The likely aims will include destroying all of Hamas’s and PIJ’s [Palestine Islamic Jihad’s] remaining rockets; destroying all of their tunnels [not just those which cross the border]; destroying all other munitions caches, weapons workshops, and command infrastructure,” Biddle said. This will also entail “the killing or capturing as many fighters and leaders as possible; and recovering as many of the hostages as possible.”
Two possible scenarios could play out in this case.
According to Tom Beckett, head of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the Israeli army would either withdraw from Gaza and re-establish a blockade, or set up a garrison in the area.
A ground offensive would be an opportunity for Israel to make up for the military humiliation it suffered, although the results are expected to be limited.
“It will be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate a movement with as significant a base as Hamas,” Bitar said. “In any case, it won’t be possible to achieve this without causing thousands, if not tens of thousands, of civilian casualties.”
This scenario harkens back to the 1982 siege of Beirut, which aimed to quash the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Until today, Israel continues to pay a high price for the violence it committed, which ultimately gave rise to Hezbollah in Lebanon.
If a ground offensive results in the occupation of Gaza, the presence of Israeli troops in specific areas, like barracks and crossing points, will create another issue. These soldiers would become prime targets for surviving Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters.
The “superior knowledge” balance will shift from the attackers to the insurgents hiding among the civilians, according to Beckett.
This scenario would leave Israel stuck between a rock and a hard place.
“Cleaning defended locations will be casualty costly for Israel and holding them will be personnel intensive even for a short reoccupation,” Beckett said.
Saving hostages
Another unprecedented factor in this war, and undoubtedly the most sensitive, is the issue of the 150 Israeli hostages in Gaza and how it could affect the number of casualties the Israeli army is willing to accept.
Back in 2014, Netanyahu limited his military operation in Gaza to prevent a surge in the death toll.
“A quick advance risks heavier IDF casualties but improves the odds of rescuing hostages alive,” Biddle explained.
American advisors specialized in hostage negotiations have been deployed to the field. However, their primary focus is on dismantling Hamas, reported a Bloomberg correspondent on X.
“If we can save the hostages, that’s fine, but our main goal is to destroy Hamas,” one advisor said, according to the Bloomberg journalist. “Locating the hostages will require a great deal of effort, as there is a lot of fighting in the area,” the reported added. “It’s not certain that this strategy will be 100% effective, given the way similar situations have been handled before.”
There is one crucial point that Israel appears to have overlooked: what would occur if Hamas were to be eliminated in Gaza?
“All of these actions are taking place without a clear strategy or a political proposal that could lead to a genuine resolution of this conflict,” Bitar said. “Thus, we find ourselves repeating the errors of the past.”
“There is a lack of awareness within the international community, and even when present in some circles, there is no substantial pressure or call for restraint to avert a potential catastrophe,” Bitar said.
The likelihood of Palestinians finding themselves without leadership is increasingly plausible, particularly due to the Palestinian Authority’s (PA) lack of popularity and its inability to maintain control, even in the West Bank.
“At best, we may end up with a PA with Hamas in the background and at worst, a state of chaos,” said Michael Horowitz, a geopolitical analyst at Le Beck International.
“Netanyahu’s decades-long objective has been to fragment the Palestinian leadership, sidelining the PA while allowing Hamas to persist,” Horowitz added. “This strategy is now proving counterproductive.”
To the north of Israel, the threat of another fighting front with Hezbollah along the Lebanese border remains impending.
There is also the looming danger of a regional conflict that could extend well beyond the Middle East, after the US positioned the USS Gerald R. Ford, the world’s largest aircraft carrier, in the eastern Mediterranean.
According to the Amwaj news site, Shiite militias in Iraq and Yemen with ties to Iran have issued warnings that if the US directly intervenes in Gaza, American targets in the region could face attacks on multiple fronts.
This article was originally published in French in L'Orient-Le Jour. Translation by Sahar Ghoussoub.