The Hamas Terrorist Attack and Its Consequences: Revisiting the Conditions for Peace in the Middle East

2023-12-10 03:16:59

The Hamas terrorist attack on October 7 caused many of us to reconsider our preconceived notions about the conditions for peace in the Middle East and the rest of the planet.

We are still shaken by the horrors of that day. In launching its attack, Hamas easily overcame Israel’s high-tech border barriers without encountering any organized resistance.

Its militants were able to massacre more than 1,200 Israelis (mostly civilians) and kidnap more than 200 hostages, broadcasting much of the carnage on social media.

(Also: The WHO insists on the deterioration of the situation in Gaza: ‘Society is collapsing’)

Building destroyed during Israeli bombings in Rafah.

Photo:

How could this have happened? Israel, which has the strongest military and best intelligence services in the Middle East, was supposed to track all terrorist threats and activities on both sides of its borders. And yet he found himself attacked by surprise by a group that operates strictly within the isolated and closely guarded enclave of Gaza.

The events of October 7 shattered many illusions. Both outside observers and the parties involved had come to believe that the decades-long conflict between Israel and the Palestinians was impossible to resolve and therefore had to be lived with.

(Also: More than 25 people died after the Israeli army bombed a school in Gaza)

The new hope was that Israel could make peace and establish diplomatic relations with neighboring Arab countries without resolving or even paying attention to the Palestinian issue. It was thought that peace in the Middle East could be achieved without the participation of the Palestinians or the creation of a Palestinian state. We now know that that idea was just an illusion.

Until this war it was thought that peace in the Middle East could be achieved without the participation of the Palestinians.
nor the creation of a Palestinian State. We now know that that idea was just an illusion.

In 1947, as the British Mandate was approaching its end, the United Nations General Assembly approved Resolution 181, which proposed the partition of the territory into two States: one Jewish and the other Arab. But as soon as Israel declared its independence in 1948, five Arab countries from the region invaded it, starting a war that has continued to this day in one form or another.

The options for ending the conflict have hardly changed. In theory, one side could prevail by conquering all the territory between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, driving out the defeated side. But that would never be accepted by the international community of the 21st century.

Consequently, the only option is for both sides to reach an agreement to establish two States with close economic interconnections, as the majority of United Nations countries envisioned three quarters of a century ago.

(Read: Three months of the Israel-Hamas war: violent combats reported in the streets of Gaza)

Since October 7, this almost forgotten two-state solution has reappeared in debates about how to end the current war in Gaza and resolve the eternal – and eternally bloody – conflict once and for all. But is this renewed interest an expression of desperation in the face of a seemingly insoluble dilemma, or rather does it represent a serious commitment to reaching the only solution, even if it is extremely difficult?

Israeli soldiers on their tank located near Israel’s border with the Gaza Strip.

Photo:

Murder and terrorism

The last time the two-state option was seriously considered was after the Oslo Accords in the early 1990s, when many thought it could be achieved. But that moment ended abruptly with the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin by a far-right Israeli nationalist in 1995.

Although there was an attempt to save the Oslo road map, only a shadow of it remained. After Yasser Arafat, president of the Palestine Liberation Organization, made the historic mistake of believing that he could bring Israel to its knees with a campaign of terror – the Second Intifada – the process was doomed to failure.

Since then, the Oslo process has been nothing more than a tragic reminder of what could have been. The solution he once offered seems further away than ever today. Under the weight of terror and occupation, and fueled by extreme factions within their own ranks, both sides have increasingly given way to violence and confrontation, culminating in the horrific massacre of Israeli civilians on October 7.

(You may be interested: President Petro met with Roger Waters, former Pink Floyd: they talked about Gaza)

How could that solution work today? To begin with, each side would have to accept the legitimacy of the other’s demands. Israel cannot be asked to put its security at risk, and the Palestinians cannot be expected to give up an independent state with secure borders, or to accept land grabs in the West Bank by Israeli settlers.

A family arrives at the Nasser hospital in Khan Yunis after their home was hit by an Israeli attack in the southern Gaza city.

Photo:

China must enter

Once the Gaza war is over, the most urgent tasks will be to develop new parameters for a revitalized peace process, reform the dysfunctional Palestinian National Authority, and change Israel’s authorities. If Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government remains in power, any initiative to restart the peace process will be dead in the first place.

Furthermore, for a new peace process to be successful, enormous military, political and financial assistance from reliable external actors will be necessary.

Since the region and the world have changed radically since the days of Oslo, the West (the United States and the European Union) will not be able to shoulder the task alone. China will also have to be involved. Without this broader constellation of mediators, it will not be possible to neutralize Iran’s regional network of radical militias that reject peace.

(We recommend: Israeli Army expands its ground operations towards the south of the Gaza Strip)

Palestinians recover bodies of victims of Israeli airstrikes in Deir Al Balah, southern Gaza Strip.

The dream of Middle East peace will only have one chance to materialize with new ideas, new people, a mutual willingness to negotiate peacefully, and new external actors that reflect current geopolitical realities.

What happened on October 7 demonstrated that the status quo in the region is as dangerous as it is unsustainable.

(Also: Several former presidents ask Joe Biden to intervene in the conflict between Israel and Hamas)

The conflict could escalate at any moment, with terrible consequences for the entire world. Peace between Israel and the Palestinians is not only a noble diplomatic vision, but a concrete political necessity to maintain global peace and stability in the 21st century.

JOSCHKA FISCHER*
Project Syndicate
BERLIN