Netanyahu, Israel’s Prime Minister, is reportedly under pressure to declare an end to the war in Gaza and claim victory. This so-called ‘opportunity’ would allow him to take credit for eliminating terrorist Yahya Sinwar, a notorious figure associated with both Israeli and Palestinian bloodshed. Riding on this triumph, he could propose a cease-fire that might pave the way for future negotiations around restoring relations with Saudi Arabia and other nations. American officials are optimistically dubbing this moment an ‘opportunity’, one that could herald an end to the Gaza war.
Although the Biden-Harris administration may yearn for a monumental peace treaty, the reality of such an outcome seems to be quite uncertain unless the U.S. administration steps-up its placement of pressure. The power vacuum left by Sinwar might quickly be filled by a successor who is potentially just as, if not more, aggressive. Hamas militancy does not show signs of ending anytime soon. Thus, laying the foundation for more conflict instead of the ‘opportunity’ touted by U.S officials.
The cycle of Israeli military victories, punctuated by the recent elimination of Sinwar, might appear effective on paper, yet it lacks a strategic vision. Netanyahu does not seem to have a clear post-conflict plan for Gaza or the West Bank. Such shortsightedness is not only dangerous but threatens to perpetuate the age-old conflict further.
In this context, Avril Haines, the Director of National Intelligence in the U.S., has expressed concerns about the ongoing squabbles in Gaza, noting that it could potentially fan the flames of a generational threat of terrorism. The fallout of this war has profound societal impacts, particularly on young children who, having been exposed to immense suffering, may turn to extremism as their only recourse. The continuous cycle of Palestinian and Israeli extremism seem to feed into each other.
Netanyahu’s response to Sinwar’s demise did not inspire hopes of a swift resolution and return to peace. Rather than seizing this moment to pivot towards negotiation, he expressed determination to continue military actions ‘full force’ in Gaza until all hostages were released. Given the national spirit, it seems unlikely that such tenacity will lead to a cease-fire, much less the release of hostages.
The probability of both Israel and Hamas accepting the Biden-led peace proposals seems dubious. Netanyahu’s focus appears more self-centered, while Israeli citizens, traumatized by continuous conflicts, may find it difficult to accept a practical two-state solution.
Another impediment to an effective peace deal is the questionable condition of the Palestinian Authority leadership. Accusations of corruption and condemnation have undermined their legitimacy. The suggestion of releasing Marwan Barghouti, a highly famed Palestinian leader, from the clutches of Israeli imprisonment may be a beneficial precedence to set.
A testament to the diplomatic challenges ahead is made apparent by a poll conducted in July. It revealed that 66% of Israeli Jews believe Palestinians aim to carry out genocide against them, while 61% of Palestinians believe in a similar intention from the Israeli camp. Diplomatic efforts become formidable when both parties view each other as genocidal killers.
Succumbing to Sinwar’s aspirations of a larger Middle East war would be a grave mistake, and ironically, Netanyahu appears to be helping him realize this. Persistent efforts for sustainable peace will serve to dismantle Sinwar’s enduring legacy.
Regrettably, instead of pursuing reconciliation, trend of a stricter approach is seeming to emerge from Jerusalem. Access to aid in Gaza has been troublingly low in recent times, and some speculate that Israeli forces are adopting a strategy of conflict for northern Gaza. Consequently, hunger is a widespread issue, and periodic attacks against aid convoys by Israel are reported.
One ironic takeaway from the elimination of Sinwar for some Israelis is the essentiality of resisting international strain. Whether this mindset can be interrupted remains to be seen.
In the early days of April and May, there was a short period of severe posture, followed by an increase in the transportation of aid supplies to Gaza. However, when the apparent pressure was brushed off as hollow threats, the resistance resumed.
It also seems that the decision-makers often demonstrate a conflicting behavior, where on one hand, they propose potential aid cuts if food inflow to Gaza is not allowed immediately, only to delay the implementation by thirty days. This attitude seriously undermines the chances of achieving peace after Sinwar’s death.
The successful leveraging of this opportunity will largely depend on whether the right encouragement and deterrence methods are employed in forthcoming months. Only time will reveal if a harmonious agreement can be brokered from the ashes of Sinwar’s defeat in this war-torn region.
In summary, the state of affairs between Israel and Palestine is deeply entrenched in a cycle of retribution, mistrust, and misunderstanding. While optimists label the current situation as an ‘opportunity’, pragmatists suggest that lasting peace can only be achieved through continuous pressure, negotiations, and strategic long-term planning.
An eye towards a realistic peace will require more than just eliminating a singular adversary; it requires systemic adjustments, tolerance, and the shared will for an equitable two-state solution. The rhetoric of the Biden-Harris administration seems superficial when compared to the larger, more complex issues at hand.