Israel Is Not Winning its War
In late October 2023, I asked what would happen when Israel found it could not win its war in Gaza. It has been almost two years, and we have something of an answer. The stated aims of the war in Gaza were the defeat of Hamas, and the return of the hostages. Many of the leaders of Hamas have been killed, Gaza devastated, nearly 60,000 people killed, and the population starved to the point of famine, but the defeat of Hamas remains far from accomplished. According to Israeli estimates, Hamas retains about 40,000 members, pretty much the same numbers as at the start of the war. About 200 hostages have been released, mostly due to an early ceasefire deal, but about 50 remain in captivity, at least half of them presumed dead.
The clearly stated goals of the war have not been met despite a level of destruction almost never seen before in history. In December 2023, the Associated Press reported that, 'In just the first two months of war, the offensive has wreaked more destruction than the razing of Syria's Aleppo between 2012 and 2016, Ukraine's Mariupol or, proportionally, the Allied bombing of Germany in World War II. It has killed more civilians than the US-led coalition did in its three-year campaign against the Islamic State group.' Even at that time the devastation was clearly visible from space. One and a half years later, they have reached such catastrophic levels that people have stopped making any comparisons, possibly because no worse examples exist except for the nuclear attacks on Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
Along with the stated goals were two unstated goals. The first was the elimination of any possibility of a repeat of the Hamas-led attack on 7 October 2023. The second was to put an end to the Palestinian question that remains the root of Israel's insecurity. There are ways to ensure both, or at least as much as possible. In September 2024, the Jordanian foreign minister offered a comprehensive deal, a reiteration of the Saudi King Abdullah's 2003 deal, of normalisation with the region and the guarantee of security for Israel. As with the 2003 offer, Israel and its allies have comprehensively ignored this path. Instead, the Israeli government has chosen the moment when its population is traumatised and it has the backing of its allies, to expand the war to every and all organisations that have disputed how the Israelis act – and this means primarily Hezbollah (and Lebanon), the Houthis in Yemen, and the Iranian government. The end goal seems not just to manufacture regime change in a country or two, but to change the whole regime of West Asia so that no country can dispute Israel's supremacy.
This is, in some ways, the natural end result of the 1923 Iron Wall argument of Ze'ev Jabotinsky, one of the early Zionists who has become more influential over the last half century. Jabotinsky argued that once the moderate Arabs agreed to Israel's existence, 'Then we may expect them to discuss honestly practical questions, such as a guarantee against Arab displacement, or equal rights for Arab citizen, or Arab national integrity.' The problem is that this rests on the elimination of the Palestinian question, or as he wrote, in the same paragraph preceding this, 'As long as the Arabs feel that there is the least hope of getting rid of us, they will refuse to give up this hope in return for either kind words or for bread and butter, because they are not a rabble, but a living people. And when a living people yields in matters of such a vital character it is only when there is no longer any hope of getting rid of us, because they can make no breach in the iron wall.'
For all of Israel's power, for all the diplomatic, financial, and military backing by the United States and the European states, the 'iron wall' has consistently been breached, never as calamitously as on October 7, 2023. We can argue until the cows come home whether this is because Israel has refused to negotiate in good faith or whether it is impossible for them to reconcile as long as the Palestinians exist as a people – Jabotinsky himself argued that it impossible to compensate them – that does not matter. What matters is that Israel and its allies believe that only by the building of an unbreachable Iron Wall will they ever be safe.
By definition, this is an impossible condition. No country on earth, ever, has unbreachable security, something that the Israelis are finding out as their vaunted Iron Dome anti-missile system is actually tested by Iran and some missiles continue to breach it. But if peace is not possible under such a system, then the only option is for Israel to be surrounded by states so weak that they cannot resist any punishment that Israel determines.
It is important to note that this aligns closely to the US worldview that sees itself as the 'indispensable nation' and one that can act as it wants, when it wants, and how it wants without justification – as seen most obviously during the long 'War on Terror' and when it passed a law in 2002 allowing it to act against the international Criminal Court if its people were ever charged. It is also a throwback to the policy of European colonial actors – Jabotinsky and early Zionists all saw the foundation of Israel as a colonial project – and thus it is unsurprising that European states and European settler states have largely backed Israel – even if some are starting to question it. Indians should understand this well, as our own history of British colonialism was very much of the East India Company and the British Empire making efforts to surround their colonies by weak buffer states that could not threaten them. Even the Soviet Empire, which tried to harness anti-colonialism against the US and its allies, behaved the same, surrounding itself by weaker, subjugated states in its periphery, something that Putin has tried to revive in Ukraine.
The brutal truth is that this policy works until it does not. A state of perpetual war is exhausting to even the countries pursuing it, and it empowers other states that benefit from being seen as guarantors of stability, in this case China. Furthermore, broken states where people are denied security and dignity are excellent breeding grounds for extremist non-state organisations such as the LTTE, Al Qaeda, ISIS, and a host of others, and as the vocal champions of Palestinian rights – many of them Jewish – assert themselves across the world, in particular in the US and Europe, it is as easy to say that Israel has given the Palestinian question renewed life as to say it is closer to finishing it.
Omair Ahmad is an author. His last novel, Jimmy the Terrorist, was shortlisted for the Man Asian Literary Prize, and won the Crossword Award.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
31 minutes ago
- News18
Friend, ‘F*** Him' To Joining His War: How Trump's Equation With Netanyahu Changed Over The Years
Is US President Donald Trump a friend of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu? Have they always been friends? How has their equation changed over Trump's two tenures? US President Donald Trump on Saturday entered the Israel-Iran war by conducting strikes on Iran's nuclear sites. Through the start of Israel's Operation Rising Lion, Trump has been vocal about his stand against Iran and support for Israel's moves. 'Congratulations, President Trump, your bold decision to target Iran's nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history," Netanyahu said in a video on X after the US strikes on Iran. From an alliance during Trump's first term, to tension, and now a renewed but cautious strategic partnership, a look at their relationship: Trump shared a close bond with Netanyahu during his first term leading to some major moves and even praise in public. In 2017, Trump formally recognised Jerusalem as Israel's capital, a major diplomatic victory for Netanyahu. The US embassy was moved there in 2018. Two years later, Trump signed an executive order recognising Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. In 2020, Trump brokered the Abraham Accords, the normalisation agreements between Israel and several Arab states — UAE, Bahrain, Sudan, Morocco, with Netanyahu involved. Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA) in 2018 and often called Netanyahu 'a great prime minister" and 'a friend." AFTER 2021 Netanyahu congratulated Joe Biden in 2020 before Trump conceded the election. Trump viewed this as a betrayal, reportedly saying: 'F*** him." In various interviews, Trump accused Netanyahu of being disloyal and self-serving. 2023-2025 During his second term, Trump and Netanyahu are sharing a relationship that can be called conditional cooperation. As Israel attacked Iran, Trump publicly backed Israel's right to self-defense. He also supported Netanyahu's strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The US President has now moved U.S. strategic bombers into the region. However, despite their military cooperation, Trump has not praised Netanyahu personally. Media reports have defined their meetings 'professional, not friendly". According to the Israeli media, Netanyahu sees Trump as 'useful but unpredictable". After the Saturday strikes, Netanyahu said, ''In tonight's action against Iran's nuclear facilities, America has been truly unsurpassed. It has done what no other country on Earth could do. History will recall that President Trump acted to deny the world's most dangerous regime, the world's most dangerous weapons… President Trump and I often say: 'Peace through strength.' First comes strength, then comes peace. And tonight, President Trump and the United States acted with a lot of strength." Trump spoke to Netanyahu after the US military launched strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities, a senior White House official told AFP Saturday. The United States also 'gave Israel a heads-up before the strikes" as Trump joined the Israeli forces in the ongoing conflict. With Agency Inputs Get Latest Updates on Movies, Breaking News On India, World, Live Cricket Scores, And Stock Market Updates. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! First Published: June 23, 2025, 19:37 IST
Hindustan Times
31 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Jagan slams CM Naidu over 'restrictions' during Rentapalla visit
Amaravati, YSRCP supremo YS Jagan Mohan Reddy on Monday questioned Chief Minister N Chandrababu Naidu on why the TDP-led NDA government allegedly imposed restrictions on his recent visit to Rentapalla to ensure that "people would not turn up." Jagan slams CM Naidu over 'restrictions' during Rentapalla visit On June 18, Reddy visited Rentapalla village in Palnadu district to call on the family members of a party leader who had died by suicide a year ago due to alleged "harassment by TDP leaders and police." Though police gave permission for a limited number of vehicles and only about 100 people for this visit, many vehicles joined Reddy's convoy, and thousands of people swarmed all along the way from Tadepalli to Rentapalla. Further, a YSRCP supporter, C Singayya, allegedly fell under a vehicle and died in that melee at Etuku Cross. Guntur district superintendent of police S Satish initially said that Singayya fell under a private vehicle, but not under Reddy's convoy. However, on Sunday night, he said that Singayya was actually "run over" by the vehicle being used by Reddy, leading to the registration of a police case against Reddy and others. Amidst this backdrop, the former CM questioned if the erstwhile YSRCP government had imposed such restrictions during the visits of Naidu and Janasena chief Pawan Kalyan between 2019 and 2024. 'Chandrababu, why did you impose restrictions on my tour to ensure that nobody would turn up? Did we impose these kinds of restrictions when you and Pawan Kalyan were touring?' Reddy asked in a post on 'X'. Reddy questioned why opposition leaders like him are allegedly being stopped from visiting their party workers and expressing solidarity with farmers and citizens. Though he "followed all the rules" and gave prior information about his visit to the authorities, Reddy alleged that the state failed to provide the necessary security arrangements. Reddy emphasised that Z security for a former chief minister is not a favour but a protocol-based right, adding that just as it applied to Naidu in the past, it should apply to anyone in the future. "Why were there no pilot vehicles or rope parties deployed during my visit, which are part of the standard Z security protocol?" asked the YSRCP chief. If the security arrangements were in place, Reddy questioned, "How could anyone have come under his vehicle," and demanded clarity. "Did the government fail to provide security, or is the claim that someone was run over false?" he asked. Alleging that the government did not provide a bulletproof vehicle, which is mandatory under protocol, Reddy said he arranged one for himself at his own expense. Further, the opposition leader referred to Guntur SP's initial statement on Singayya's incident and demanded to know "why the narrative was later changed and politicised." He accused the ruling coalition of using this tragic incident as a distraction from their governance failures. Observing that he had only held a press conference to expose the alleged "unfulfilled promises, corruption, and financial damage done by the current regime," Reddy alleged that the NDA alliance government has launched diversionary tactics instead of responding with accountability. On learning about Singayya's death, Reddy said he immediately instructed his party leaders to provide help, along with ₹ 10 lakh compensation to the victim's family. He reminded that another supporter had also died due to a heart attack during the same tour, and similar support was extended to that family as well. Reddy asserted that these actions show the value he places on his supporters and questioned Naidu's response in similar situations. He criticised the TDP for allegedly spreading lies and questioned their moral authority to speak about humanity and ethics. Moreover, Reddy called on Naidu to mend his ways, act with responsibility, and "stop using political power to suppress the opposition." Meanwhile, Home Minister Vangalapudi Anitha accused Reddy of continuing his tour even after two people had lost their lives. The police had informed YSRCP leaders that the road was only 10 feet wide and that security could be provided for only 100 people, including his convoy and three vehicles, she said. Despite intelligence reports suggesting that the YSRCP was mobilising cadres, police extended maximum security, keeping in mind Reddy's Z status, said the Home Minister. "No one who commits a crime in the state will escape the law under any circumstances," she added. She further alleged that Reddy's supporter in Rentapalla village had died a year ago due to gambling, questioning the need for his visit. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
Time of India
31 minutes ago
- Time of India
Where is 400 kg enriched uranium? Iran claims to secretly move nuclear material to undisclosed location before US airstrikes hit nuclear sites. Here's how uranium may have been transported secretly
Iran has claimed that it secretly moved most of its enriched uranium to an undisclosed location before the United States launched coordinated airstrikes on its nuclear facilities. The strikes targeted three major enrichment sites in Iran, but reports suggest that key nuclear materials were not present at the time. United States Attack Early on Sunday, US forces attacked three of Iran's main enrichment sites—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. B-2 bombers and submarine-launched missiles were used in the operation. According to satellite imagery, the Fordow site sustained heavy damage. Isfahan was also hit, though it reportedly held little enriched uranium during the strike. Natanz had already been damaged earlier by Israeli attacks, which impacted its electrical systems. Where is 400 kilograms enriched uranium? Reports from Israeli officials and defense analysts confirmed that Iran moved about 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60% purity before the attacks. The material was likely relocated from Fordow and Isfahan to a secret place. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) head Rafael Grossi said his team last saw the fuel a week before the strikes. He stated Iran had made efforts to protect the material. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Join new Free to Play WWII MMO War Thunder War Thunder Play Now Undo Also Read: Which country can give nuclear warheads to Iran? Russia's Dmitriy Medvedev says US strikes may backfire as Iran may now begin nuclear weapons production and procure nuclear warheads from other nations Concerns Over Hidden Stockpiles Though the US claimed it destroyed Iran's nuclear capabilities, officials have admitted they do not know the location of the moved uranium. Iran's continued ability to produce nuclear weapons depends on its remaining centrifuges and infrastructure. Analysts believe rebuilding could take years, but it is still a security concern. Live Events Calls for Inspections and Negotiations At an emergency meeting in Vienna, IAEA chief Grossi urged for renewed access to Iran's nuclear sites. He asked for cooperation from Iran and international leaders to account for the uranium stockpile , especially the 400 kilograms enriched to 60%. Advanced Centrifuges and Enrichment Iran had been using advanced centrifuge models like IR-2m and IR-6 before the strikes. These machines shorten the time required to produce weapons-grade uranium. According to the Arms Control Association, Iran could have built a nuclear bomb in under two weeks with its earlier capacity. Also Read: Strait of Hormuz Closure: What is Iran's next move as regime takes final call to close Strait of Hormuz with Yemen joining Iran in war against US and Israel? See if Russia may come to Iran's aid in war How Uranium may have been transported secretly? Uranium is stored in reinforced steel containers and transported with added protective casing. Movement by road, rail, or sea is possible. Satellite imagery captured convoys and construction vehicles at Fordow days before the US strikes, suggesting a planned relocation of materials. Iran's Defiance and Future Steps Iran's deputy foreign minister declared that Iran would not halt its nuclear program. US and Israeli officials remain concerned about Iran's future plans. Monitoring the next 24 hours is key, said US Vice President JD Vance. FAQs Where did Iran move its enriched uranium before the airstrikes? Iran reportedly moved the uranium to an undisclosed location, possibly days before the US strikes. The IAEA is seeking access to verify the current location and stockpiles. Is Iran still capable of making a nuclear weapon after the US attacks? Yes, if Iran rebuilds its centrifuges and facilities, it could still produce a nuclear weapon. However, this process may take years depending on available resources and hidden infrastructure.
