At approximately 06:30 local time Oct. 7, the Gaza-based Hamas militant group launched a surprise land, air, and sea attack against Israel. The militant group fired thousands of rockets against Israeli cities, reaching as far away as Tel Aviv. Hamas has called the operation “Al-Aqsa Flood”. It is the largest and most coordinated attack against Israel since its inception. It coincided with the Jewish religious holiday Simchat Torah and, most significantly, occurred 50 years and a day after the beginning of the 1973 Yom Kippur War. The attack resulted in more than 1,200 Israeli dead, including 220 soldiers, and more than 3,000 injured. Israel’s response has also killed more than 1,300 people in Gaza, and injured 6,000 more. Allies of Israel, as well as states with no official relations such as Saudi Arabia, have condemned the attack, while supporters of Hamas, including Iran and Hizballah, have welcomed it.
The events currently unfolding are on a scale far larger and of greater significance than that of the Yom Kippur War; this is Israel’s 9/11 and Pearl Harbor combined. External advice in the planning and preparation phase of the planned attack, most likely from Iran or its more influential proxy forces such as Hizballah, may have been provided. The attack has shocked Israeli society and will undoubtedly leave a mark on it for generations. The events that have transpired arguably represent the most severe failure of intelligence in Israeli history, which will have long-lasting effects.
Hamas claimed to have launched attacks against more than 50 locations within Israel. While many of them took place within the Gaza envelope – the populated areas of Israel that are within 7 km (4.3 miles) of the border with Gaza – this is the first time since the creation of the Israeli state during which Arab armed forces have marauded with such relative impunity in what is considered as Israel “proper”. While Israel has been no stranger to conflict since its inception in 1948, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared to the nation in a televised speech that, “We are at war”. Such words are significant and will echo in the hallways of history.
The scale and success of the attack, including the capture of Israeli towns and their people, as well as the number of deaths, is unparalleled. Israeli society and its very psyche have been impacted and the attack will undoubtedly leave a mark for generations. Widespread evidence from social media and other sources indicates there is widespread anger – even disgust – at the events that have occurred and a consequent willingness to fight back. Public opinion will probably be in favor of a dramatic change to the status quo. Israeli people will demand answers for what has transpired.
Security Impact in Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon
Violence in the West Bank is expected to rise. Civil unrest, demonstrations, and violent clashes with security forces have already taken place. Israeli forces have deployed in response to the clashes that have taken place. The killing of Palestinians in the West Bank is likely to trigger violence that militant groups, such as Lion’s Den, will look to exploit. For over two years, there has been a wave of violence across the West Bank, which reportedly played a part in Hamas’ decision to attack. Hamas’ attack and Israel’s fierce military response will likely elicit further anger and, in turn, a fresh wave of violence. Moreover, communal violence between Palestinians and Israeli settlers will increase as a result of Hamas’ attack, not only in the immediate future but for years to come. The shock to Israeli society will leave a scar for years, and individuals will likely seek their own personal retribution.
The Israeli siege of Gaza is already underway. A ground incursion will likely follow. Israeli authorities have closed all border crossings between Gaza and Israel. The Israel Defense Minister has “ordered a full siege on the Gaza Strip. No power, no food, no gas, everything is closed. We are fighting human animals, and we act accordingly." Hundreds of Gazan citizens have been killed, and more than 338,934 Palestinians have been displaced, many living in makeshift shelters within the territory. Egypt, at the time of writing, has refused to take Gazan refugees in, and Israel’s response will likely continue to exact a very harsh toll on Gaza.
However, there remain a lot of unknown variables in this conflict. It remains to be seen how Hamas' allies or backers, such as Lebanon's Hizballah or Iran, will respond to a potential Israeli ground invasion of Gaza. Should Iran decide to respond in an overt military fashion - as has Hizballah, albeit on what appears to be a limited scale – then the possibility of the conflict spilling over and impacting the rest of the region will increase. While this is currently a worst-case scenario, the risk of a serious escalation or miscalculation increases so long as the conflict continues.
Hizballah is unlikely to participate in the conflict on a greater scale than has already been done. Hizballah’s cross-border projectiles targeting northern Israel currently appear to be a calculated risk, intended to avoid not elicit a far larger Israeli response. Both sides are currently adhering to thresholds of attack intended to avoid a serious escalation of violence. Hizballah is also a political actor and, therefore, can be expected to be relatively rational. They are aware of their constituents' interests. Lebanon is a broken country, and it cannot afford a conflict akin to that of 2006. Similarly, Israel does not desire a multi-front conflict. On the other hand, the Al Quds Brigades, the military wing of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), have claimed responsibility for ground and air attacks launched from Southern Lebanon into Northern Israel. Their involvement in the Hamas attack will likely continue to result in Israeli airstrikes against potential PIJ hideouts in Southern Lebanon.
Regional Implication of the Israel-Hamas Conflict
Hamas likely also launched the attack partly to embarrass the Arab leaders, many of whom are from the Persian Gulf monarchies that have made, or desire to make, peace with the Jewish state. Claims that the attack was launched solely as an effort to put a halt to purported Saudi-Israeli negotiations are likely misguided. While they almost definitely have contributed to Hamas’ thought process, the scale of the coordinated attack indicates months, if not years, of planning, which likely started before reports of Saudi-Israel rapprochement garnered speed. It is unlikely to result in Riyadh putting a complete stop to normalizing ties with Jerusalem in the long term. Nevertheless, it is undeniable that the attack has put a short-to-medium-term halt to the potential normalization agreement. While Riyadh is likely secretly supportive of Israel’s actions to fight Hamas, it still has to be mindful of public opinion. As the conflict plays out, images of Israeli airstrikes playing on Arabic media and social media platforms will result in an increase in support of the Palestinian cause among many Arabs.
While Iran has publicly supported the attack, it will not get directly involved in the conflict. Iran’s support of Hamas is not out of a moral sense of duty to the Palestinian cause, but rather one of protecting and advancing their national interests. Post-conflict, there is almost certain to be an increase in tit-for-tat attacks between Iran and Israel. In particular, Israeli airstrikes targeting Iranian interests in Syria, even if only to reiterate ‘red lines,’ will likely expand. While such incidents will lead to growing tensions between Tehran and Jerusalem, a direct or conventional confrontation seems unlikely. The Israeli-Iranian rivalry is playing out in the spectrum of competition that has become known as the “grey zone”.
Moreover, it is likely there will be an increase in militant attacks targeting Israeli/Jewish sites globally. A rogue Egyptian policeman killed two Israeli tourists in Alexandria Oct. 8. While the exact motive of the attack is unknown, it is almost certainly linked to the events going on in Israel. Hamas has called on its allies to launch attacks globally in support of their cause.
Finally, while hope of a swift and smooth resolution to the conflict seems unlikely, there have been some diplomatic efforts initiated by regional powers, including King Abdullah II of Jordan and President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi of Egypt. International diplomatic stakeholders, such as the US, have begun discussions with Israeli and Palestinian actors, including but not limited to President Benjamin Netanyahu and President Mahmoud Abbas. These meetings have the benefit of existing and creating a space for diplomacy; their actual impact on Israeli and Hamas’ decision-makers remains to be seen.
Conclusion
This war is unprecedented, and Israel will likely use all the capabilities at its disposal. Israel has already called more than 360,000 reservists and deployed them both at the border with Gaza and in Northern regions. Reports indicate that Israeli airstrikes against Gaza have been targeting specific infrastructure, not only buildings where Hamas militants were allegedly hiding but also key infrastructure. This seems to indicate a potential ground operation to regain control over the Gaza Strip. While more than 150 hostages are still being held in the territory, and their location remains unknown, it is likely that Israel will intensify their air campaign prior to the initial ground response to the Hamas attack. This is a moral dilemma for Israel, as every Israeli life is highly valued, but to many Israelis the survival of the State of Israel is what is at stake.
Author(s)
