Israel’s self-defence always offends more than the jihadi atrocities that triggered it - The Jewish Chronicle

If not war, then what? This is the question that Israel’s detractors should be called upon to answer.

Since the IDF resumed the fighting in Gaza after the collapse of the ceasefire deal, the West has been up in arms about a return to bloodshed. With dreary predictability, the cant of “international law” — which these days is defined by its exceptional treatment of Israel, the very opposite of its founding principle of universalism — has been wheeled out as a battering ran against the Jewish state.

Yes, the foreign secretary was put back in his box by Number 10, which always keeps a wary eye on both sides while advancing an anti-Israel agenda below the radar. Don’t aggravate the Jews, David! You’ve gone full Tonto too soon! Let’s do this properly! Or words to that effect.

But there was no mistaking the mood of the international community as Israel grimly sent its boys once more into harm’s way to wrest its last living hostages from the terror dungeons under Gaza. Take a step back and it’s quite apparent: the world is always far more aggrieved by the measures Israel takes to defend its people than the jihadi atrocities that demand them.

So we return to the question: if not war, then what? If Jerusalem were to overlook Hamas’ ceasefire violations and proceed to the second phase of the deal, this would mean a full withdrawal from the Strip and a conclusion to the war. From one point of view, we would breathe a sigh of relief: Hamas would release more hostages — maybe — and the people of Gaza, not to mention Israeli soldiers, would be spared further casualties.

But an addiction to short-term thinking is what got Israel into this mess. For decades, Netanyahu presided over a policy of containment, keeping his enemies across the border deterred while focussing on normalisation and growth. October 7 did for all that. For the Bibi of 2025, the question is: if you pull back before a decisive victory is achieved, how will you ensure that your people are safe from future atrocities? This is the mirror image of the question facing those tender turtles calling for calm.

Take Simon Walters, Britain’s ambassador to Jerusalem. As the fighting recommenced, he tweeted: “I have worked in and around conflicts for 30 years, and grew up in Northern Ireland during the height of the terrorist campaigns. At some point, the fighting has to stop and the diplomacy begin. That time is now.” 30 years? Thanks for that.

We’ve already had a cessation of hostilities, accompanied by bucketloads of diplomacy. Yet the hostages continue to languish underground and Hamas remains in control. Mr Walters, who was appointed to Jerusalem fairly recently, will be on to his next posting in four years or so. It’s very easy to wag your finger when it’s not your children in the firing line.

So what is the answer to my question? If not war then “diplomacy”? In the real world, that solution would look something like this: the IDF withdraws; perhaps a few more hostages are released; Hamas declares victory and consolidates its power in Gaza; and attempts at installing a “technocratic” administration in the Strip, resulting in a resounding failure.

How do I know it will fail? Firstly: where are these brave, unaffiliated and upstanding technocrats who do not suffer from the tribalism, radicalism and corruption affecting every other Palestinian official? Secondly: if 17 months of warfare have not succeeded in removing Hamas from power, what makes anyone believe that more chat and technocrats will?

We are dealing with jihadis here, not the Irish terrorists of the ambassador’s prior experience. As savage and fanatical as the IRA men were, they were not Hamas. The depths of the cruelty on display in Gaza — the torture, the rape, the executions and mutilations, the killing of women and strangulation of children, the propaganda ceremonies, the playing of games with dead bodies, the psychological manipulation — should be enough to satisfy us that these people are not like us. They run on a different operating system and it is the most depraved of all.

With Israel unable to accept anything less than the destruction of Hamas, and Hamas ideologically committed to the destruction of Israel, this has always been a zero-sum affair. Hamas understands that if it were to release all the remaining hostages, there would be nothing restraining Jerusalem from one day ordering the final assault. The agonising judgment facing Benjamin Netanyahu is therefore a fine one: how many hostages is Hamas willing to release before it starts stringing the negotiations along with no intention of giving up its final cards?

Unlike those in the West, or those sitting in grand embassies in Jerusalem, who have the luxury of getting cerebral about all this, Israel must think in first principles. This is a war that must be won. These are hostages that must be released. Laying down its weapons while the job is half-done will only store up more blood and tears for the future. It is, I’m afraid, as simple as that.

Topics: