As we find ourselves in the fourth week of the Israel-Hamas war, the lack of well-defined Israeli goals and a clear endgame for the conflict remains a significant challenge. While the initial shock and desire for vengeance were understandable, it is essential to remember that shock and vengeance alone cannot substitute for a comprehensive strategy. As ground operations continue and the situation escalates, it becomes imperative to plan for the aftermath of the invasion.
President Biden’s recent remarks in Tel Aviv on October 18 highlighted Washington’s growing impatience with Israel’s failure to articulate its objectives. He emphasized the importance of clarity and an honest assessment of whether the chosen path will lead to the desired outcomes. Despite this, Israel has not presented a clear vision for what it aims to achieve, apart from a vaguely worded statement about the creation of a new security regime and the removal of its responsibility for day-to-day life in the Gaza Strip.
The absence of a well-defined Israeli vision and the growing escalation of the conflict necessitate urgent international intervention to prepare the diplomatic off-ramp that must be the end goal of any war.
However, several challenges must be addressed to ensure the success of such a diplomatic off-ramp. Firstly, the destruction of Hamas’s military and governing capabilities, which Israel has proclaimed as its main objective, lacks a clear plan and feasibility. Hamas is deeply rooted in Gaza’s social and civilian structures, and eradicating it would require not only combating tens of thousands of armed individuals but also dismantling the organization’s civilian infrastructure that employs thousands of civilians. Maintaining the functioning of Gaza after the war ends will be critical.
Moreover, solely disarming Hamas without considering the consequences can create a power vacuum that other militant and terrorist groups could exploit. Groups like Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Salafi-jihadist factions, equally committed to waging war on Israel, would likely fill the void left by Hamas if it were weakened or dismantled.
It is important to recognize that a war aimed at destroying Hamas will not necessarily secure the release of the approximately 240 Israeli hostages in Gaza. In fact, such brutal fighting would likely endanger their lives. Other approaches, such as third-party negotiations, have proven successful in securing the release of hostages. For example, Qatar and Egypt have previously brokered deals resulting in the release of several hostages. Therefore, alternatives to sheer military force exist and should be explored.
The diplomatic off-ramp must involve a comprehensive regional grand bargain, addressing Israel’s strategic needs, supporting pragmatic Palestinian forces willing to reach a permanent agreement, preventing a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza, and averting a wider regional conflict. While the challenges are significant, the effort must be made, with two primary components at its core.
Firstly, an “all-for-all” hostages for prisoners exchange deal between Israel and Hamas should be pursued immediately. Such a deal would involve the release of all Israeli hostages in exchange for the blanket release of all Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails. This would include the two Israeli civilians held by Hamas before October 7. The exceptional number of Israeli hostages makes previous precedents moot, necessitating a new approach.
Secondly, the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip should be a long-term goal. Achieving this would require a concerted regional and international effort, potentially including the disarmament of Hamas and other Palestinian militant groups in both Gaza and the West Bank. A coalition of regional stakeholders, such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain, should unite against Hamas to prevent a major victory for their common enemy, Iran. Financial support from wealthy Arab states and European donor countries would be crucial.
These two components form the basis of the essential regional bargain. A broader deal should aim to redefine the regional security architecture, curb Iran’s ambitions, and potentially include defense pacts between the United States, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, as well as Saudi-Israeli normalization. Additionally, joint U.S. and Saudi-sponsored Israeli-Palestinian negotiations on a two-state solution could be pursued.
While negotiations for a two-state solution may seem distant at present, the trauma of recent events and the pain experienced throughout the ongoing crisis may foster a willingness on both sides to engage. This would require new leadership with broad public support in Israel, and in Palestine, internal reforms, economic reconstruction, and external support akin to a Marshall Plan. The demilitarization of the Gaza Strip and the consolidation of a Palestinian polity would remove a significant obstacle to negotiations since Hamas’ takeover in 2007.
The path forward is undoubtedly challenging, but the urgency for regional and global diplomacy cannot be overstated. A failure to create an off-ramp from this war would not only result in the continuation of the same violent cycle but also plunge the region further into chaos.
Market Capital Research 