The Theory of Victory: Gaza Taiwan Ukraine

Non-specialists in political and strategic sciences may not know that until now we do not have a comprehensive theory of victory, “Theory of Victory.” This calls us to think about how Benjamin Netanyahu dealt with his war on Gaza, and whether he can achieve a victory, and what is the relationship of this to the Russian theory of victory in Ukraine? And to be precise, Before that, the Kosovo War. Also, how do the Chinese think about the theory of victory over the Americans if they decide to send their aircraft carriers to the Strait? There is, of course, another nuclear-armed regime in Pyongyang with a completely different theory of victory. Putting these theories side by side may give us clear indications of the fate of Netanyahu and the fate of Gaza, as well as the fate of the American presence in the greater Middle East region from Afghanistan to Morocco.

In Taiwan, the Chinese idea was not to deter the Americans nuclearly; because, simply put, the Americans have more than five thousand nuclear warheads, but their idea was that the Americans have vulnerabilities in the Pacific Ocean and East Asia that make even defining victory in the sense of hegemony in the Pacific Ocean impossible, and thus America may be able to achieve a limited victory and lose. Peace, either in time of war or after war, whether with regard to hegemony in the Asian theater from Japan to Taiwan, or it is losing in the real sense in the areas of weak points in its bases in Akunawa, southern Japan, or in Guam, the Philippines, and South Korea, all of which are areas of weakness that China can exploit, if China does not decide to use its ballistic missiles to strike cities from California to Texas. Here, even the theory of victory in the sense of domination and excessive control remains limited.

I know that the reader is wondering: What does the theory of victory have to do with what is happening in Gaza?

The theory of victory in Gaza is more complex than in Ukraine or Taiwan. In Ukraine, for example, there is the Russian theory of victory, the limited theory, the basis of which is to keep NATO outside Russia’s scope, and for NATO not to have complete control, and Ukraine - according to Putin’s opinion - is not a backyard, but rather the road to the borders of the Tsar’s bedroom.

But it is important to understand the American theory of comprehensive victory, which consequently applies to the Israeli military doctrine. Let us understand whether Netanyahu's victory over Gaza is possible.

The American comprehensive vision of deterrence, which represents the closest thing to the American theory of victory, consists of six elements: The first is that political ties between allies are strong, and this is what the Obama administration tried to confirm. What do political alliances mean as a deterrent? If North Korea noticed that Japan could be separated from South Korea, or from the American political alliance, this would mean that political deterrence would have ended. The second element is maintaining military superiority with conventional weapons (and this is also what America is trying with Israel in our region - Israeli qualitative superiority over the Arabs combined). The third element is the sudden conventional strike force. This happened in the 2003 Iraq War, and perhaps this is why there are now aircraft carriers to neutralize Iran from trying to enter the Gaza war. The fourth element is cyber power and control of space, and this is something that competing countries may not know regarding American capabilities. Fifth, the missile defenses in the theater of operations, and also at the level of America itself (and the intervention of the Israeli Iron Dome in the framework of American territory, as some Americans consider Israel part of the homeland. Sixthly, it concerns the use of nuclear capabilities in the theater of operations, which makes the allies safe and also prevents any war on American territory. This is the comprehensive American theory of deterrence, which can be described as a preliminary outline of the American theory of victory. 

But the recent nuclear use, as Paul Nietzsche, the most important theorist of the 1950s, explained, is like the king in a game of chess: all moves are to maintain the king, but when the king moves, the game is almost over.

Are the six American elements available for Netanyahu to achieve victory in Gaza? I believe that Netanyahu can win the war, but, like the Americans, he will lose the peace for two reasons: The first is historical and relates to the comprehensive reputational contamination that Israel will bear by killing this huge number of children (a Palestinian Holocaust), and the second is the loss of trust with its neighborhood.

So, like America's wars; From Afghanistan to Vietnam, Netanyahu will win some of the war and lose some of the peace, and he may lose in terms of internal cohesion in Israel itself.

Above all, the American theory of victory is linked to victory over traditional countries, and it has failed to deter groups and movements. Most notably, Al-Qaeda and Osama bin Laden, which cost the United States an unforgettable attack on its soil on September 11, 2001.

What applies to Al-Qaeda also applies to Hezbollah and Hamas, with a difference, but here we are talking about the theory of victory against a traditional enemy who has something to lose, but these movements have nothing to lose, and victory for them is just one individual coming out from among the rubble to say that “Hamas” remains.

Above all, if victory is the imposition of sovereignty and dominance over the theater of operations, such as the American presence in Europe or the Pacific Ocean and East Asia, then I do not believe that Israeli hegemony over the Middle East region can lead to results, as the Democratic Peace Group says, as its  Its theorists, such as Michael Doll, or economic interpenetration, as Joseph Nye and Robert Cohen see, or the spread of democracy and the end of history in the Middle East, as Fukuyama sees.

The theory of victory in all its forms, as interpreted by the literature, does not bode well for the government of Benjamin Netanyahu, and not for Netanyahu alone, but for all Israeli governments for whom victory would be more efficient by withdrawing inside an iron dome to protect itself from Hezbollah missiles, or to remain under an American umbrella as a deterrent to Iran, and I do not think that America will remain in the region forever.

Source: Alsharq Alawsat