A war that is difficult for anyone to absolutely win it

“America is Alone”: This is how this newspaper titled what happened recently in the Security Council. Indeed, America was alone when it announced the veto. No one in the world supported it. Even Britain contented itself with abstaining from voting, while France disagreed.

This miserable result says that the Israeli war can only be won by force, and by force alone wars cannot be won at all. With this characteristic, it is similar to the superiority of the beast over humans and the superiority of muscle over everything else. This is not an underestimation of power, but it highlights its limitations in persuasion and value and its inability to win allies, which ultimately leads to it confining itself to itself, and its owner appearing as hated, arrogant and arrogant.

How could it be otherwise when insane Israeli killing takes place, accompanied by indifference to any public opinion, clear contempt for human humanity and an extremely unequal and discriminatory evaluation of their lives, not to mention an endless flood of lies?

This is how the Israelis today appear to be alone, and who would dare to join them in a barbaric project like this, the most prominent of which is the killing of children, the displacement of the population, and the destruction of homes, even if they wanted to?

But the depletion of alliances is fueled by other factors indicated by the demonstrations in the world's capitals and what some of its educational and media institutions are witnessing. Israel does not accompany its war with any policy or proposal for a solution, and there is widespread hostility towards America and the West based on its identification with them. In turn, the memory of the Holocaust is declining and obsolete, especially after its leaders continued to exploit it. This is while the new mood in the world can no longer tolerate silence about the tragedies of peoples, especially the tragedy of the Palestinians have also become fascinated by this mood of the defeated victim, just as it was fascinated decades ago by the strong victor. In addition to the spread of anti-violence sentiment, albeit with a degree of selectivity, social media has become available for all speech after the traditional media, owned by wealthy institutions, filtered and directed speech. Finally, especially with immigration and demographic changes, the contradiction between democracy and its foreign policy has become subject to accountability, and the review of “colonial history” has become widespread, rivaled only by the awakening of identities of every kind to their partial self, and the atrophy of the universality contained in the values of Enlightenment.

But when taken together, these factors appear to be similar to the mixture of conception and misfortune. Although it provided many allies for the Palestinians, the fear remained that the Palestinian national project and its specificity would be suffocated by the grip of this intense and abundant embrace. While many reject the possibility of the aforementioned project coexisting with the liberation concern of the Syrians, which is supposed to be the closest and most similar, those appear who make Palestine a symbol of gender equality, and of objection to Columbus’ discovery of America, and those who reject neoliberalism, and those seeking a cleaner environment, and those who want to Islamize the world, as well as those who want to remove religion from the world's chest. In these “social movements” we find those who claim to correct history and the mistakes of geography because of the colonialism and borders and entities created by the colonizers. We also find those who seek to return women to the male house of obedience, and those who want freedom for them are said to be what prevents them from consumerism mixed with reactionary values. 

And just as ideas and perceptions are mixed around Palestine, so are the borders. Thus, Yemen, which is experiencing a civil war accompanied by Iranian hegemony, is relied upon to save Gaza by immersing the region in a regional and perhaps international war. As Lebanon lives in daily fear of war spreading to it, such an event, supposedly supportive of Palestine, would be able to explode an issue fraught with sectarian conflict that would steal some light from its cause.

It is feared, in the end, that we will live through an expanded repetition of what we have witnessed of the traditional Arab use of the “central issue” as everyone’s issue and no one’s issue at the same time. This is with the knowledge that “everyone”, this time, is the entire world.

The situation is that many signs announce the difficulty of transforming this noise into a policy that reflects itself on decisions and institutions. Overthrowing Joe Biden, for example, will only bring Donald Trump to the White House, provided he escapes prosecution. This, while preventing the British Labor Party from winning, will keep the Conservatives in power, just as Marine Le Pen inheriting Emmanuel Macron is incomparably more likely than Mélenchon inheriting him. 

This is reminiscent of the observations made by some scholars of the movements opposing neoliberalism, after the objection began to lack a strong social class such as the working class and its unions, as a result of the technical revolution and robots. Thus, those outside production and classes are the ones who undertake this task in which reactionary and progressive titles rise and fall in between, while its practical effectiveness decreases and declines.

In turn, the many issues in the Palestinian issue are what it is advisable to control and shorten so that the private Palestinian voice remains more heard. Otherwise, abundance is a source of weakness in the case of the Palestinians, just as few are a source of weakness in the case of the Israelis: one party is isolated and the other is lost in the crowd. This is what makes a sweeping and complete victory, any victory, a hasty claim.