Opinion| For Israel, Gaza is a preventative war

BY JAMIE DETTMER

The country’s leaders can’t see a future for a Jewish homeland with a Palestinian state sitting alongside it — not until Palestinians have changed.

Israel’s top politicians sense a possible near-term election. And in their preparation, they have started complicating Israel’s war on Hamas, making relations with the country’s key Western ally, the United States, more difficult. In fact, currently, none of the key contenders in this race are talking of a short war — nor are they embracing calls from the U.S. and Europe for a serious effort to revive long-moribund talks on a two-state solution to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They wouldn’t dare even if they wanted to. There’s no appetite in Israel for a revival of two-state talks, as no one can envision how it would bring peace in the wake of the brutal Hamas attacks on southern Israel on October 7, which left 1,200 dead in a terrifying spree of violence.  

And it is this collective stance — not just Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — that is increasingly at odds with the U.S. administration, which has publicly called for a shift from high intensity warfare in Gaza to a more surgical war to reduce civilian casualties. In fact, despite growing international pressure to wind down Israeli military operations amid a mounting civilian death toll, as well as clamor from the relatives of the Israelis still held hostage by Hamas for a deal to free captives, Netanyahu and other top leaders are vowing to continue the fight. And they are offering no letup until the job is done and Hamas is crushed enough to never again — at least for years to come — deliver a blow like it did. 

Speaking at the Knesset on Monday, Netanyahu was uncompromising, telling lawmakers, “We need to keep going until the end.” Explaining how he’d come to the session directly from Gaza, he cited battalion commanders who told him, “Time, we need time.” In an op-ed published the same day, the prime minister wrote that for Hamas to be demolished, “its military capabilities must be dismantled and its political rule over Gaza must end. Hamas’ leaders have vowed to repeat the Oct. 7 massacre ‘again and again.’ That is why their destruction is the only proportional response to prevent the repeat of such horrific atrocities. Anything less guarantees more war and more bloodshed.” 

Some American and European officials who POLITICO spoke with suggested this is, as one of them put it, simply “Bibi being Bibi,” and that Netanyahu has a vested interest in pursuing a long war, hoping to help erase the missteps that failed to prevent the attacks. In short, he needs time to restore his public image as Mr. Security. They also noted that he has restricted room for maneuver thanks to the religious and hard-right parties in his coalition.

But while that may be so, to view the military campaign as primarily motivated by Netanyahu’s political needs is to mistake the Israeli psyche in the wake of October 7.The perspectives of Israel and Washington are in stark contrast to one another — the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden is focused on a political strategy, while Israeli eyes are firmly set on a war strategy to the exclusion of all else. And no active party leader is outlining a serious plan for the postwar governance of Gaza. They don’t see how the Palestinian Authority can be sufficiently revitalized enough to be given the responsibility of running Gaza.

Just listen to active politicians who aren’t Netanyahu’s friends. Take, for example, Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant, one of the likely contenders to replace Netanyahu. Gallant told Knesset lawmakers, “This is a long, tough war. It has costs, heavy costs, but its justification is the highest that can be.” And he vowed Israel would punish Hamas over its brutal attacks “whether it takes months or years.” 

Gallant — whom Netanyahu tried to fire last March for opposing his controversial bid to weaken judicial independence — is also at the forefront of war Cabinet members and Israeli Defense Forces commanders pushing for a reckoning with the Iran-backed Lebanese militant group Hezbollah.

Talking to the Knesset’s Defense and Foreign Affairs Committee, Gallant emphasized that Israel can’t afford to allow threats to fester along its borders, north or south. “Without meeting the goals of the war, we will find ourselves in a situation where the problem will not be those who live near Gaza or live in the north; the problem will be that people will not want to live in a place where we do not know how to protect them.”

According to Gallant, Israel is “in a multi-front war. We are being attacked from seven fronts — Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), Iraq, Yemen and Iran. We have already responded and acted on six of those fronts.” And in a clear threat to Iran, he added: “Everyone who acts against us is a potential target. Nobody has immunity.”

Then there’s Benny Gantz — the former defense minister who’s widely seen as the man most likely to call time on Netanyahu’s long, turbulent career. Before the Hamas attacks, Gantz had expressed concern over the dangerously “extremist” direction Netanyahu and his right-wing political allies were taking the country. But after October 7, he has largely echoed Netanyahu when it comes to the war.

For the sake of national unity, Gantz joined Bibi’s war Cabinet and in a speech earlier this month, the former minister indicated he and Netanyahu are of like-minded skepticism when it comes to a two-state solution. “It is clear to both us and our partners that the old concepts and the reality of the past decades, need to change and be forward-facing.”

At this stage, Gantz can at best envision a Palestinian “entity.” Exactly what that might be, he has not detailed — but it clearly isn’t a full-fledged state.

In fact, across the political spectrum — outside a left wing that’s in utter disarray — there appears to be little stomach for a two-state solution. (Although most mainstream Israeli politicians aren’t as damning as Netanyahu of the Oslo Accords.) And privately, they have been urging the Biden administration to row back on its two-state talk — which is only adding to America’s frustrations with its difficult ally.

From Washington’s point of view, without the prospect of serious discussions about a two-state solution, the Palestinian Authority will never be persuaded to take on the governance of Gaza, and Gulf Arab countries won’t cough up the billions needed to rebuild the Palestinian coastal enclave. The war will only radicalize Palestinians more.

Netanyahu is “a good friend, but I think he has to change,” Biden said at a campaign fundraiser this month. “You cannot say there’s no Palestinian state at all in the future.”

However, Israel’s leaders can’t see a future for a Jewish homeland with a Palestinian state sitting alongside it — not until Palestinians have changed and “deradicalized.” For them, this is a prophylactic war — one that will secure Israel from repeated pogroms but offer no cure.