The British newspaper "The Times" said that Israel can only emerge from its war on Gaza weak after falling into the same trick that lured the West into going to the Iraq war, to make itself more exhausted and more exposed to danger, at a time when it wasted its moral authority.

The newspaper started - in an article written by Matthew Syed - from the strategy of boxer Muhammad Ali Clay that he used against his rival George Foreman in their historic confrontation in 1974, which is based on provoking the opponent and angering him with sarcasm to provoke an exaggerated reaction to exhaust him, as Foreman remembers that Muhammad Ali told him “Is that all you got, George?” He even punched himself in a state of exhaustion, and Ali knocked him out in the eighth round.

The writer projected this strategy onto what happened after the events of September 11, 2001, when American and British leaders thought that a comprehensive invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq would make them safer. They were terribly wrong, when they struck hard, killed hundreds of thousands of civilians, and returned for more. They are more exhausted and more vulnerable after they have squandered their moral authority, as their opponent, Al-Qaeda, wanted.

Israel falls into a trap

Israel fell into the same trap - as the writer sees - by saying that “the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) is a sect of fanatical killers,” but (Hamas) followed a sophisticated strategy, when it exaggerated Israel’s anger in the October 7 attack, in reference to the Al-Aqsa flood, while The writer considered it part of a carefully designed plan to induce Tel Aviv into an exaggerated response that would make Hamas stronger and Israel weaker.

Thus, Hamas succeeded - as the writer says - because Israel’s bombing of Gaza in its entirety, and its justification for each bombing by referring to the atrocities it endured as a result of the Al-Aqsa flood, directly served its enemies who were eager to propagate images of bloodshed that would be conveyed to the world watching the war, while Israel became more isolated in The United Nations and its allies begin to consider imposing an embargo, and world public opinion increasingly leans against it.

The writer expressed his astonishment at the level of Israeli anger over the events of October 7, until the Israelis stopped contemplating the contradiction surrounding their declared goal of the war, which is to eliminate Hamas, forgetting that Hamas is an ideology that cannot be eliminated forcefully. Weapons alone, and the destruction of Gaza has proven to be a more effective recruitment factor than a thousand schools.

Strategically unacceptable

Perhaps the greatest tragedy - according to Matthew Seid - is that all of this was expected, since Defense Minister Yoav Gallant promised to impose a “total siege” on Gaza “without electricity, food, or fuel,” and the next day he told the Israeli forces that he had “released all restrictions.” Then Giora Eiland, a former Israeli general, wrote, “In order to make the blockade effective, we must prevent others from providing aid to Gaza,” with such statements forming the backdrop to everything that happened.

These statements may have been understandable from a psychological standpoint, but they are unforgivable at the strategic level, because they justify attacking an aid convoy because it “may” contain an armed fighter, not to mention the massacre committed against humanitarian workers and journalists. The justification is that mistakes happen in the dark. War, but it often occurs when war is conducted in the fog of revenge, as the writer says.

The writer concluded that getting rid of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, for whom the continuation of the bloody war serves his interests, would be a useful beginning, but it would not be sufficient in itself, and the Israelis must see how they are being manipulated by their opponents and deceived into a tragedy of historical proportions. .

Source: Times