The nature of war never changes. It is fought for political goals. This is how the Prussian thinker Carl von Clausewitz theorized. But what is certain is that the characteristics of war change according to changes in the economic, political, and social dimensions, but without forgetting the technological ones.

In ancient times, wars were fought around the city with the aim of seizing it, not inside it. Even the famous Battle of Stalingrad took place entirely around the city, and was not fought from house to house, or from street to street.

In war everything is easy, but the easiest thing in it is very, very complicated. Whoever goes to war is inevitably knocking on the door of the unknown. This is urban warfare. The city receives its visitors, and if they turn against it, it turns against them in turn. It is peaceful if the visitor is peaceful. It is hostile if the visitor's intentions are malicious. The city favors its son and those born in it. He is aware of the place and time in it. He has memories in every corner.

The German thinker Friedrich Ratzel, the father of political geography, considers the city to be an important laboratory for the cross-fertilization of ideas. Have you ever seen a genius emerge from the village? It is born in the village, but its development inevitably takes place through the city.

In the American Civil War (1860-1865), which claimed more than 650,000 lives, Washington residents went to the countryside to watch the Battle of Bull Run, taking with them their supplies and the glasses they used when watching the opera. This battle was called the Picnic Battle. Now, in the twenty-first century, there is no need to go for a walk to watch a live battle. If the city is not interested in war, then war is definitely interested in the city. It has become a theater of conflict and a hotbed for those who do not have enough strength to fight the powerful. The city is an equalizer of forces. The city is struck by the attacker's numerical as well as qualitative superiority. The city has its own privacy. Its spirituality lies in its space, its civil architecture, its streets, and its landmarks. Every house there is a rampart. Every high-rise building is a surveillance and monitoring center. In the city, distances get longer and time slows down. Whoever enters the city is changed, and at the same time he changes the city. The relationship between the city and those attacking it is a dialectical one.

In the city, the soldier learns what he did not learn during his training, even if this training took place within artificial cities similar to the actual theater of war.

This is how Israel trains its special forces for urban warfare. It has built a training center for urban warfare in the Negev desert, which is an exact copy of the Palestinian city. In this artificial city, there is a mosque, shops, and “graffiti” on the walls, very similar to cities in the Gaza Strip. The streets of this city resemble the streets of Palestinian cities. But the actual war in the city is not a war of exercises. In the city, the soldier learns after every step he takes (On the Job Training). With every step he takes, he begins to become aware of the place. When he skips this step, the next step could be fatal. His awareness of the place is gradual and cumulative, unlike the original son of the city.

Netanyahu wants to destroy the Hamas movement. But the means and possible time for this do not help him. He wants something, and his military leaders want something different. The difference in plans is clearly visible.

After Biden's visit to Israel, direct American sponsorship of the war on Gaza emerged. The White House, as has become clear so far, wants the following things: for Israel to launch a military operation, but without occupying the entire Strip. The situation of the hostages must be taken into account, as well as the situation of civilians in Gaza. Continuing the flow of humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip. Some information says that the Americans believe that not much can be achieved from a large ground operation. Therefore, it may be said that what is required so far is as follows:

Continued aerial bombardment, taking into account the situation of Gazan civilians; Provided that this bombing is in preparation for military operations inside the Gaza Strip; Provided that these operations are specific and dispersed in several places, and may target the military leadership of the Hamas movement, including infrastructure.

America asks Israel to define the theory of victory. That is, when will the war stop? Israel considers itself to have achieved what it wanted. Last but not least, do not drag Hezbollah into opening the northern front.

These conditions constitute major restrictions on Israeli military behavior in response to Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. This is with the knowledge that the time factor has always played against Israeli interests in its wars with the Arabs. Hence, the window of time open for Israel to carry out any military action seems very small.

In comparing means

“Hamas”: “Hamas” prepared the Gaza Strip for the worst scenario since it took control of it in 2007. It prepared it for fighting in several dimensions: the horizontal dimension - length and breadth; The vertical dimension, i.e. tall buildings; And last but not least, the dimension represented by the underground tunnels (the length of the tunnels is estimated, according to the BBC, at 500 kilometers).

Hamas has special forces. She is fully aware of the place, even if the bombing changed the city's features. It has explosive devices, mines, and suicide drones. In addition to snipers. This is in addition to the presence of civilians and hostages within the area of operations. Last but not least, the number of Hamas fighters is estimated at 30,000, and the saying applies to them: “Where is the escape? The sea is behind you and the enemy is in front of you.”

Today, at this stage, Hamas is adopting a push-pull strategy. It had used the push strategy during the implementation of the operation inside Israel. In the Gaza envelope area, it has reached its maximum extension (Push). So it gained what it gained through the most dangerous surprise in the history of Israel. When she withdrew, she forced the Israeli army to follow her (Pull) to her safe area, to her main theater, to her home, to the theater she knew where she had the advantage (Home Court).

Israeli Merkava tanks maneuver near the Lebanese border on Thursday (EPA)

Israel: Israel outperforms Hamas by all standards. But strength is relative in absolute terms. Power is considered power to the extent that it can be used. Israel is a nuclear power, but can nuclear weapons be used in Gaza? Therefore, nuclear weapons are considered non-existent, and do not enter into the current war equation. Israel has air, sea, land, intelligence and artillery superiority. It owns space, especially with American intervention. It also has electronic warfare (EW) capabilities. But the war is not all about numbers and quantity, as it is taking place in political and geopolitical circumstances that impose many restrictions, especially in the case of the current global order.

In conclusion, the theater of war appears to be preparing for a new bloody encounter. After a while, Israel may be allowed to carry out military action, but only after preparing the conditions for the American deterrence system in the region, especially against Iran, and ensuring its effectiveness and credibility. In such a way that the result would be as follows: attacking Hamas, but without eliminating it, and in such a way that Israel would feel that it had taken revenge. But this result, without a permanent political solution, will lay the groundwork for a future war in the future. Didn't we say that war is fought for political goals? Therefore, where are the political goals of this war?