The events in the Middle East are accelerating as the Gaza War enters its eighth month. The political, military, and economic maze in which the occupation and its supporters are entangled in their war against the Palestinians continues to expand, with the conflict increasingly interwoven with other regional and global disputes.
Today, we see different dynamics at play: the Palestinian resistance is actively engaged on the ground with clear objectives for military negotiations, while Israel aims to neutralize Gaza, turning it into a settlement project and displacing its inhabitants. Meanwhile, other parties, particularly in the West, are engaging in what can sometimes be described as strategic ambiguity, and at other times as deception, maneuvering, and misinformation.
The Western camp supporting Tel Aviv presents a picture of its stance on the military operation that some interpret as containing differences, while others see these differences as minimal and primarily intended to deceive the Palestinians and those who wish to stop the massacres of innocents in Palestine. This is done to protect certain interests and avoid criticism during specific, mostly transient events. Thus, the public witnesses a deliberate maneuver by the Western camp, aimed at buying time in the hope of achieving their pre-determined goals.
In this context, the West attempts to conceal the extent of the Israeli military’s failures. However, even in this, there is confusion. In Tel Aviv, officials claim that the Israeli occupation forces have inflicted significant losses on the Palestinian resistance. The spokesperson for the occupation forces even stated that 75% of Hamas’s estimated 40,000 to 60,000 fighters have been eliminated. Yet, American intelligence agencies question even these revised Israeli claims, believing that Israel is far from achieving its goal of crushing the surprisingly resilient resistance forces.
Another indicator of the significant failure of the Israeli-American effort in the Gaza battle is reflected in the statements of several top politicians in Washington regarding the management of the conflict, which reveal their desperation for victory. For example, this month, Senator Lindsey Graham (Republican from South Carolina) called on Israel to bomb the Gaza Strip with a nuclear weapon to end the military operation and achieve its goals.
In an arrogant reading of bloody history, Graham cited the United States’ actions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in the 1940s against Japan, which had initiated war against the United States by attacking the Pearl Harbor naval base.
This madness in statements and actions by most Western politicians stems from the resilience of the resistance to date against their overwhelming force. The American empire and its ally Israel see their dominance waning in the face of a resistance that fights with minimal resources yet inflicts losses on them at all levels.
In recent decades, the conventional armies of industrialized nations have failed to completely suppress irregular forces and liberation movements, which always operate with only a fraction of the resources and weapons. Not far back, less than two years ago, the United States and its Western allies failed to suppress the Taliban and build a stable alternative government in Afghanistan despite two decades of attempts that cost billions of dollars. The end was negotiating with those they had labeled terrorists and withdrawing from Afghanistan in a humiliating manner.
Today, eight months into the war and as the occupation begins its military operation in Rafah, where most of Gaza’s civilians are concentrated, the Israeli occupation forces remain far from achieving the military objectives of the war. Additionally, they are now held accountable before the world for a massive humanitarian catastrophe that cannot be overlooked, potentially leading to deep and increasing international isolation for the occupation and its supporters—impacting the occupation on all levels.
As the war concludes, the impact of the defeat for the occupation will be more resounding than many anticipate, with the regional and global effects of the war weighing heavily on the occupation even if Washington continues its political and economic support.
