“Hamas hopes that the Israeli counterattack will arouse the solidarity of the Arab world against Israel, widening this crisis to the level of regional and perhaps global war since such a development would necessarily involve the rest of the world. Regardless of the choices Israel makes, the rest of the world would do well to focus on the need to keep this conflict within its current geographic limits." The professor is worried Stefano Silvestri, acute observer of geopolitical and military processes, former president of the IAI, the Institute for International Affairs: after the invasion of Ukraine, another very serious crisis in the Mediterranean is shaking the world with a load of horrors never seen before.
In the conversation with FIRSTonline Silvestri begins by contesting the very formulation of theHamas attack on Israel: it is not a war, but a terrorist act.
And words matter, don't they, professor?
"Absolutely yes. The political pressure to declare a new "war on terror", as the Americans did after September 11, is very high, but it is not necessarily the best path. Words lead to actions, in 2001 as now. What war does Netanyahu want to wage? Does he want to occupy Gaza? But this could prove to be a nightmare because to do so he would have to maintain a standing army on the territory. Not to mention that this would create yet another large wave of refugees. Which in addition to the human drama, politically it could also mean the dispersion of terrorist cells in the host countries, in a sort of metastasis of terror".
So is it conceptually wrong to talk about war?
“In my opinion, yes, it is conceptually wrong in this case. It's a fight against terrorism. Then if things spread it could become a war. For example, if a front were opened in the north with Lebanon and Syria, or if Iran entered the field. But at the moment we are only faced with small skirmishes on the northern border, and we hope they will remain so."
Israel's response has already caused 1.500 Palestinian deaths and we are only just beginning. The horrors found by the Israeli military in the Kfar Aza kibbuz attacked by Hamas, with 200 dead including 40 children, some of whom were beheaded, do not admit of weakness, it is clear. Yet, not everyone agrees with the hard line that Israel is implementing by cutting off water, electricity and gas to the population of Gaza. For example, Laurent Joffrin, historic director of Libération and Nouvel Observateur, harshly criticizes it today on Le journal.info. What do you think?
“I read Joffrin's newsletter, which recalls how the French also experienced the terrorist horror, at home. However, I remain of the opinion that Israel's reaction is proportional to the offense suffered, at least for now. Israel's problem lies in the asymmetry of expectations. The terrorist attack ignored and violated every legal and moral principle. The Israeli response is conditioned by respect for its own laws and rules, even more so if it is its Armed Forces that act. This asymmetry often translates into the indication of "red lines", limits placed on action, which must not be exceeded. Often it was Israel's allies themselves who drew these lines and put pressure on them to be respected. Today, however, it is impossible, in the face of horror, to claim the right to draw lines: the only ones who can do so are the Israelis themselves. It is they, in my opinion, who must decide how far to push the "eye for an eye" logic. After 11/XNUMX the USA attacked Afghanistan. The problem in this case is whether the Israeli attack will inflict a significant defeat on Hamas, or whether it will trigger the anti-Israeli media trap."
The hostage issue is very serious. There are 150 of them in the hands of Hamas. The memory goes back to 2006 when terrorists took the young corporal Gilad Shalit hostage. There was, we remember, Operation Summer Rains, with which the army attempted to rescue him, without success. Many Hamas leaders were eliminated and arrested, but in the end Israel resigned itself to a very humiliating negotiation that led to Shalit's release five years after his capture and in exchange for 1.027 Palestinian prisoners. One of whom is the one who today holds the fate of the prisoners in his hands, Yahia Sinwar, 62 years old, 20 of which he spent in cells in Israel, sentenced to four life sentences for killing Palestinians whom he considered collaborators. How can Israel behave?
“The fact is that Israel is very fragile in the face of hostage taking, it is not politically capable of saying “we don't deal with terrorists”. It is a weakness, but it must be remembered that it is also one of the pillars of its national identity: no one is expendable. A negotiation of such proportions seems unthinkable. But even leaving everyone for dead in order not to stop the retaliation is impossible to accept. However you look at it, Netanyahu is faced with the need to make cruel choices that will create more losses. Of course, it's not yet the time for negotiations. We will have to wait for the outcome of the counter-offensive and then hear what Hamas will ask. We are at a stage where Israel still has to reconquer all of its territory and secure it. And ensure effective control of the border with Gaza. Then we will see how to negotiate and whether to negotiate.”
When we talk about Palestinians, what should we mean? They seem, politically speaking, without choices: on the one hand there is the gerontocracy of Al Fatah; on the other, the fanatics of Hamas. Arafat's old party governs in Ramallah, in the area of the West Bank not controlled by the Israelis, in total a territory smaller than Molise, where over 3 million inhabitants live; Hamas, whose militias were outlawed by the Palestinian president himself, Abu Mazen, controls the Gaza Strip, 360 square km, just twice the size of Milan, where 1 million and 700 thousand people live, of which 1 million and 200 thousand are refugees, those from the first Arab-Israeli war of 1948. What leadership can we expect them to express in these conditions?
“Unfortunately, the truth is that there is no Palestinian leadership capable of proposing, supporting and accepting an effective peace plan. In this historical moment Israel rejects the two-state option, it seemed at a time that we were almost there, but the Palestinians pulled back. The current Palestinian leadership is not able to accept this two-state hypothesis on the conditions that Israel could accept today. However, this means that we are in a stalemate situation. Because if the goal, as Hamas says, is only to destroy Israel, they don't have the strength. And in the long run they end up putting themselves in a position that makes the Palestinians suffer above all. They would probably like to create a more consistent anti-Israeli coalition and hope that the alliance with Iran and Iran's relationship with China and Russia, with the Iranian presence in Iraq and Syria, and in Lebanon with Hezbollah, is it sufficient or could it be the beginning of an anti-Israeli blockade that in some way forces the Americans, as well as Israel, to review their priorities".
Frankly it doesn't seem real.
“No, it's just in their head. It is clear, however, that these terrorist acts are exploited by Iran, and by others, Turks, Saudis, Egyptians, Moroccans, Algerians, in the struggle for influence in the Arab world. Fight that fuels a series of wars in the Middle East and Africa: Yemen, Sudan, Libya, Sub-Saharan region, in which terrorist movements, especially al Qaeda and ISIS, with their allies, are protagonists. Hamas fits into this framework even if its sphere of action is more limited for the moment to the fight against Israel. In short, it may appear not to be real, but in the meantime it slows down any push for change and development in those areas."
In the end, the question that we asked ourselves in other terrible moments in which defenseless people were massacred by fanatics in Europe, in America, in the world returns: can terrorism be defeated?
“Terrorists and their organizations can be defeated. But it's hard to beat them just by bombing. We can win if politics and the police are also mobilised. You have to change people's lives and arrest terrorists. We need politics and courts, as well as soldiers."
Why did Israel fail?
“Because it has not established a rule of law in the occupied territories. He established an occupation with annexation processes. And then there's the story. Borders have always been temporary. Those of 1948 were recognized by convention in Israel, but have never been recognized by the Palestinians and the Arabs. So this has pushed Israel onto the path of annexations: if they don't recognize them, I'll do more. Now the question is that you, Israel, can also expand and take the whole West Bank, but then you have to give political rights to the inhabitants. But they do not want and cannot give them these rights: because their greatest terror is becoming a country with an Arab majority."
