The flood of words about the ongoing wars, which often take their cue from fake news, envelops everything in a cloud of good feelings, of generic invocations to medium-high pace and to dialogue, of emotion for the "innocent" dead, but in fact it distances from the true understanding of the issues for which we are fighting, and from the identification of the interests at stake and therefore of the possible ways out. This is valid for the war of Russia against theUkraine and it is valid for the battle of Gaza unleashed by Israel after the terrorist incursion of October 7.
If we can put aside for a moment the feeling of horror for the war and its victims, and look at the question of Gaza with a cool head, thinking in political and strategic terms, we can perhaps trace the real crux of the matter. Let's also leave aside the ancient and more recent history of the Jews in Palestine, and the turmoil of guilt in the West that sides with the Palestinians without supporting the proclamations of the most extremists who want the destruction of Israel, let's see what the true interests of Europe would be and how they could be pursued.
The crux of the problem is that we have to hunt Hamas from Gaza and in general from Palestine. And then we need to put Iran (the head of the snake) in a position where it cannot do any harm. Unfortunately, we must acknowledge that Israel's military strategy has not worked. Its army has not managed to free even one hostage in more than a year. It has bombed, occupied the territory several times, inflicted losses on Hamas, but the organization is still standing and probably manages to control Gaza and its population (which only now, timidly, is able to make some demonstrations against the oppression of Hamas). The Europeans, and perhaps even the Americans (but with Trump you never know) call for an end to hostilities, bombings and the occupation of Gaza by Israeli ground forces. Without, however, exerting similar pressure on the leaders of Hamas and other Arab countries to release the hostages still alive and to make them accept a new political structure in the area.
But perhaps you think in the sea of chatter, we have forgotten one of the reasons, perhaps the most important, that pushed Hamas to unleash the offensive of October 7 against the defenseless civilians of the Israeli settlements across the border. The main aim was not to defeat Israel militarily, but to influence the other Arab countries by awakening their fighting spirit, and first of all to expel from West Bank old man Abu Mazen and unify the Palestinians under his command. This has not yet succeeded, but the strenuous resistance of the Hamas leaders is based on the belief that the further sacrifice of thousands of civilians could generate international pressure that would finally force Netanyahu to withdraw. This means that Hamas will be able to march through the squares of Gaza, hastily cleared of rubble, with the insignia of victory. The heroic resistance of Gaza will be the founding epic not only of a new Palestine but of a larger Arab territory today controlled by shaky dictators. A redemption of all Arabs not only from the invading Jews, but from the colonialist and infidel Western Europe itself. The shortsightedness of political leaders has already brought not peace, but much greater troubles, on other occasions in history. And this lesson should also be valid for the United States, which, when dominated by isolationism, then ended up in much larger conflicts such as two world wars.
Can Europeans stand by indifferently to the risk that a Hamas victory could generate such upheavals? Or worse, appease the bloodthirsty leaders of this warmongering group, hoping to keep it happy? And if Gaza is given in, how can we then contain the aggressiveness of the Iranian regime that has suffered heavy blows for the moment but that, weakened by the protests of the young people within it, cannot help but continue an aggressive foreign policy?
But if Israel cannot impose a military solution, because the terrain does not allow it and international pressure will become more and more insistent, how can we get out of the impasse? Europe, which is seeking new recognition of its role in the world, will have to deal with the Middle East in addition to Ukraine. And it will therefore have to be willing to commit itself personally, together with a series of moderate Arab countries to be involved, to send troops with the task of not only pacifying the Gaza Strip, but also disarming Hamas, to then arrive at some form of Palestinian state, along the lines recently indicated by the Prime Minister of the Ramallah Government. In this way, Israel's existence would be guaranteed while also reducing the pressure from its right-wing extremists. Today all right-thinking Europeans are against Netanyahu. But he is already politically defeated: he was unable to manage the Gaza Strip before the attack of October 7, and then he did not win the war, ending up in a military stalemate and a political situation of complete isolation.
The problem is therefore theEurope. Are we willing to send an expeditionary force to Gaza not only to bring humanitarian aid but also to bring the Hamas armies back into line? By the way, calling them terrorists is now very reductive. They are a regular army that uses guerrilla techniques but they must be defeated not only with weapons, but also with political instruments, that is, by allying with the Arabs who want peace. If it is true that war is the continuation of politics by other means, then for Europe it is time to put into play a strong political idea that can perhaps also temporarily use the military instrument.
