18
votes
Weekly Israel-Hamas war megathread - week of April 1
This thread is posted weekly - please try to post all relevant Israel-Hamas war content in here, such as news, updates, opinion articles, etc. Extremely significant events may warrant a separate topic, but almost all should be posted in here.
Please try to avoid antagonistic arguments and bickering matches. Comment threads that devolve into unproductive arguments may be removed so that the overall topic is able to continue.
NPR -- World Central Kitchen workers killed by Israeli strike in Gaza, José Andrés says
Inside the ruins of Gaza’s al-Shifa Hospital (Washington Post)
...
...
...
...
...
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2024/04/02/strike-that-killed-world-central-kitchen-workers-bears-hallmarks-of-israeli-precision-strike/
Israeli cabinet approves reopening northern Gaza border crossing for first time since October 7, official says (CNN)
I’m wondering what happened at Erez Crossing on October 7th? The news articles I’ve seen describe it very briefly, in conflicting ways. Wikipedia was no help.
Here’s the Guardian:
Israel to reopen Erez crossing into Gaza after Biden sounds warning over protecting civilians
What does “was destroyed” mean here?
…
Here’s more about Erez crossing:
Why Israel may reopen a key crossing with Gaza (Washington Post)
…
…
Top Israeli spy chief exposes his true identity in online security lapse (The Guardian)
Could we reconsider titling this as the "Israel-Hamas War"? We don't need to call it a genocide, since there's a whole legal debate over what that term should mean, but it would be much more accurate to call it something like the "Israeli operation in Gaza" or, as Wikipedia has, the "Israeli Invasion of the Gaza Strip".
Oddly, Wikipedia has both articles:
Israel–Hamas war
Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip (2023–present)
The first article points to the second one as the "main article" when it gets to that point in the timeline.
I would be happy with either, since we aren't talking about October 7 much anymore. Although, who knows, maybe the Houthis will become more active?
The conflict between Israel and Hamas might be a subset of what is happening, but an explicit aim of Israel at this point seems to be terrorizing the civilian population through collective punishment. And that aim in some ways undermines their efforts in a standard war against Hamas alone significantly enough to question whether the situation can be described as being mostly a war. I'd favor "Israeli Invasion of the Gaza Strip" since it's a more general term that encompasses both aspects.
You’re making a statement about Israeli motivation that I’m not sure holds up. I’m also doubtful that terrorizing the general population in Gaza helps Israel, but I think the Israeli government sees it differently? They seem to think it helps defeat Hamas.
Understanding motives from what’s happening isn’t straightforward because other people can see their self-interest differently than we do. For example, invading Ukraine seemed like a bad idea to us, but Putin did it anyway.
If it’s explicit, well, where did they say it? But people can lie, so understanding motives from what they say isn’t straightforward either.
If Israel is the party that declared it a war to end Hamas and their actions are clearly undermining their war aims, it begs the question if it can really be called a war to end Hamas. The Israeli regime isn't dumb, so I can't see that their sincere aim is to end Hamas (especially considering Netanyahu's historical support for Hamas to undermine the PA), but to push out the Palestinian population from the Gaza strip.
The difference in what one understands to be their self-interest may confuse an analysis of whether that party is rational and, by extension, whether a motive can be inferred from their actions. But once their understanding of self-interest is understood, I don't think there's any issue there. Putin values autonomy and stemming liberalization of the Russian system over economic prosperity from trading with the West. His decision to invade Ukraine can be understood to be to create a moat against eastward liberalization over, say, a desire for conquest for economic gain.
You say they’re “not dumb” and that’s certainly true in some ways. Maybe it makes you wonder what they’re really up to? That’s fine, I wonder about that too. But better to leave that question open than to substitute your own reasoning to answer it.
Consider how badly this sort of thinking fails for deterrence. You could say that the October 7 attack was a really dumb move, strategically, considering the likely result, but it still happened. The assumption that an opponent is a rational actor can fail spectacularly, if you assume too much about how they think.
It also fails pretty badly for religious beliefs, which often look pretty silly from the outside, and yet, it’s a mistake to assume people don’t believe their own religion.
One reason to believe that Israel’s goal is to “end Hamas” is because they are constantly saying that it’s what they want to do. Maybe that’s too simple, but it’s evidence for that belief.
I believe that Israel believes in deterrence, that by hitting the enemy harder than they hit you, it will deter future attacks. That’s pretty consistent with their history? The track record for this succeeding isn’t so great, as far as actually achieving security, but they still believe it.
And when that fails, try harder.
You can see this as an extreme form of nationalism. When nations are attacked, the response is often not “proportionate.”
I can't see the sense in this sentiment, when there are serious and plausible alternative hypotheses to contend with. Netanyahu has made explicitly clear his plans for a greater Israel, and he gave a presentation with maps to the UN stating so.
I don't see the October 7th attack from Hamas at all as irrational. Their goal was to sabotage the Abraham Accords by revitalizing the Islamic world's opposition against Israel, and they got exactly that.
Rationality should always be defined with respect to an endpoint. Actors are irrational if they fail to properly assess what gets them further or closer to their endpoint. Religious people can still be "rational" towards the end of achieving peace of mind, having a sense of community, and preserving culture and tradition (especially when those things are privileged over, say, the pursuit of scientific knowledge). It would be irrational toward profit-maximization, for instance, to burn a wad of cash.
I think this may potentially be the plurality view among the Israeli populace, but Netanyahu and everyone to the right of him have plans to create a greater Israel and I don't believe they're doing a tit-for-tat deterrence.
I'm cautious about claims made by Israel's critics. They're probably based on something, but unlikely to put it into context. So I looked it up. Here is the full text of that speech.
He seems to be boasting about treaties that Israel made with Arab countries:
(See Wikipedia for more about the Abraham accords.)
He also talks up the possibility of a peace agreement with Saudi Arabia:
He then takes a hawkish stance towards Iran:
Then he talks about AI for some reason.
There's little mention of the Palestinians. The main point he makes is that they were able to make peace treaties with Arab countries without first making a peace treaty with the Palestinians, and that he hopes they might eventually come around.
I suppose the maps could be seen as a troll of some sort, though?
But anyway, this was before October 7, when many things changed. I don't think it tells us all that much about Israeli intentions now.
If I recall correctly "Israel-Hamas war" refers to the full conflict starting from Oct 7th to now, and the Israeli-Invasion of the Gaza Strip is a phase of the conflict much like how the initial Hamas incursion was the first phase of the war.