RSS
What Would ‘Total Victory’ Mean in Gaza?
Hamas leader and Oct. 7 pogrom mastermind Yahya Sinwar addressing a rally in Gaza. Photo: Reuters/braheem Abu Mustafa
In recent years, the concept of decisive victory has eroded in Israel, but October 7 brought it forcefully back to the center of the national security process. There are four types of victory: tactical (the ability of the IDF to negate the enemy’s fighting ability); operational (the ability of the operative echelon to dismantle the fighting system facing it, which is currently happening in Gaza); military strategic (the ability to remove the military threat posed by the enemy for many years to come); and grand, or national, strategic (military victory leads to a fundamental change in the geopolitical situation, like a peace treaty or the establishment of a new regime).
It seems that the “total victory” that is spoken about in the context of Gaza is a strategic victory, which, given the right interfaces among military, civil, and economic moves, can bring about a relatively calm security situation for a decade or more.
Victory and decision are one and the same. Over the years, attempts have been made to distinguish between them: for example, victory is tactical and decision is operational or strategic; or victory is the result and decision is the process. The word “victory” is more popular than the more professional word “decision,” but the two concepts overlap. The words used depend on the user’s needs and image.
Decision/victory is one of four elements of Israeli national security doctrine (along with early warning, deterrence, and defense), but in fact, it is the most important, because it is the only optimal outcome of a military campaign. In the last three decades, ever since Operation Accountability against Hezbollah in 1993, the theoretical discussion about the use of force in military operations has gone awry: deterrence has become the desired outcome of a military campaign, while decision/victory has essentially disappeared as the primary goal.
This pushing aside of victory and centralization of deterrence was largely due to the limitations the State of Israel and the IDF placed on themselves regarding the use of force. The goals of these limitations were to reduce casualties among IDF soldiers and avoid ground maneuvering as much as possible; reduce civilian losses as a result of missiles and rockets hitting the home front; rely on active defense to postpone a long-term solution to challenges; reduce enemy collateral damage by avoiding war-fighting within dense urban spaces; reduce international criticism of Israel over its military conduct; resist holding onto territories that are not part of the State of Israel (a lesson from the long stay in Lebanon); avoid the need to provide a civil response to the needs of a local enemy population and to incur the cost in terms of resources and attention that such an effort would entail; and more.
The IDF’s use of the term “victory” in recent years has not been aimed at victory/decision, which will be defined below, but at a significant improvement of deterrence.
Israel’s belief that it can rely on intermittent deterrence operations (“rounds”) and does not need a victory/decision was painfully shattered on October 7, 2023. It took a severe blow to national security to force a review of the security doctrine, and a rediscovery of the concept of victory/decision. While it was quickly understood that victory/decision is required in the current campaign and probably also in future campaigns, the need arose to define what a “victory” is.
Tactical victory is the ability of IDF units to annihilate enemy forces in battle and control territory in a way that negates the enemy’s ability to continue to fight in that area in a military framework. This kind of victory is the achievement towards which fighting is directed. This is not about the killing of all opposing military soldiers or terrorist operatives, but about breaking their ability to fight as an organization or a combatant framework. A tactical victory is a military action that is a means to achieving broader goals. It does not mean that all threats to our forces or to the home front have disappeared from the area where victory was achieved.
Operational victory is the ability of the IDF’s operative echelon, usually the regional command operating in the operational arena or front, to dismantle the fighting system facing it. In a cluster of battles (usually many dozens are required) in which tactical victories and control of terrain are achieved, the combined fighting force of the IDF manages to render the enemy’s military system dysfunctional — i.e., unable to achieve military strategic goals or to deny the IDF’s ability to achieve such goals.
The operational victory achieved in the Six-Day War forced Egypt and Syria into a military reconstruction process that led them to embark on another war — with improved opening conditions for a military surprise — six years later. In the current war, operational victory does not mean the threat of guerrilla warfare and terrorism has been removed from the Gaza Strip, but that Hamas’ ability to cause damage, especially to the Israeli civilian home front, is declining dramatically. It can be said that in most areas of the Gaza Strip, the IDF has already achieved an operational victory. Its completion depends on Israel’s decision to fight in the limited remaining areas (Rafah, some of the center camps).
Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. This kind of victory is achieved by continuing military operations after the operational victory is achieved in order to weaken the enemy’s guerrilla warfare and terrorism capabilities until they either stop completely or are reduced to the scale of individual events. Strategic victory requires fundamental changes in the situation on the ground: the loss by guerrilla and terrorist operatives of the support of their population; isolation of the arena to prevent the insertion of new weapons and funding in a way that could allow guerrilla and terrorist operatives to recover; and a distancing of junior operatives or supporters from leading terrorist operatives that significantly impairs those leaders’ ability to command their juniors.
Such a change in the situation on the ground requires steps that go beyond military combat. These include rehabilitating the economic and civilian infrastructure for the population that is not engaged in terrorism; gaining the consent of neighboring countries and other partners to block weapons smuggling routes and money transfer channels into the territory; and the regulation of local government such that it can satisfy and develop the civilian and economic needs of the population. Such a strategic victory was achieved in 2004 at the end of the Second Intifada, and it resulted in relative quiet for about a decade.
The Grand Strategy victory, or victory on the level of national security strategy, is when a military victory leads to a fundamental change in the strategic posture of the State of Israel. This can stem from a desire among enemy leadership to fundamentally change its hostile attitude toward Israel and sign peace agreements with it that end the military conflict. Such a great victory — some would call it a mutual victory — was achieved with Egypt about five years after the Yom Kippur War.
Another type of grand victory is a situation in which the IDF controls territory following a military victory, and the failure of the previous regime in the war leads to regime change of a kind that creates fundamentally different national conduct. The classic historical examples of such a change are Germany and Japan after World War II. Israel won this kind of victory in the Golan Heights when it applied sovereignty over the territory in 1981.
Another form of grand victory stems from the complete dissolution of terrorist elements and the integration of their political movement into national mechanisms, as occurred in Malaya (part of Malaysia) in the 1950s, and with the Tamil rebels in Sri Lanka in 2009.
Grand victory cannot be achieved only by military means. It requires dialogue with local forces, deep and ongoing economic and civil rehabilitation, and permanent security control and policing mechanisms that create law and order and are acceptable to the population.
So what would “total victory” mean in the current Gaza conflict?
Tactical victory alone, as it is defined above, cannot lead to total victory.
Nor can an operational victory be “total.” While such a victory does mean a fundamental weakening of the enemy’s military capacity to do harm, it will, over time, be able to continue to fight guerrilla or terror warfare. The State of Israel strives to return all residents to the Gaza envelope region and create a situation of “absolute” security for them. This goal cannot be fulfilled solely by an operational victory.
Grand victory in Gaza would mean a years’ long process until the creation of fundamental change. During that period, the IDF would continue to eliminate guerrilla and terrorist operatives until they are completely subdued. A civilian authority would be established with an effective police force and the capacity for civil, economic, and law enforcement governance. The population would implement a basic approach of coexistence with Israel. Actions taken by the civilian authority toward this end, and its delicate coordination with Israel’s military activity, would receive international and regional support.
Such a process does not yet appear practical or feasible in Gaza, and even if it were, it is highly complex. It will be even more complex to connect Gaza to the civil and political processes in the West Bank, and ultimately to a political peace agreement that would lead to the establishment of a single Palestinian state entity in both areas simultaneously.
In light of all this, it seems that “total victory” in the Gaza conflict is most likely to come in the form of a strategic victory. This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.
In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.
Col. (Res.) Shai Shabtai is a senior researcher at the BESA Center and an expert in national security, strategic planning, and strategic communication. He is a strategist in the field of cyber security and a consultant to leading companies in Israel. A version of this article was originally published by The BESA Center.
The post What Would ‘Total Victory’ Mean in Gaza? first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Pro-Hamas Activists, Groups Turn Against Progressive Lawmakers, Allies as Anti-Israel Movement Shows Cracks
Pro-Hamas activists gather in Washington Square Park for a rally following a protest march held in response to an NYPD sweep of an anti-Israel encampment at New York University in Manhattan, May 3, 2024. Photo: Matthew Rodier/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
A slew of anti-Israel groups and activists have turned on left-wing Democratic lawmakers and allies, dismissing them as “enemies” and calling into question their support and loyalty to the Palestinian cause.
In recent weeks, anti-Zionist organizations and public figures have taken to social media to lash out at high-profile left-wing politicians and activists for criticizing their methods of opposing the Jewish state. Staunchly anti-Israel groups such as Within Our Lifetime (WOL) and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) have expressed outright indignation at allied lawmakers and activists for suggesting their extreme, sometimes violent tactics are counterproductive and risk cannibalizing the movement against the Jewish state.
SJP, which promotes anti-Israel propaganda on college campuses, lambasted US Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) for criticizing a mob of pro-Hamas protesters who demonstrated outside an exhibition in New York City that commemorates the victims of the deadly Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack at the Supernova music festival in southern Israel. The group asserted that any public disapproval of pro-Palestinian activists is tantamount to enabling “genocide” in Gaza, the Palestinian enclave ruled by the Hamas terrorist group.
“We are not loyal to our oppressors; elected officials who choose to enable genocide, endorse the architects of said genocide, or otherwise stand in the way of Palestinian liberation will face the political consequences of those choices,” SJP wrote.
“Figures like AOC and Jamaal Bowman have utility insofar as they leverage their positions within the belly of the beast to shield the masses and our righteous struggles for liberation, directly challenge white supremacist power structures, and stand firmly against Zionism and all manifestations of US imperialism,” SJP continued. “Without these tangible actions, we regard these elected officials as our enemies.”
Ocasio-Cortez and Bowman have been among the US Congress’s most vocal critics of Israel, falsely accusing the Jewish state of “genocide” and “white supremacy,” relentlessly castigating its American supporters, and claiming that the charge of antisemitism has been weaponized for political purposes.
However, their anti-Israel comments and policy proposals haven’t seemingly gone far enough for SJP, which has been behind many of the pro-Hamas demonstrations that devastated universities this past academic year.
Within Our Lifetime (WOL), an organization that promotes the eradication of Israel and Zionism as its central goal, similarly condemned Bowman and Ocasio-Cortez for not taking maximalist stances against the Jewish state. The group criticized the two lawmakers for “sanctioning Palestinian resistance” by voting in favor of a resolution which strengthens the authority of the US president to levy sanctions against entities that use human shields in conflict. Hamas has been widely criticized for its military strategy of embedding its terrorists within Gaza’s civilian population and commandeering civilian facilities like hospitals, schools, and mosques to run operations and direct attacks against Israel.
WOL also blasted the two lawmakers for perpetuating “debunked Zionist propaganda about sexual violence” by voting in favor of another resolution that condemned Hamas’ systematic use of rape and other forms of sexual violence against Israeli women during its Oct. 7 onslaught.
Nerdeen Kiswani, the founder of WOL and a prolific organizer of anti-Israel demonstrations, reprimanded Ocasio-Cortez for calling out her group’s protest of the exhibit honoring victims of the Nova Music Festival massacre.
“You are a genocide apologist,” Kiswani wrote, dismissing the display as a “zionist [sic] exhibit used to manufacture consent for genocide.”
“You are worse than any openly fascist politician. At least we know they are our enemies. Liberals like you will smile in our face as you lie to and backstab our communities,” Kiswani continued.
The WOL leader then fired shots at US Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), the first Palestinian American woman elected to Congress, for issuing a statement criticizing protests of Bowman’s reelection campaign rally. The congresswoman wrote that members of WOL harbor “unrealistic expectations of political perfection.”
“You think we care about Palestinians who repeat Zionist agenda and lies? Unfortunately Rashida Tlaib repeated the lies about Palestinians committing sexual violence on Oct. 7, the same lies used to manufacture consent for genocide. She needs to be called out too,” Kiswani wrote.
Kiswani also took aim at Rafael Shimunov, a Jewish activist and leader of the anti-Israel organization IfNotNow, for criticizing WOL’s decision to protest a rally supporting Bowman’s failed reelection campaign.
“Weren’t you already called out for being a liberal Zionist? Do you need to be dog walked again?” Kiswani wrote.
“Do you really think Palestinians have so little agency that we wouldn’t on our own volition protest politicians backing genocide Joe who we’ve chanted against for months?” Kiswani continued, using a nickname that pro-Hamas activists have given to US President Joe Biden due to his overall support for Israel’s military campaign in Gaza.
Beyond Congress, even avowed anti-Israel activists who have been at the front lines of the movement against the Jewish state have come under fire.
Ali Abunimah, director of the anti-Israel outlet Electronic Intifada, attacked Women’s March leader and progressive activist Linda Sarsour for criticizing the divisive tactics of pro-Palestinian organizations.
“Calling us ‘purists’ or accusing us of ‘demanding perfection’ from ‘progressives’ who pander to ‘Israel’ devalues lives of Palestinian genocide victims. These ‘progressives’ reap huge rewards from being ‘pro-Palestine’ while doing NOTHING to actually help Palestinians. Enough!” Abunimah wrote.
Sarsour has been among the most prominent anti-Israel voices in the US for several years.
Meanwhile, Abunimah has repeatedly called for the destruction and replacement of Israel with a Palestinian state. He regularly accuses Israel of committing “genocide” in Gaza and “apartheid” in the West Bank. Abunimah has also compared Israel to Nazi Germany, posting on X/Twitter that “supporting Zionism is not atonement for the Holocaust, but its continuation in spirit.”
Abunimah has dismissed Zionism as “one of the worst forms of antisemitism in existence today,” disregarding the fact that the vast majority of Jews self-identify as Zionist and believe in Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish, democratic state in the ancient homeland of the Jewish people.
The post Pro-Hamas Activists, Groups Turn Against Progressive Lawmakers, Allies as Anti-Israel Movement Shows Cracks first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Over 300 Social Media Influencers Unite to Strategize on Combating Antisemitism, Misinformation About Israel
Bravo TV host Andy Cohen (far right) hosting a discussion with (from left) Joseph Yomtoubian, Melinda Strauss, and Lynn Shabinsky. Photo: Ohad Kab
More than 300 leading social media influencers gathered in New York City for a two-day event that organizers described as the largest global influencer summit against antisemitism, misinformation, and hate.
The summit “Voices for Truth: Influencers United Against Antisemitism” took place on Sunday and Monday at The Glasshouse in New York City and was hosted by the Combat Antisemitism Movement (CAM) in collaboration with the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Center for Jewish Impact, and The Jewish Agency for Israel. A diverse group of influencers — including chefs, cookbook authors, artists, musicians, and athletes — united to share their experiences with antisemitism and strategize on how to use their online presence to fight hatred.
Since the deadly Oct. 7 Hamas terrorist attack in Israel, many Jewish influencers have faced an increase in antisemitic bullying across all social media platforms and have also lost brand partnerships and contracts for standing in solidarity with Israel and the Jewish community. Nevertheless, these influencers continue to use their platforms to raise awareness about antisemitism, to express solidarity with Israel, and to counter misinformation about Israel and the Jewish people.
At the two-day summit, attendees included US Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY), rapper Kosha Dillz, professional basketball player Ryan Turrell, reality star and entrepreneur Julia Haart, Holocaust survivor Tova Friedman, dancer and activist Montana Tucker, and judoka Yael Arad, who was Israel’s first ever Olympic medalist.
Grammy-nominated reggae singer and songwriter Matisyahu, who released a song in March about antisemitism, joined a discussion on stage about antisemitism impacting his career before performing live for the audience. The “Jerusalem” singer talked about being dropped by his manager and having a number of his scheduled concerts cancelled after he expressed solidarity with Israel following the Oct. 7 Hamas attack.
During the summit there were other discussions on stage about debating misconceptions and misinformation regarding the ongoing Israel-Hamas war; building interfaith alliances; “navigating the science of social media to maximize impact”; being “united in diversity” with Jews of color; and “fighting antisemitism with comedy,” the latter of which featured comedians Yechiel Jacobs, LE Steiman, and Josh Zilberberg. Pro-Israel student activists participated in a panel discussion about fighting antisemitism on college and university campuses, and Zionist LGBTQ+ community members led a discussion titled “Proud in Pride: Breaking Down the Queers for Palestine Movement.”
At the event’s opening gala on Sunday night, New York City Mayor Eric Adams talked about the need to stop college campuses from “breeding hatred” against Jews and the dangerous dark corners of social media, where antisemitism and misinformation flourish and “truth no longer matters.” He also told the influencers in the audience they have the means to change history.
“You are now on the precipice to decide which direction we’re going in move in, not only as a country but as a globe. You only have to pick up your device to change the course of history,” said Adams. “This is your moment to use the tools you have — your platforms. Your platforms can actually change the course of what we are experiencing across the globe. There’s no room for hate in this city [or] on our globe and together we can turn it around.”
“Doesn’t matter where you go, where you come from,” he added. “If you wear a hijab or yamulke, kufi, turban … doesn’t matter where you go to worship or pray or not at all. It doesn’t matter. I know we are members of the greatest race alive, and that’s the human race. Let’s lift each other up.”
Bravo producer and television and radio host Andy Cohen spoke at the opening gala about being a “proud American Jew” and told the crowd: “For me, flying the flag of who I am culturally is the greatest thing I can do right now and and I think continuing to celebrate what we love about being Jewish is actually more of a political statement than people realize. Many of you have large social media platforms, and that just by representing Jewish culture with pride to your followers, you will have a far-reaching impact more than you may even realize.”
“Be proud of being Jewish and don’t shy away from showing it publicly,” the host of “Watch What Happens Live” added. “And sometimes the simplest displays or gestures are the strongest and most effective.”
Cohen also moderated a panel discussion at the summit about using social media to combat hate and foster understanding. When he asked one of the panelists, influencer Lynn Shabinsky, about losing thousands of social media followers after sharing content that called for the release of the Hamas hostages, Shabinsky replied, “We don’t need them. We’re here as people. We need to survive. The money will come later.”
The summit further drew attention to the hostages still being held captive by Hamas terrorists since Oct. 7 by welcoming rescued hostages to the stage as well as a survivor of the Nova music festival massacre, Natalie Sanandaji. She shared her first-hand account of surviving the Nova massacre and the importance of resilience in the face of hate. Sanandaji additionally presented Tucker with the CAM Impactful Activism Award.
“Jews today have a voice, we are strong, we are powerful, and we are resilient,” Tucker said in her acceptance speech. “We are fortunate to have social media to use our platforms to reach people all the around the world. We have experienced brand deals fall through, death threats, but we’ll continue to fight every single day, and we will not give up.”
The summit ended on Monday night with a call to action that encouraged attendees to continue using their social media platforms to educate, inspire, and combat antisemitism.
“We live in a world in which lies become truth, truth becomes a lie, victims become aggressors, and aggressors become victims,” said Israeli Consul General in New York Ofir Akunis. “But know this: Those who started this war will be defeated. We will not be victims of violence anymore. Enough. Enough.”
“This is our chance to make a difference. To stand up for Jewish people and our values and the protection of minorities,” said CAM CEO Sacha Roytman. “To stand by is not an option anymore. Bring back activism and community leadership as a way of life.”
The post Over 300 Social Media Influencers Unite to Strategize on Combating Antisemitism, Misinformation About Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Students of Columbia University Affiliate School Petition Administration to Hire Pro-Hamas Professor
The “Gaza Solidarity Encampment” at Columbia University, located in the Manhattan borough of New York City, on April 25, 2024. Photo: Reuters Connect
Students of the Union Theological Seminary (UTS), an affiliate school of Columbia University, are pushing the institution to hire an academic who was just terminated for defending the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’ Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel.
Dr. Mohamed Abdou, a visiting professor in modern Arab studies who defended Hamas after the terrorist group slaughtered over 1,200 people and kidnapped about 250 others during its Oct. 7 onslaught, was reportedly relieved of his duties at Columbia University as of Sunday. Following Abdou’s firing, UTS students circulated a petition calling on the seminary to extend the anti-Israel academic an offer of employment.
“We condemn Columbia University’s efforts to stifle any mobilization around [the Palestinian] cause and its repressive, anti-Palestinian victimization of Dr. Abdou,” the petition reads.
“We ask the UTS administration to hire Dr. Abdou for the 2024-2025 academic year,” the petition continues.
During a US congressional hearing on campus antisemitism in April, Columbia President Minouche Shafik promised lawmakers that the university would terminate Abdou at the conclusion of the school year, citing his repeated public endorsements of violence against Israel and endorsement of terrorist groups.
During a Jan. 5 interview with Revolutionary Left Radio, Abdou heaped praise on Hamas, referring to the terrorist organization as a “resistance” and dismissed criticism of the terrorist organization as “white supremacy.” In the aftermath of the Oct. 7 terrorist attacks, many pro-Palestinian groups have similarly defended Hamas a a “resistance” group and referred to the Oct. 7 atrocities as “self-defense.”
On Jan. 16. the Columbia Middle East Institute tapped Abdou to serve as lead instructor for a course on “Decolonial-Queerness & Abolition.” According to the course description, students analyzed “Euro-American informed modernity animated by (neo)liberal-Enlightenment values (free will/humanity, secularism, racial capitalism)” and “contemporary conceptualizations of family, kinship, and friendship in Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) communities within the context of settler-colonial societies (as the U.S./Canada) as well as in postcolonial nations and regions (as Southwest Asia, Africa, and the Middle East) that arguably never underwent adequate decolonization.”
Abdou faced intense criticism after a student recorded and circulated a course lecture in which he denounced Israel as a “settler colonial” entity that was inspired by American-style beliefs on private property, gender, and sexuality.
Following Shafik’s congressional testimony, Abdou claimed that the Columbia president “lied” about his firing and accused her of “misrepresenting” his opinions. He reiterated his support for Islamist terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, both of which are backed by Iran.
Abdou’s public support for terrorism has caused a firestorm of controversy with Columbia students and alumni, calling into question the university’s commitment to fostering a tolerant and safe environment for Jewish and Israeli students.
Abdou indicated gratitude for the petition on X/Twitter, saying that he is “indebted for this generous initiative.” He called on his supporters to sign and spread the petition “as far [and] as wide as possible.”
The post Students of Columbia University Affiliate School Petition Administration to Hire Pro-Hamas Professor first appeared on Algemeiner.com.