Gaza truce, though welcome, an embarrassment for Israel

None in the right frame of mind can dispute that the four-day truce in Gaza is to be warmly welcomed. Though a temporary reprieve, it brings to ordinary Gazans a respite from the brutal assault that Israel has subjected them to in retaliation of the Hamas attack on their territory and civilians on October 7.

More importantly, what the truce highlights amid the fog of war is the limitations of Israel’s fabled military machine. Despite having virtually carpet-bombed the tiny sliver of land that Gaza is, it has now been forced to negotiate with Hamas a cessation of hostility – no matter only for a few days.

Although Israel will never admit this, the fact is that its deal with Hamas, mediated by Qatar, signals a sort of embarrassing climbdown.

The mighty bends

For days on end, Israel has been spitting only fire, vowing to entirely obliterate the armed Palestinian group which rejects the existence of Israel to justify its own existence.

Now that Israel has had to enter into an agreement with the same group shows that it may not be as mighty as it is customarily thought to be to push through what it wants. That it has had to open back-channel negotiations with Hamas to arrive at a pause in the Gaza conflict illustrates that Israel too can be brought down by several notches – if not down its knees – when the going gets tough.

There, of course, have been some instances – not too many though – when Israel has had to beat a retreat in the past. Despite fighting and defeating combined military forces of several Arab nations several times as in 1973, it did, however, end up with a blackened face in Lebanon in 2006.

The conflict there triggered by an attack on an Israeli patrol unit by the Iran-backed militia Hezbollah led to a month of bloodshed, killing some 1,000 Lebanese and more than 160 Israelis.

Without going into who was right or wrong, what stood out in that particular conflict was that the Israelis faced rough weather once they engaged in an all-out war with the Hezbollah. Disciplined, well-armed and obdurate – all in equal measure – Hezbollah proved to be more than a match for the Israelis. It fought long and hard, compelling the Israelis into a ceasefire without a clear winner.

This is not to suggest that Israel faces a similar military outcome in Gaza.

Lessons from the past

For one, Hamas is no Hezbollah. More importantly, the Palestinians impoverished over the decades by a crippling siege of Gaza and brutal occupation of West Bank, may not have the wherewithal to checkmate Israel in the theatre of war.

But what Palestinians have is their rightful aspirations for a life of dignity. It is unlikely that the killing of Hamas fighters – even to the last fighter – will end their collective quest for nationhood, identity and pride.

History tells us that brute military firepower alone does not always guarantee total victory. If that had been the case, the US ought to have wiped out the Vietnamese resistance when it carpet-bombed Cambodia some 50 years ago to smash the Ho Chi Minh trail, a massive network of supply routes and tunnels that that the North Vietnamese used. In the end, the mighty US evacuated with their tails tucked firmly behind their legs.

Then there is the more recent example of Afghanistan. After some two decades of warfare, the US left the battlefield, handing over power to the very same Taliban that it had sworn to entirely terminate.

Israel’s deal with Hamas, in that light, is possibly pregnant with possibilities. If not anything else, it implies that the powerful Israelis can be compelled to sit down with arch enemies if the ground realities demand so.

Temporary pause to war

But how the truce plays out within Israel domestically is yet to be ascertained. That many in the country will hail the move that brings back home at least a section of the hostages held by Hamas is undeniable. But the release of Palestinian prisoners under the agreement may not go down well with the hardline constituents that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been seeking to appease.

It is also unlikely that they would relish the fact that Netanyahu has negotiated with the Hamas. It could be interpreted as a sign of weakness on the part of the Israeli state.

For Hamas, the four-day pause is just a temporary relief, not a permanent reprieve. If media reports are to be believed, Israelis needed a break to replenish their depleted stocks of arsenal, having already dropped more than 25,000 tonnes of explosives on the Gaza Strip. They reportedly are in the urgent need for fresh supply of weaponry that their friends in the West such as the US are frantically gathering.

So, after the four-day pause passes, Palestinians can brace to be woken up again by the ear-splitting noise of renewed bombing and the heavy thud of Israeli military convoys rolling into their neighbourhoods. More civilians will die and more homes will be destroyed as Netanyahu seeks to satiate the bloodlust of his hardline supporters. The madness is likely to march on, post the brief interval.

(Ruben Banerjee worked with Al Jazeera as an editor in west Asia for 12 years)

(The Federal seeks to present views and opinions from all sides of the spectrum. The information, ideas or opinions in the articles are of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Federal)