Netanyahu vs. Abu Ubaydah: On Victory and False Victory
06 October 2014
By Ramzy Baroud
In the rush to analyze the outcome of Israel's 51-day
war in Gaza, dubbed Operation Protective Edge, some
may have neglected an important factor: this was not a
war by traditional definitions of warfare, thus the
conventional analyses of victory and defeat is simply
not applicable.
That being the case, how can we explain Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's triumphant statement on
28 August, and the massive celebrations on the streets
of Gaza regarding the resistance ‘victory' over
Israel? To be truly fathomed, they must be understood
in context.
Soon after the ceasefire declaration on 26 August,
ending Israel's most destructive war on Gaza yet,
Netanyahu seemed to have disappeared from the scene.
Some Israeli media began predicting the end of his
political reign. Although this notion was a bit hasty,
one can understand why. Much of the man's political
career was predicated on his ‘anti-terror' stance and
Israeli security agenda.
He served as prime minister from 1996 to 1999, with
the decided aim of defeating the Oslo ‘peace process.'
He argued it compromised Israel's security. Then as a
finance minister in Sharon's government (2003-05), he
was troubled by Ariel Sharon's intentions regarding
re-deploying out of Gaza. In fact, it was the Gaza
‘disengagement plan' that ended the Netanyahu-Sharon
alliance.
It took Netanyahu a few years to fight his way back
from the seeming oblivion in Israel's complicated
political landscape. He fought a grueling political
battle, but managed to redeem only some of the
rightwing Likud party's past glory through fractious
alliances. He served as prime minister from 2009-2013,
and for a third term (a rarity in Israeli history)
from 2013 to the present.
Not only was Netanyahu the king of Israel, but its
kingmaker as well. He did keep his friends close and
enemies closer, and cleverly balanced out seemingly
impossible coalition odds. He succeeded, not simply
because he is a shrewd politician, but also because he
managed to unite Israel around one goal: security.
This he did by fighting "Palestinian terror," a
reference to various Palestinian resistance groups,
including Hamas, and building Israeli defenses. He had
such command over that political discourse that no one
came even close, surly not the newcomer centralist
politician Yair Lapid, or even rightwing and far-right
hawks Avigdor Liberman and Neftali Bennet.
But then, Gaza happened, a war that could possibly
become Netanyahu's biggest miscalculation, and perhaps
the reason for his downfall. Aside from the collapse
in his approval ratings, down from 82% on 23 July, to
less than 38% shortly after the ceasefire
announcement, the man's own language in his
post-ceasefire press conference is telling enough.
He seemed desperate and defensive, arguing that Hamas
failed to achieve its war objective, although it was
Israel, not Hamas, that instigated the war with a list
of objectives - none of which were achieved anyway.
Hamas responded by mocking his statement as the group
didn't start the war, nor had any demands then, a
group official told Al Jazeera. The demands were made
in the subsequent ceasefire talks in Egypt, and some
of them were in fact achieved.
Netanyahu is twisting language and stretching the
truth in a despondent attempt to score a political
victory, or to simply save face. But few are
convinced.
Writing in Foreign Policy on 20 July 20, Ariel Ilan
Roth came to an early conclusion about the Gaza war,
which has proven to be only partly true. "No matter
how and when the conflict between Hamas and Israel
ends, two things are certain. The first is that Israel
will be able to claim a tactical victory. The second
is that it will have suffered a strategic defeat."
Wrong. Even the tactical victory was denied this time
around, unlike previous wars, most notably the
so-called Operation Cast Lead (2008-09). The Gaza
resistance must have learned from its past mistakes,
managing to withstand a 51-day war with a destructive
outcome unprecedented in all past Gaza conflicts. When
the Egypt-mediated ceasefire was announced, every
Israeli soldier was pushed behind Gaza's borders.
Almost immediately after the agreement, a Hamas
official from Gaza read a statement in which he called
on Israelis living in the many evacuated border towns
to return to their homes, in a statement of defiance
also unprecedented. Shortly after, hundreds of
fighters representing all factions, Fatah included,
stood at the ruins of the Shejaiya, neighbourhood in
Gaza city. "There is no room amongst us for that
defeated, weak Arab," the military leader of the Gaza
resistance Abu Ubaydah declared, as throngs of people
showered the fighters with kisses.
He too declared some kind of victory. But is his
"victory" statement any different from that of
Netanyahu's?
"Israel has a history of claiming victory when in fact
it has suffered defeat; the October 1973 war is the
best example," wrote Roth in Foreign Policy. The
difference back then is that many in Israel accepted
false victories. This time around they refuse to do
so, as various opinion polls by Haaretz, Channel 2 and
others are showing. Furthermore, the chasm in Israel's
political class is wider than it has been in many
years.
Irrespective of this, ‘victory' of the resistance
cannot be understood within the same context of
Israel's own definition of victory, or false victory.
Surely the resistance "was able to establish
deterrence, displaying an incredible level of
resilience and strength, even when equipped with
primitive weapons," as argued by Samah Sabawi. The
very idea that powerful Israel, and the likes of
Netanyahu, can use Palestinians as a testing ground
for weapons or to enhance approval ratings seems to be
over. The Sharon old wisdom that the Arabs and
Palestinians "must be hit hard" and "must be beaten,"
as a precondition for calm, or peace, was challenged
like never before in the history of Arab-Israeli wars.
Gaza's ceasefire "celebrations" were not the kind of
celebrations that would follow a football match win.
To comprehend it as an expression of mere joy is a
mistake, and reflects a lack of understanding of Gaza
society. It was more of a collective statement by
people who lost 2,143 people, mostly civilians, and
have over 11,000 wounded and maimed to care for. Let
alone the total or partial destruction of 18,000
homes, 75 schools, many hospitals, mosques, and
hundreds of factories and shops.
No, it was not a statement of defiance in the symbolic
sense either. It was a message to Israel that the
resistance has matured and that Israel's complete
dominance over when wars start and how they end is
over.
Only the future could prove how accurate such an
assessment is and how consequential it will be for the
West Bank and East Jerusalem, which are under military
occupation. Interestingly, "liberating Jerusalem," was
in fact a dominant theme among jubilant Palestinians
in Gaza. Another theme was the insistence of national
unity among all Palestinians. After all, this was the
real reason why Netanyahu had launched his war on Gaza
in the first place.
Resistance discourse, al-Muqawama, is now the most
dominant in Palestine, and it goes beyond factional
divides, or the tired discussion about useless ‘peace
talks' that garnered nothing for Palestinians but
territorial loss, political division and much
humiliation. That sentiment is already reverberating
in the West Bank. But how it will be translated in the
future is yet to be seen, considering the fact that
the Palestinian Authority (PA) there is weak in its
dealings with Israel, and very intolerant of any
political dissent.
Israeli pressure on PA President Mahmoud Abbas will
continue. In his first press conference after the
ceasefire Netanyahu repeated the same ultimatum. Abbas
"needs to choose what side he is on," he said.
After failing to end the Gaza resistance, Netanyahu is
left with nothing other than pressuring Abbas, 79,
whose choice, after Gaza's war, means so little to
begin with.
- Ramzy Baroud is a PhD scholar in People's History
at the University of Exeter. He is the Managing Editor
of Middle East Eye. Baroud is an
internationally-syndicated columnist, a media
consultant, an author and the founder of
PalestineChronicle.com. His latest book is My Father
Was a Freedom Fighter: Gaza's Untold Story (Pluto
Press, London).
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments