Hamas assault may have destroyed deep-rooted beliefs about Israel and Palestinians

The unexpected terror let loose by Hamas into Israel on October 7 has dealt a blow to long-standing beliefs on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict over the years.

Israelis drew parallels between the attack, which led to approximately 1,400 casualties on their side, primarily among civilians, and the tragic events of September 11, 2001, in the US. 

The element of shock and surprise in the assault evoked memories of both 9/11 and the Yom Kippur War of 1973. In that war, Israeli forces found themselves unprepared for an Arab coalition, spearheaded by Egypt and Syria, challenging widely accepted assumptions.

However, the present Israel-Hamas war has shattered a series of long-held assumptions that once underpinned the Israel-Palestine dispute.

Assumption 1 - Israel is 'bulletproof' and its army unbeatable

Israel was basking in its own technological glory when the Hamas attacked. The country boasts of the most sophisticated military in the Middle East. Yet, akin to the shock felt in the US after 9/11, a considerably less equipped adversary managed to put together an unforeseen attack.

While Hamas may rely on relatively basic, mostly hand-held weaponry , they did use drones, paragliders and their own intelligence to outfox Israel's supposedly impenetrable border, laden with top-notch surveillance tools.

Streaks of light seen as Israel's Iron Dome system intercepts rockets launched from Gaza. Photo credit: Reuters

Hamas' ability to keep their mega assault plot under wraps, despite the involvement of hundreds of fighters, dealt a significant blow to Israel's pride in its on-ground human intelligence capabilities in Gaza, led by the reputed agency Mossad.

Also read | Hamas-Israel war: Rare dissent over US arms for Israel raises troubling questions

Assumption 2: Hamas could be kept in check

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu long pursued a strategy aimed at dividing Palestinians between the West Bank and Gaza. This involved weakening the Palestinian Authority led by President Mahmoud Abbas, allowing Hamas to maintain control over Gaza, whereas PA was confined to West Bank, the other piece of land which, along with Gaza, constitutes the homeland of Palestinians. 

The theory was that, by letting Hamas focus on governance and bolstering the Gaza enclave's living conditions, the group might moderate its stance and avoid major conflicts with Israel.

Palestinian Hamas militants take part in a rally marking the 31st anniversary of Hamas' founding, in Gaza City. Photo credits: Reuters

In practice, Israel permitted Qatar to financially support Hamas, provided essential resources, and allowed a limited number of Gazans to work in Israel, while maintaining strict controls on population movement in cooperation with Egypt, leading to what many termed "an open-air prison."

Assumption 3: The US could take a backseat in Middle East relations

For the longest time,  the US  has only verbally expressed its commitment to a two-state solution and criticised Israeli settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank.

The US has also consistently  prioritised matters related to China and the Indo-Pacific region. Similarly, it has also been involved in managing the aftermath of Russia's actions in Ukraine.

President Biden was greeted by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on his arrival in Israel. Photo credit: AFP

Yet, this time around, President Joe Biden had to re-engage with the Middle East by providing unwavering support to Israel and maintaining relations with Arab countries facing threats from Iran and its associated groups.

(Disclaimer: The views of the writer do not represent the views of WION or ZMCL. Nor does WION or ZMCL endorse the views of the writer.)

WATCH WION LIVE HERE: