By Virgilio O Aran

It is often assumed that history repeats itself, and we strive to glean insights from past events to inform our actions and decisions in the future. Since the conclusion of last year, we have borne witness not only to the indiscriminate bombing of civilian populations but also to the tragic loss of innocent lives, predominantly among civilians. Technology, a revived movement for social justice in the context of the Gaza conflict, and the potential to sway the 2024 U.S. election have all played pivotal roles. Ultimately, it's tacitly understood by most involved parties, including ourselves, that the continuation of the Gaza war will be contingent upon the extent to which various stakeholders can influence the U.S. election.

The War in Gaza has brought to us the reality of war to our own eyes, transforming for many the way that we see war. It is not the first time this phenomenon has happened nor is it the only conflict happening now. Still, it is the first time in many decades that war has agitated the masses in such a way that it becomes a catalyst of the anti-war movement we have not seen in the U.S. since the war of Vietnam. It is not just the size of the demonstration but the energy and camaraderie among those who have participated. 

The Israeli government has decimated Gaza, where 90 percent of the houses are destroyed, with a high number of casualties, a majority of women and children. The article “Gaza death toll: How many Palestinians has Israel's Campaign Killed?” from tThe news outlet Reuters, underscores that according to the Palestinian health authorities, "Israel's ground and air campaign in Gaza has killed more than 39,000 people, mostly civilians, and driven most of the enclave's 2.3 million people from their homes" (July 25, 2024). The numbers are astonishing, especially when you take into account the number of people who will have permanent physical and mental disability as a result of the war. The condemnation of the action of Israel has been quite open, including the top U.N. Court. “The article Top U.N. Court Says Israel's Presence in Occupied Palestinian Territories is Illegal and Should End" by Mike Corder states, “the decision of the U.N. Court that Israel's presence in the occupied Palestinian territories is unlawful and calls for it to end and for settlement construction to stop immediately, issuing an unprecedented, sweeping condemnation of Israel's rule over the lands it captured 57 years ago (July 19, 2024).” But even despite all of the international condemnation and rallies across the planet, including in Israel, demanding an immediate ceasefire, the war in Gaza does not seem to have an  end near. The question is why when all evidence indisputably condemns the current government of Israel of war crimes?

The ongoing conflict in Gaza has brought the harsh reality of war to the forefront, affecting the way many perceive war. While this is not the first time such a phenomenon has occurred, it's the first time in many decades that war has galvanized the masses and sparked an anti-war movement reminiscent of the Vietnam War era in the U.S. The impact is not just in the size of the demonstrations but also in the energy and camaraderie among the participants.

The War: The Stakeholders

The Israeli government's campaign has ravaged Gaza, resulting in the destruction of 90 percent of the houses and a high number of casualties, especially among women and children. According to Palestinian health authorities cited by Reuters, Israel's ground and air campaign in Gaza has led to the deaths of over 39,000 people (an estimate as many others are still under the rubble unidentified and unaccounted for), mostly civilians, and forced the displacement of the majority of the enclave's 2.3 million residents from their homes (dated July 25, 2024). The scale of the humanitarian crisis is staggering, with numerous individuals facing permanent physical and mental disabilities as a consequence of the conflict.

International condemnation of Israel's actions has been widespread, including a landmark ruling by the top U.N. Court. An article by Mike Corder reports that, “the U.N. Court has declared Israel's presence in the occupied Palestinian territories illegal and has called for its immediate cessation, along with an end to settlement construction, issuing an unprecedented and all-encompassing condemnation of Israel's rule over the lands it seized 57 years ago (dated July 19, 2024).”

Despite the global outcry and calls for an immediate ceasefire, the conflict in Gaza shows no sign of abating. The troubling question remains: Why does the war in Gaza persist despite overwhelming evidence condemning the Israeli government for war crimes? This is where stakeholders must have a clear, articulated strategy to achieve their objectives. Each stakeholder involved, including the mass anti-war movement, is positioned in this chess war to gain the upper hand. 

The Anti-War Movement

The anti-war movement, diverse in nature and objectives, has a clear short-term objective: the ceasefire. The call for a ceasefire where people are dying every day seems just and proper, given the inhumane situation Palestinians in Gaza are living through. However, this call to stop the war has met real opposition in the hall of power or where power matters: Washington, in the United and Tel Aviv, in Israel. In the case of the United States, the current president has been willing to divide its coalition, which allowed him to win the presidency in 2020. Progressives, Democrats, and a critical segment of the Palestinian-Americans and muslims decided that in 2024, Biden did not deserve their vote. For the anti-war movement, the ceasefire was the most immediate goal. To achieve this goal, they have used different tactics from direct actions such as civil disobedience, weekly protests across the country, and social media action, including disseminating videos, teach-ins, and others. However, at the core, the strategy is a political strategy to influence the behavior of the party in power, in this case, the Democrats. To execute this strategy, the anti-war movement launched a political campaign of the non-commitment vote during the primary  elections of the Democratic Party across the U.S., especially in battleground states such as Michigan, Wisconsin, and Arizona, where the November election will be close. The objective is to change the president's behavior, so that  Biden  exerts more pressure on Prime Minister Netanyahu. While some of the leftists in the anti-war movement are opposed in ideology to this strategy, it is clear that part of the calculus behind it is to use some leverage of the Democratic primaries to achieve the ceasefire. With the dropout of Biden from the presidential race and the  nomination of Vice-President Kamala Harris for President, some momentum can be achieved if the anti-war movement is strategic.

The Israeli State and Prime Minister Netanyahu

The other stakeholders in this context are the state of Israel with Prime Minister Netanyahu as its most visible representative. Before  Hamas carried out the terrorist attack against Israel on October 7th, the Israeli government, headed by Prime Minister Netanyahu, was in a precarious position. They were facing legal challenges and social unrest that could have led to imprisonment. However, October 7 provided Netanyahu and his government with the crucial opportunity they needed to maintain their grip on power. Netanyahu, akin to the main character in Machiavelli's "The Prince," strategically leveraged the Hamas attack to rally the Israeli populace behind his leadership. Consequently, the fate of Netanyahu's political career has since been intricately linked to the continuous conflict in Gaza. Moreover, the conflict in Gaza served to strengthen the right-wing faction within Netanyahu's government coalition, which staunchly advocated for a hardline approach towards the Palestinian territories and sought to establish firm Israeli governance over Gaza.

This conflict in Gaza also underscored Israel's substantial economic, political, and military dependency on the United States. Without the financial, military, logistical, and political support from the United States, Israel would have been unable to engage in the conflict in Gaza. An article entitled "U.S. Aid to Israel in Four Charts," authored by Jonathan Masters and Will Merrow and published in the Council on Foreign Relations highlighted that, "since the outset of Israel's conflict with Hamas on October 7, 2023, the United States has enacted legislation providing a minimum of $12.5 billion in military aid to Israel, which encompasses $3.8 billion from a bill in March 2024 (in line with the current Memorandum of Understanding) and $8.7 billion from a supplemental appropriations act in April 2024" (July 31, 2024).

The United States: The Enabler

Alongside economic assistance, the United States has also extended political support to Israel in global forums, particularly within the United Nations, including the U.N. Security Council and other international bodies. The United States played a pivotal role in safeguarding Israel's security, notably during Iran's attempted assault on Israel in the spring of that year as retaliation for an Israeli offensive against Iran. The coordinated efforts of the U.S. military with other nations successfully intercepted the drones deployed by Iran to attack Israel. It is evident that the Netanyahu government regards the United States as a crucial partner for Israel's capacity to pursue the conflict and for the Prime Minister to sustain his political power. Retaining U.S. support is vital to Israel's strategic objectives, which revolve around influencing the U.S. president, Congress, public sentiment, and the subsequent U.S. presidential administration.

The state of Israel understands the role the United States plays in supporting its war plan against Gaza. Therefore, Israel has employed diverse strategies to secure backing from allied groups within American society, including entities such as The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), while also utilizing mass media channels. Further, Netanyahu's government is focused on influencing the U.S. political landscape, particularly in light of adverse public perceptions regarding the ongoing conflict in Gaza. It is common knowledge that Netanyahu wields more influence within Republican circles than among Democrats. While the Biden administration has encountered some resistance to its support of Israel,  the majority of the Republican party has unwaveringly supported Israel.

Hence, Israel's political strategy revolves around maintaining the support of the present administration, anticipating a subsequent administration aligned with their ideological stance, and ultimately securing an unswerving endorsement of Netanyahu's actions. In this case, Netanyahu and its coalition are looking for a second Trump administration in 2025. 

Hamas: The Evolver

The other stakeholder is Hamas, which has governed the Gaza Strip for almost two decades. On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a successful terrorist attack against the state of Israel. In the previous months before the attack, the interaction between Hamas and the state of Israel was minimal, with sporadic cases of violence. However, it was evident before the attack that the right-wing government of Israel had escalated pressure on Gaza and its citizens. Many analysts believe that the years of blockade against Gaza have increased dissatisfaction among Palestinians in Gaza, particularly with Hamas' rule. According to an article by Mark Green titled "Gazans' Pre-War Views of Hamas," published on the website of the Wilson Center, a survey conducted by the non-partisan research group Arab Barometer revealed that 44% of Gazans had no trust at all, 23% had "not a lot of trust," and only 29% expressed great trust in their government before the war (November 28, 2023). After the attack of October 7, 2023, support for Hamas and its actions increased in Gaza. The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research conducted poll research between November 22, 2023, and December 2, 2023, in Gaza and the West Bank and found that 72% of the public believed that Hamas's decision to launch the October 7 attack was correct. 

The same study highlighted that 53% of Palestinians interviewed believed that Israel's war objective is to destroy the Gaza Strip and kill or expel its residents. Another study conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research between May and June of the same year revealed that more than 60% of Gazans report having lost family members in the current war on Gaza, yet two-thirds of the public continue to support the October 7 attack, with 80% believing it put the Palestinian issue at the center of global attention (https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/980.). Despite the destruction caused by the state of Israel in Gaza, the determination of the Palestinian people is apparent in bringing to the forefront of international public opinion the dire socioeconomic conditions they faced due to the actions of the state of Israel even before the attack of October 7. 

In this situation, Hamas' strategy might appear counterproductive in the short term as it could provoke a strong response from Israel, as it did. Nevertheless, it is a strategic move in the long term to bring the matter to the international community's attention. Another goal of Hamas is to break free from the isolation imposed by major players, including the United States and Israel. To counter this, Hamas has implemented a comprehensive media strategy to shape the perception of the organization and Gaza amid the ongoing conflict. Like the Anti-War Movement and Prime Minister Netanyahu, Hamas is pursuing a political strategy to influence not only American public opinion but also to exert pressure on the U.S. presidential election. To achieve this, Hamas has supported protests worldwide, particularly in the United States, as statements from senior Hamas officials when the crackdown of protests in the US occurred in the early stages” (O’Connor, T., 2024, April 26).

While Hamas and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank acknowledge the strong support for Israel from the U.S. political establishment, as evidenced by public statements from President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, they also recognize that a Republican administration like Trump's would seek to isolate Hamas further and take a harsh stance against the organization. This view is also shared by Hamas' ally, Iran, which directly experienced the so-called maximum pressure strategy developed by the Trump administration. Essentially, although not explicitly stated, the outcome of the November election may shape the next phase of global relations. While the stakeholders mentioned above are crucial players, there are other actors who could potentially impact the current conflict in Gaza. Russia, Iran, China, Saudi Arabia, and India possess international leverage to influence the conflict, but they have thus far opted to play a minimal role. Notably, China's foreign minister recently facilitated a meeting where the various political factions within Palestinian society agreed to cooperate..

Conclusion

In conclusion, in the aftermath of the Hamas terrorist attack and subsequent disproportionate response from Israel, Gaza has seen a devastating loss of over 39,000 lives, predominantly civilians. It has led to a diverse range of strategies and tactics being employed by various stakeholders involved in the conflict. Despite their differing interests and ultimate goals, each stakeholder has sought to shape American public opinion in anticipation of the upcoming U.S. election in November. It is evident that Israel's ability to sustain the conflict hinges on substantial American financial, military, and political support. Meanwhile, Palestinian families are enduring severe hardships, including scarcity of food, water, and shelter, while living in constant fear for their safety or fearing the death of their loved ones at any moment. It's crucial for the international community to recognize this perspective in order to avoid repeating past mistakes.

__

Virgilio O Aran is a Labor and Policy Organizer. He graduated from Hunter College and Cornell University.

REFERENCES

Green, M. A. (2023, November 28). Gazans’ pre-war views of Hamas. Wilson Center. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/blog-post/gazans-pre-war-views-hamas . The latest date article revised: July 19, 2024

Masters, J., & Merrow, W. (2024, May 31). U.S. aid to Israel in four charts. Council on Foreign Relations. https://www.cfr.org/article/us-aid-israel-four-charts#:~:text=Since%20the%20start%20of%20Israel’s,appropriations%20act%20in%20April%202024. 

O’Connor, T. (2024, April 26). Hamas slams US crackdown on pro-Palestinian college protests. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/hamas-slams-us-crackdown-pro-palestinian-college-protests-1893962 

The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. (2023, December 13). Public opinion poll no (90). PCPSR. https://pcpsr.org/en/node/963.   This poll was conducted between November 22 and December 2, 2023, in cooperation with the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung in Ramallah and the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

The Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. (2024a, June 12). Press release: Public opinion poll no (92). PCPSR. https://www.pcpsr.org/en/node/980. This poll was conducted between May 26, 2024, and June 1, 2024, in cooperation with the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung in Ramallah and the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PSR) in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

Reuters. (2024, July 25). Explainer: Gaza death toll: How many Palestinians has Israel’s campaign killed? | reuters. Explainer: Gaza death toll: how many Palestinians has Israel’s campaign killed? https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-death-toll-how-many-palestinians-has-israels-campaign-killed-2024-07-25/ 

DISCLAIMER; The author's opinions and ideas are his own, and not necessarily those of Esendom.

.