The trauma of October 7th has cast a long shadow over Israel's policies in the West Bank, shaping its decisions and priorities in a profound way. This is a controversial and complex issue, one that has sparked intense debate and differing opinions.
The Impact of Trauma on Policy
Foreign policy expert Harley Lippman argues that the events of October 7th have left an indelible mark on Israel's leadership, influencing their approach to security and international relations. He believes that this trauma has led to a shift in focus, with physical security taking precedence over other considerations.
The Israeli government's recent decision to reopen land registration in Area C of the West Bank for the first time since 1967 is a direct result of this trauma-driven policy shift. With an initial budget of NIS 244 million, this process is expected to take years and has faced strong international criticism. Several countries, including Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia, have denounced the move, which effectively allows Israeli citizens to purchase land in the West Bank by declaring it state land.
A Pariah Nation?
Lippman suggests that Israeli leaders, after facing sustained international criticism for two years, have adopted a mindset where they expect criticism regardless of their actions. As a result, they are willing to take risks and potentially become a "pariah nation" if it means enhancing their physical security.
He explains, "October 7th was, in many ways, the most traumatic experience for the Jewish people since the destruction of Israel in 70 AD. It was preventable, and Israel's failure to protect its citizens that day has had a devastating impact on the Israeli psyche."
The Gaza-West Bank Contrast
Lippman highlights the contrast between Gaza and the West Bank. While Gaza has sufficient forces to mitigate potential threats, the West Bank is seen as a vulnerable area. He believes that the widespread support for Hamas in the West Bank, which far outweighs support for the group in Gaza, poses a significant threat that Jerusalem cannot ignore.
Recent polls and surveys confirm this, with 87% of Palestinians in the West Bank opposing Hamas disarming and a significant percentage believing in the abduction of hostages and Israel's lack of right to exist.
The PLO's Ineffectiveness
Lippman hypothesizes that many Israeli planners view the PLO as useless, corrupt, and ineffective. This creates a void that Hamas fills, giving it far more credibility, respect, and followers in the West Bank than the Palestinian Authority.
Holocaust 2.0 and Cynicism
Lippman believes that Yahya Sinwar's plan on October 7th, if fully executed, could have led to a second Holocaust. This perspective influences those who are cynical about the current Israeli leadership and their annexation plans. He argues that Jerusalem needs a buffer, and this mindset is understandable given the current vulnerabilities.
The Six-Day War and Yom Kippur War
Lippman recounts a conversation with a senior Israeli military official, who explained that during the Six-Day War and Yom Kippur War, Israel's priority was not to be known as the first attacker. However, Lippman believes that Israel must now adopt a proactive approach, as waiting and hoping to recover is arrogant.
He cites the close call in the Golan Heights during the Yom Kippur War as an example, stating, "Israel was almost cut in two. That would have made recovery much more difficult and led to far more losses."
The West Bank's Significance
Area C, comprising 60% of the West Bank, is a significant area of contention. Lippman claims that the West's focus on this conflict is due to its involvement of Jews. He points out the double standard, where the UN Security Council responded swiftly to Israel's actions but failed to do so when tens of thousands of protesters were murdered by the Islamic regime.
The Inevitability of a Palestinian State
Despite acknowledging the issues of radicalization and corruption within Palestinian society and leadership, Lippman believes a Palestinian state is inevitable. He argues that Israel must focus on winning the peace, not just the war, and suggests clear conditions for a Palestinian country, such as demilitarization and giving up the right to return.
The Role of Intellectuals
Lippman claims that intellectuals perpetuate the conflict by failing to grasp the resolution of wars, where one side defeats the other. He believes their emotions and compassion interfere with logical thinking.
The Diplomatic War
While Israel may have won the military conflict against Hamas and Hezbollah, it is losing the diplomatic war. The Trump administration's silence on the new West Bank policy, despite previous condemnations, suggests a potential request from Netanyahu to refrain from commenting.
Lippman explains that while the current Washington leadership may be more understanding, regional and global leaders are likely to be less receptive to Israel's reasoning.
The Impact on Israel's Reputation
The decision to further entrench control in the West Bank has the potential to rally radicalism worldwide against Israel, impacting its relationships with Gulf nations. Some argue that this is not in Israel's best interest, as it further isolates the country.
However, Lippman acknowledges that many Israelis prioritize physical safety over diplomatic relations.
The Way Forward
Lippman believes Israel can still turn the tide but criticizes its public relations approach. He suggests that Netanyahu could have better served his country by speaking about compassion for the Palestinians, presenting a more vulnerable and empathetic image to the West.
Final Thoughts
The trauma of October 7th has undoubtedly influenced Israel's West Bank policy, but the question remains: Is this shift in focus a necessary adaptation or a self-destructive path? What do you think? Join the discussion and share your thoughts in the comments!
