The article accuses Israel of potentially committing war crimes in its conflict with Hamas, focusing on a siege on Gaza, airstrikes harming civilians, and evacuation orders. It criticizes the U.S. for not condemning Israel’s actions and emphasizes the need for diplomatic solutions. The piece argues that Israel’s approach could backfire politically and suggests that there’s no military solution to the conflict. It calls for the U.S. to exercise influence to deter such actions, asserting it’s in the interests of both the U.S. and Israel to prevent further civilian casualties and maintain regional stability.
Just out of curiosity what’s your suggestion?
It really has to be a question of what your end goal is. If the end goal is eliminating Hamas which is embedded in the civilian population, then the only thing you can do is to kill all 2 million people. I’m hoping that’s not a real option. Killing some will just give Hamas the ability to come back.
If your end goal is peace then you have to negotiate. Hamas has to release hostages and disband. In exchange the Palestinian Authority would rule over Gaza in a two state peace process. I think the only legitimate solution that both sides would accept is a two state solution at this point. Palestinians want their 1967 borders back and Israel refuses to do that…that’s the heart of this issue. Israel right now can forcefully take the entire region with the western world’s backing, so they see no reason to negotiate. The only way this could ever happen is if other countries twisted Israel’s arm and forced it to negotiate. I.e. sanctions or blockade until a peaceful solution is agreed upon. This is highly idealistic and will never happen though.