What would happen if the power imbalance in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict shifted?

Great Debates
1

I am specifically talking about Hamas (although it doesn’t represent all Palestinians, it represents all Gazans who seem to be the ones most affected by the conflict) when I say the power shifts to Palestinians.

Hamas’ charter calls for the destruction of Israel and the elimination of Jews, even to the extend in which the world itself for beg for the Jews to be exterminated (the tree will tell that a Jew is hiding behind it, what a nice tree though!). So obviously if they had the chance they would accomplish their dreams, or at least what their charter demands.

Israeli forces are criticised for killing civilians disproportionately fighting the Hamas militants in Gaza Strip, a very densely populated area so even with great precision, civilian casualties are bound to happen and since Hamas fighters are known to have used civilian uniform while fighting IDF soldiers it is ambiguous who is a civilian and who isn’t. Adding to this the IDF could wipe out every Palestinian in Gaza in a day if it wanted to but it doesn’t so obviously the situation when Hamas had power wouldn’t be same, since they take oaths to struggle against the survival of Israel…

But on the other hand, before Israel was created there was Haganah which later became IDF, it was the paramilitary Jewish force in Mandatory Palestine responsible for stopping Arab attacks on innocent Jews. It killed a notable number of Palestinians but after it became a state obviously, it became less hostile and more diplomatic. Some people argue that this point is the same for Hamas, after becoming a legitimate government they will cease terrorist activities since they will no longer be in oppression and change their “priorities” towards national-secutiry threats and self-defense. However, I don’t think it is the same because the Haganah was a paramilitary force of a bigger organization, call it the World Zionist Organization or simple a force created to protect Jews in Mandatory Paletine while Hamas isn’t a political party with an army at its disposal, quite the opposite (just like Hezbollah) Hamas is a militant (terrorist) organization with a political party at its disposal. ()I know Hamas is the politic party’s name and Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades is the military wing.)

So for me I feel like a second Holocaust would be immediate, what do you guys think?

EDIT: Sorry this probably should have been in Great Debates.

2

Moved to Great Debates.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator

3

What do you think Hamas will destroy first with those random rockets, the Israeli nuclear arsenal, the F-15 and F-16 figher squadrons, the Cobra and Apache attack helicopters, the Navy, the drones, the Cruise missiles, the intercontintal missiles or the Iron Dome missile defense system?

4

Barring some kind of epidemic that wipes out 75% + of the Israeli population, how would power shift to the Palestinians?

Anyway, is there a potential state of Palestine to which most of the population would be more loyal than to their various clans? If not, I figure any significant power gain with Palestine is just as likely to be directed against rival Palestinians than Israel.

5

Well, Americans are willing to suspend civil liberties and main, torture and kill for what are minor grievances compared to being walled off in ghettos and purged whenever the Palestinians get uppity.

So I’m going to go with, yeah, probably rather brutal reprisals unless someone helps get the Israelis out.

And as mentioned, this is basically a fairy tale discussion.

6

Several Hamas leaders have said that the 1988 Charter is no longer relevant, although they have some unconvincing excuses for not formally revoking it. That aside, the Charter states, along with all the anti-Semitic nonsense and calls for jihad, that if it ever did obtain total control of “Palestine,” it would be tolerant of other religions, and specifically Jews and Christians, as long as they didn’t challenge Islamic sovereignty (Article 31).

In other words, I read phrases like “the destruction of Israel” and “wiping it off the map” as political goals, not a call to genocide.

Up to you whether you believe that, but Islam does have a track record of being more tolerant to Jews than many Christian nations were, pretty much for the thousand years preceding the Balfour Declaration.

7

Emphasis added.

A little before that. It started eroding seriously in the 19th century with the increasing rise of ethno-religious nationalism, a process to which the Ottoman state among others was not immune.

8

True, but it didn’t erode so far that it was worse than early- to mid-20th century Europe, so there’s that. I mean, it sometimes boggles the mind to hear people act as if Muslims are the only people capable of atrocities in the last 800 years (and we have several examples of that just this week, in reaction to Obama’s prayer breakfast remarks), when there are millions of people still living who actually witnessed the REAL Holocaust, perpetrated by Christians following the principles laid down by Martin Luther.

9

Hmmm, a harmless and cerebral discussion on this topic? Egad!

Basically, the Palestinians are fighting for some sort of “fair” (definitions vary) settlement of grievances, specifically:

  • Right of Return (or more likely, suitable compensation and an apology)
  • Return to pre-1967 lines (perhaps some mutual swaps? Remove settlements that illegally occupy Palestinian land, or transfer the occupants to Palestinian authority and citizenship?)
  • end to the military occupation
  • use East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine. (i.e. part of their nation)
  • recognition as a full state.

Of course, being on the weak side of the bargaining table, they don’t have a lot of leverage. They have moral suasion, they have the Hamas charter, they have demographic progression, etc.

Remember that Hamas technically is the legitimate government - not because the Palestinians as a majority deeply want to exterminate Israel, but because Fatah was so corrupt that when the USA pressured for free elections, Hamas beat them in the polls. Be careful what you wish for.

As for the “exterminate Israel” clause, I would think this falls in the “Mother of All Battles” category of Arab hyperbole. Their mouths write cheques their ass can’t cover.

First, why would they remove this? Do you seriously think if Hamas said “ok, we don’t mean it, delete that paragraph”, that the Israelis would give them what they want? See how well that worked for Fatah. Second, conflict drives out reason. After a hard fought election, the two sides descended to pitch battle; Fatah arrested Hamas in the West Bank, and Hamas shot Fatah members they couldn’t throw off the top of tall buildings in Gaza. Anyone who appears “soft” on Israel risks death or dismemberment.

The last Gaza battle started not with Hamas kidnapping and killing 3 Israelis (actually, by some guys in the West Bank who were Hamas sympathizers, not on orders from Hamas brass); rather, it started a few weeks before that, when Hamas and Fatah came to deal, and in order to scupper it, Israel first started arresting Palestinian militants all over the West Bank. then they reneged on the deal to release prisoners, and proceeded to re-arrest some who had been released. Israel could not tolerate a united Palestinian government, that would risk the case for statehood gaining even more traction.

So, let’s pick a more realistic scenario. I’ve said this before. Each Gaza battle, every few years, the rockets get longer range and the accuracy gets better. Drone and GPS technology are cheap. Full computers like Raspberry Pi sell for $35. How long before cruise missiles are home-made? Iron Dome won’t shoot down self-guided aircraft zipping along at 200 feet. Palestinians in the diaspora will have plenty of opportunity to develop and test these things before passing the plans to the Gazans.

In the last war, the rockets managed to shut down Israel’s international airport for at day or two. What would better targeted munitions do?

Meanwhile, Israeli hawks seem to have been deliberately pushing to see just how hard they can kick the US in the nuts before the US stops supporting them. Every administration since Carter has been telling them to stop building settlements on occupied land. Baker famously told Israel “call the White House switchboard when you ar ready to listen.” Netenyahu today seems to be gambling the future of Israel that the Republicans will win the 2016 presidency - and that Obama won’t get too pissed off before then.

I think responsibility brings on rationality. (“With great power comes great responsibility”) I think the Hamas people will see the same thing. As long as Israel screws Gaza over, the leaders can blame Israel. But if they got everything they needed, food, money, imports, commerce - then suddenly people’s concern would be very different. People want law and order; they want education for their children, they want jobs, they want health care. If Gaza’s floodgates opened and they got these things, then it would be harder for Hamas hard-liners to keep control.

(This is my opinion about this; Sisi has bought Israel another 10 years or so, since they’ve squandered the last 20 or 30. But, in 10 years, its likely Egypt will have a populist elected president and congress who will want to help their fellow Arabs, open the gates and let commerce flow. Then what?)

The danger would be in the first flush of victory. It takes a while for the demand for good government to percolate through the social structure. During the first flush, the fanatical nutbars are still in charge. It’s in their interest to foment conflict, as their reason for being disappears if peace is reached. (Same as Israeli hawks) As a result, they will continue the fight as long as they can. Another reason why Israel should make a deal; if Gaza gets a decent amount of weapons… almost every Israeli solder is a reserve dragged away from a productive job. Gaza is almost 2M people, mostly young, and mostly unemployed. Who can afford to field a bigger army, and for how long?

it wouldn’t be a holocaust, but it would be a major mess and a lot of people on both sides would die; like whites from South Africa after apartheid, a lot of people would abandon Israel.

10

I’m not sure if this is what the OP meant, but if Palestine had the same power advantage over Israel that Israel currently holds over Palestine, then yes, I’d expect blockades, wars, and possibly even mass genocide of the Israelis.

11

I think mass genocide is unlikely (unless you mean something on the same scale as what Israel is doing.) The OP makes a very, very good point: at some point Hamas, or whoever controls Palestine, has to play like an international actor rather than a revolutionary government. Think of Saddam Hussein: he was a total dick, and murdered thousands of his own people, but still engaged in diplomacy with Israel.

12

Is this a new thing “mass genocide”. Is it like genocide but with more mass?

13

It’s genocide with force divided by acceleration and part of the new-old math.

As for the OP:

People are dreaming in this thread if they don’t think there would be a huge genocidal massacre if a group like Hamas ever got the upper hand. As noted above this is unlikely, but if it happened then initially they would run wild and the slaughter of Jews would be horrific. Possibly down the road, when they tried to become a nation state, they would back off, but it would be similar to Turkey and the Armenian’s, at least initially (and if Hamas COULD do whatever they wanted with such a large shift in power).

14

I think the Jews will be safe from extermination.

Desperation makes people resort to extremism. Without that, the Palestinians would feel they have the time and power to slowly encroach upon Jewish lands and would not need to exterminate them. As for Hamas, I believe their extremism is a reflection of that desperation, and mainly to inspire their own and project terror. I think they’d become blowhards with a few extreme elements, such as Israel is today, and most people would not simply start the drive of the Jews to the sea.

15

It’s a difference of scale.

16

If you mean “desperation to inflict one’s ideology on others by any means” then I agree with you.

On the other hand, if by desperation you mean “poverty and oppression” then reality is not on your side in the Middle East.

17

Let’s say hypothetically a truly ridiculous amount of readily-exploitable oil is discovered in Gaza and/or the West Bank, like a Kuwaiti amount…

18

There can be overlap and its not always a one-to-one correlation.

I think the Palestinians are desperate to have a working government and land of their own but for years they’ve denied that by circumstances such as the power Israel has had over the region, both economically, militarily, through the support of even more power allies. Such a situation will breed ever more increasing levels of extremism.

Of course not all ME states are poor, some are rich and idealogically extreme, like the Saudi’s. I would say that there are more than one path to extremism and theirs is not analogous to the Palestinians. I restrict the issue I’m discussion to the Palestinians only. They are desperate for want of homes, land, a government, and better living conditions. Such it is that has driven many of them to extremism.

19

Israel won’t need US aid any more.