Israel and Palestine: self and other, positive and negative; 2023
4 War
FIRST DRAFT (9 pages)
The phases of the war
Harming, suffering, reacting
Military rampage and military urban devastation
Headlines from October 7th and the following week …
… four weeks later
Israel and the military situation
Relationship value space: trajectories and scenarios
Were Pinker and Goldstein wrong?
What if …? … virtual history
The phases of the war
The phases of the war have been:
The October 7th attack …
… and the immediate aftermath in Israel
The preparation for the assault on Gaza
Going into Gaza
The ceasefire
Continuing after the ceasefire
Israel advancing right down to the south of Gaza
There has been associated violence in the West Bank and on the border with Lebanon and further afield.
Harming, suffering, reacting
“Intense violence, intense suffering, intense anguish … intense opinion”
That was how I characterised events in the week following the October 7th attack. And that is how I would characterise what has followed. Most of what I have written is rather abstract, but I do not want to lose sight of the horror of the violence.
Later, at the end of 2023, looking back to the beginning here is how I characterised it. The war has been terrible. And people have characterised it using terrible words. Looking back now I am characterising it as a military attack and rampage being responded to by military urban devastation.
Thinking about the self and the other, it is selves harming and being harmed by others.
Military rampage and military urban devastation
Military attack and rampage
What might be an objective, scientific, description of what happened on October 7th?
I suggest it is: a planned military operation with military objectives, combining a military attack with rampage-like consequences for civilians. Note that the rampage aspects were part of a broader operation and consequent engagements.
What might be an appropriate phrase? Can I suggest “military attack and rampage”.
In terms of the consequences for civilians it brings to my mind, the lone shooting rampages common in the USA, here however carried out by a military organisation.
Military urban devastation
What might be an objective, scientific, description of what is happening in Gaza? I suggest it is: the devastation of an urban area for military objectives with earthquake-like consequences for the inhabitants.
What might be an appropriate phrase? Can I suggest “military urban devastation”.
In my mind I picture the rubble and the encampments following an earthquake. I think of Guernica, of the urban rubble of World War II on all sides, both conventional and nuclear … and in more recent times Iraq, Syria, Ukraine …
“… increased air strikes, artillery bombardment and fighting … Israel’s military ordered evacuations in the centre of the strip … the ground offensive that has left the north of the territory devastated. Since the war began on October 7, only 10% of food aid needed has reached the strip. … the threat of famine …” (1)
…
Tonight, Saturday 23rd December 2023 BBC:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67809242
BBC Israel-Gaza War: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c2vdnvdg6xxt
Headlines from October 7th and the following week …
Harming, suffering, reacting, Saturday 7th October 2023
[Obs 1: The Observer, October 2023 8th, page 1]
“Hundreds die and hostages held as Hamas assault shocks Israel …” Obs 1.
“ … ‘It is judgment day, a nightmare’ ” Obs 4-5.
“Civilians pay the price in biggest challenge to Israel since 1973.” Obs 5
“West unites in condemnation and offers support as diplomats rush to deter escalation … Middle East on a knife edge as militants hail incursion and fears for civilians grow.” Obs 6-7
“Surreal images and a sense of disbelief as the unthinkable happens.” Obs 6-7
“Voices from around the world.” Obs 7
“Militant group aims to impose itself on wider Middle East diplomacy.” Obs 7
“Hamas’s murderous attack on Israel will be remembered as an intelligence failure for the ages. The advance surveillance of Palestinians makes scenes of gunmen moving through the streets all the more astonishing.”41
[Neither the leader page nor the letters page referred to the attack – presumably these pages were prepared before the attack happened.]
The Observer, Sunday 8th October 2023:
https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2023/oct/08
Times front pages: Monday 9th October to Saturday 14th October 2023
Monday 9th
Stunned Israel goes to war. Briton among more than 1,000 dead. Gaza hit by airstrikes as civilians taken hostage. Sunak offers military aid.
Residents told to lock doors as gunmen stalk streets. 9, 1
Tuesday 10th
Hamas: one hostage will die for every Gaza strike. Terrorists threaten to broadcast civilian ‘executions’. Israel bombards strip and cuts off water. 10, 1
Wednesday 11th
Hamas ‘cut the throats of babies’ in massacre. 11, 1
Thursday 12th
Israeli coalition ready to invade. Netanyahu forms war government. Troops expected to cross into Gaza next week. BA suspends flights over rocket fear. 12, 1
Friday 13th
Israel shows mutilated babies. Images alleged to be proof of atrocities. Britain sends two Royal Navy ships. Sunak hits out at protesters and BBC.
Saturday 14th
Disabled teen taken by Hamas. Vulnerable girl among hostages seized at festival. Million Gaza residents told to flee. Israel stages first raids inside strip
More harming, more suffering, more reacting, Saturday 14th October 2023
[Obs 1: The Observer, October 2023 15th, page 1]
“Israel warns fleeing Gazans: ‘the next stage is coming’ … US secretary of state urges restraint … ‘70 dead’ in airstrike on evacuation convoy.” Obs 1-2
“ ‘My mother sacrificed her life to save me from Hamas killer’ …
… Amid the heartbreak, teenager vows to honour his parents’ final sacrifice … “This is the largest pogrom since the Holocaust. We said never again. And we just can’t allow this to happen again.” Obs 1, 6
“My daily battle to dodge the bombs as death rains down … A Manchester scientist was visiting his family in the enclave. Now he is determined to stay with them.” Obs 2-3
“Sunak pledges backing for Israel – but makes no mention of Gaza’s plight.” Obs 3
“A ground assault will be physically dangerous and politically perilous … Israel’s military has superior numbers and equipment, but Hamas is well prepared and the humanitarian fallout could be costly.” Obs 4-5
“Fury grows with PM even as he seeks unity. … Netanyahu shares power with critics but gets public blame for security failures.” Obs 4-5
“Angry old men set the Middle East ablaze. The young will pay the price.” Obs 5
“ ‘I want to get rid of this ugly war’: fear grows in enclave … Palestinians fear armed settlers and Israeli military – and doubt their own leaders.” Obs 7
“British families from two faiths fear for relatives – and for their safety at home.” Obs 8
“Thousands marching to ‘free Palestine’ defy Braverman’s warnings.” Obs 9
“Lost generations trapped in Gaza’s cycle of trauma. … I have watched repeated Israeli military assaults. They only succeed in radicalising the young.” Obs 10
“The week terror changed the Middle East.” Focus Obs 39-43.
“This is a raw moment. Can we talk of injustice in the face of atrocity?” Obs 43.
“Victim-blaming is a crime to so many progressives. Except when it comes to Jews. There was no pause for pity as false narratives justifying murder took hold before the blood had dried.” Obs 47.
“Amid its grief, Israel must act with care.” Editorial Obs 48
“Saving lives must be paramount.” Obs 54
“Hamas’s barbarism does not justify the collective punishment of Palestinians.” Obs 56.
The Observer, Sunday 15th October 2023:
https://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2023/oct/15
… four weeks later
October 7th: is now four weeks ago
“Louk’s limp body on the back of a pickup truck.” Nov 1, 6
Four weeks ago, a Hamas armed force from Gaza went into Israel, terrorised the local population and killed over a thousand civilians. Three weeks ago, I wrote “8 books … Ottoman 1517-1917; British Palestine; Israel and Jordan”.
The continuing horror in Israel and Gaza has made me return to the issue …
… still more “harming, suffering, reacting”.
“Horror of bombs and blood haunts Gaza paramedics.” Oct 26, 7
Deaths in Israel and Gaza
https://time.com/6328885/gaza-death-toll-explainer/
The Times published a graph of deaths in Gaza since October 7th. It is approximately a straight line.
deaths in Israel, October 7th: Hamas attackers and their victims
deaths in Gaza = gradient x number of days since October 7th
If Israel goes into Gaza* then it is anticipated that deaths on both sides will increase.
Looking now at suffering, the numbers of those suffering is some multiple of the number of deaths.
*Some days ago, Israel started a few in-out incursions in Gaza and now has established a few small areas and now there is further expansion and intensification.
Looking back in time:
Israel since 1948:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_casualties_of_war
Israeli and Palestine, 2008 to 2020:
https://www.statista.com/chart/16516/israeli-palestinian-casualties-by-in-gaza-and-the-west-bank/
Israel and the military situation
Back in October I jotted down some general points about Israel and the military situation:
.(1) An insecure state
“Insecure Russia: the only country outside NATO? (not quite)*
Back in the 1980s the IR Theory Group of BISA held a seminar on The Insecure State. The two cases were the Soviet Union and Israel. It’s not really something one should joke about but the joke made back then was that the Soviet Union was the only country in the world surrounded by hostile Communist states. The reference of course was to the Warsaw Pact countries**. Israel likewise was surrounded by hostile Arab states.”
[Quotation from 3 Conflict and love … loss aversion and insecurity]
.(2) Military past
Throughout its history Israel has had wars with its neighbours.
.(3) Military present
There is continuing conflict with Gaza.
.(4) Military future
A main mission is to prevent Iran building a nuclear bomb.
.(5) A conception of national identity
There is to be a new “authority for Jewish national identity”.
.(6) A wider nation
Since its founding, military conflict has led it to expand its territories.
.(7) Increased population of Israeli settlers
A graph shows how the number of Israeli settlers has increased to 650,000 from zero in the 46-year period 1972-2018, initially in East Jerusalem and later in West Bank (and hardly at all in Gaza). Since 1990 the number of settlers in the West bank has risen linearly at the rate of 12,500 per year.
How should I think about the war? What should I say?
… Death, misery, destruction. These are the terrible things that are happening.
… The consequences of war. More death, misery, destruction.
… Action, reaction, reaction, ad infin … “Hamas planned this. They must have known how Israel would respond. They must have planned what their own response to this will be.” [words to that effect Monday].
… Recipient, action, actor, rule/value … death, killing, killer, rule/value. Do not kill. Do no harm.
… The causes of war. Previous death, misery, destruction.
… The initiator? The first cause?
… The trajectory … the alternation of war and peace, of low-level and high-level violence
… The balance of power, the balance of perpetration, the balance of harm
… The supporters
… The widening of the conflict
Relationship value space: trajectories and scenarios
Consider a relationship between two actors A and B and the value of the relationship to each actor. The value is created by their interactions. The interactions may contribute positively or negatively. It may happen that actions are reciprocated. Positive reciprocation and negative reciprocation are both possible. Love or hate; peace or war.
An arms race is an example of negative reciprocation - as modelled by Lewis Fry Richardson - who noted that his model could equally apply to positive reciprocation such as trade relations and love. His model dealt with the accumulation of arms in an arms race – accumulated negative value. In a war there is accumulated negative value associated with the accumulated number of deaths, the suffering, the destruction of cultural, social and economic capital, etc. Noting that truth is the first casualty of war, there is the reciprocation of untruths and their accumulation.
All this can be simply represented by points in a two-dimensional space, one dimension being the value to A and the other dimension being the value to B. A more complex representation would take in multiple dimensions.
Trajectories
The reciprocation of positive value leads to an upward trajectory of accumulated positive value, from A to D:
. D
. C
. B
A
The reciprocation of negative value leads to a downward trajectory of accumulated negative value, from A to D:
. A
. B
. C
D
The above two cases present the same simultaneous shifts for both actors, either both upwards or both downwards. Where there is alternation of actions between the two actors, the trajectory can have a stepwise appearance.
. x x
. x |x
x |x
|x
In particular, the first action by one actor can be positive or negative for the other actor, and if there is reciprocation, this sets the trajectory on a positive or negative trend. October 7th is a case of the latter.
Histories and scenarios
Histories are trajectories in the past and scenarios are trajectories in the future.
Scenarios
This section is prompted by a session on scenarios at the CRS conference at King’s College London, last month. In the course of the afternoon and working in groups we were led to formulate a variety of scenarios for the Ukraine-Russia conflict. It is a complex situation and there was an appropriate sophistication in the scenarios proposed. Shying away from the complexity I wondered if there was a simple abstract account of the scenarios. I also had in mind some of the two-dimensional diagrams used to illustrate cooperation and non-cooperation in two-person games.
Consider two actors, A and B, and the set of all possible events/situations/scenarios which can exist for the relationship between two actors. Each event has a value vA for A and vB for B. Consider the two-dimensional space for the values vA and vB. The first dimension is the value for vA and the second dimension is the value for vB.
. best for B
. |
. worst for A neutral for A best for A
. neutral for B
. |
. worst for B
The four quadrants are:
. best for B
. best for B, | best for B,
. worst for A | best for A
. |
. worst for A neutral for A best for A
. neutral for B
. worst for B, | best for A,
. worst for A | worst for B
. worst for B
Consider now the two diagonals.
The diagonal sloping up from left to right represents shared value: moving up the diagonal the shared value increases from worst to neutral to best. Positive reciprocation involves moving up the diagonal; and negative reciprocation involves moving down the diagonal.
The diagonal sloping down from left to right represents opposing value: moving down the diagonal, A moves from worst to best, but B moves from best to worst – a zero-sum game.
The Gaza-Israel war has moved the situation (further) into the bottom left quadrant.
Were Pinker and Goldstein wrong?
[Extract from my talk at the CRS conference in September 2023. I thought it was a relevant question in view of the war in Ukraine. Now, even more so with the Israel-Gaza war.]
We now end with a brief case study. Richardson was the pioneer in analysing the statistics of conflict and it was on the consensus in this area of research that, ten years ago, Pinker and Goldstein claimed that violence was declining. Now today, there is war in Ukraine … [and now in October, Israel-Gaza]. At this point I want to stop and ask you:
Does the war in Ukraine show that Pinker and Goldstein were wrong?
[Your answers]
Some of your answers are similar to mine – some are different. The points I would make are:
.(1) Pinker also said that other things were getting better as well. Is this the case?
.(2) Pinker gave reasons for the improvement. Are the reasons valid?
.(3) Pinker would say he was talking about the past, not predicting the future.
.(4) Ukraine is bad - but are other places getting better to compensate?
.(5) Pinker agrees it is not a steady decline – rather a saw-tooth decline, increases accompanying the downward trend.
.(6) World Wars I and II are examples of occasional upward movements … so might the same be said of the Ukraine war? [of Israel-Gaza?]
Battle deaths
https://www.prio.org/publications/13513
As well as the number of deaths, another measure is deaths per population. This was the measure that Pinker used. In the period 1950-2022 the world population tripled. Using this measure, deaths per population, earlier periods look relatively worse and more recent periods look relatively better – relative to the simple number of deaths.
https://ourworldindata.org/population-growth
Looking at the graphs … modelling the data
However it is not good enough simply to look at the numbers in the graph. One needs to model the statistical process that is generating the data. Elsewhere I have suggested a unit root model where the expectation is that war death rates stay the same but that the most likely trajectory is one of declining war death rates … and also an extreme worst possible trajectory and an extreme best possible trajectory.
Burt, VWSM Yearbook 2015 (2017) 141-151
What if …? … virtual history
Most historians are nervous about the ‘what if …?’ question. An exception was the collection of chapters in a book some years ago entitled Virtual Histories. My specific interest here is in situations where a violent option has been chosen. Let us ask the question: what if the violent option had not been chosen?
One case is where the initiator of violence, themselves suffer as a result of subsequent violence.
What if Hitler had decided against invading Poland?
What if Putin had decided against invading Ukraine?
And in our current situation,
what if Hamas had decided against its assault against Israel on October 7th?;
what if Netanyahu had decided against his goal of destroying Hamas in response to October 7th?
A virtual history
The Hamas leadership is meeting on September 7th, 2023.
“So, are we all agreed? On October 7th we carry out our assault against Israel?”
“No, I disagree. I think we all agree that Israel will respond with violence, but the rest of you think that Israel’s violent response will be at a level which we are willing to accept. Surely there is a scenario in which Israel, particularly an Israel run by Netanyahu and his Zionist zealots, will decide to totally destroy Gaza. I think we should avoid that scenario. So I say no to the assault against Israel.”
And this argument won the day. And there was no assault on Israel.
Another virtual history
Netanyahu’s cabinet is meeting to discuss the response to October 7th.
“So, are we all agreed? This atrocity must be punished. Never again must we allow Hamas to do this. Hamas must be destroyed. We must take whatever military action is required to achieve this goal. We must have total victory”
“No, I disagree. I think we all agree that we must respond. But our response must be measured. Hamas cannot be destroyed. At some point we shall have to negotiate with the Palestinians including Hamas.”
And this argument won the day. And there was a ceasefire and a negotiated peace.
This morning’s paper
Having written this I go down for breakfast.
Yesterday’s paper had:
“Netanyahu spurns truce and says ‘crushing victory’ is close” …
And this morning the editorial runs:
“Bitter end. Hamas’s threat to repeat October 7 means the Gaza offensive is bound to continue.”
The Times, February 9, 2024: 29.