7/10 attack: a year on

Most conflicts around the world are forgotten conflicts. We reached a point in Afghanistan where many didn’t even realise we were still there. Even Ukraine has gone on the backburner. No news is… well, no news. The same even applies to the Gaza offensive. Other than the Iranian missile attack this week, the conflict has barely registered in the headlines for months. Even the hate marches on our own streets are largely ignored.

Still, though, Israel remains a preoccupation for domestic politics. The issue stalks the left as much as it does the right. For some, it’s the defining issue. The conflict has an unnatural and unhealthy grip on our politics.

That is not to say it isn’t important, because where an individual stands on the issue often tells us a lot about who they are and where they’re coming from. For starters, there's a bizarre division on the Right which hinges on whether or not a party supports Israel. I've seen plenty of anon X accounts refer to Ukip is as a "civnat Zionist party". That's usually a sign you're talking to a foaming antisemite with neo-nazi tendencies, addled with conspiracy theories about Jewish influence.

This is why I’m cautious of my dealings with individuals to the far right because it’s a horseshoe issue where the far right begins to merge with the far left. The rhetoric is substantially the same, with the same antisemitic motives.

Much of that frame of thinking, I find, is heavily influenced by American white nationalism, which is largely irrelevant to British discourse. You don't have to be a foaming conspiracy theorist to say that the Jewish lobby has considerable influence over US foreign policy in respect of Israel, but you can say much the same of Irish influence when it comes to Ireland, as we learned during Brexit. It's an American debate, and as such, is peripheral to our own politics.

Israel, however, will continue to be a divisive issue. Almost as off-putting as rants about Zionism is the cultish devotion to Israel in conservative circles. It seems to rest on who you hate more... Muslims or Jews. The Tommy Robinson crowd tends to side with Israel because they direct most of their ire at Islam. Tommy Robinson himself is often described as a "Zionist shill" - funded by the Israel lobby to create divisions between Christians and Muslims. The Joos are pulling the strings!!

There are plenty of good reasons to criticise Tommy Robinson, but that isn't one of them. If that's what you think, please get as far away from me as possible.

I'm more pragmatic in my approach to the issue. Whether or not Israel has a right to exist or not is secondary to the fact that it does exist, and will continue to do so as long as Israelis will it to. It existed long before I was born and millions of Israelis live there. The Israeli government takes all the actions necessary to defend its borders from attack in a manner I would demand from my own government in similar circumstances.

Fundamentally, this is Iran's war of aggression and Israel is doing a spectacular job of of shutting down Iran's forward operating bases. If Israel is engaged in genocide then it's the most incompetent genocide of all time.

As I see it, any nation on earth that suffered attacks such as those we saw on 7/10 would be obliged to put a stop to it for good. Moreover, no country would expect to sacrifice their own soldiers in a bloody ground offensive to do a job that could be done by aerial bombardment.

In any case, there is no guarantee that a ground offensive would result in fewer casualties given that tactics employed by Hamas, ensuring that civilians are in harm's way. The Battle of Mogadishu is an example of how much death can occur in a single day of open urban conflict.

The bottom line is that there was only ever one solution to this; the destruction of Hamas's offensive infrastructure. That could only ever be done methodically, clearing out blocks at a time and destroying the tunnels. To ask of Israel that it should simply endure continual indiscriminate rocket fire from an enemy sworn to repeat 7/10, is not a demand that would be made of any other country.

Further, there is no concession Israel could make that would lead to a lasting ceasefire because this is ultimately Iran's proxy war against Israel, and has little, if anything, to do with Palestinian statehood. This is entirely about the continuity of the dying Iranian regime.

There is no way for Gazans to prosper while under Hamas occupation, and there is no negotiation with a terror group that will simply re-arm and resume if allowed to. That Israel is engaged in a genocide is a fiction promoted by cynical forces, who know all too well how to leverage international sympathy from the gullible.

That Israel now faces further aggression from Hezbollah forces in Lebanon and outright attacks from Iran does not change the arithmetic for Israel. The state is duty bound to defend its citizens against external attacks, and it is not obliged to make any concession to the enemy. Hamas and Hezbollah cry over their losses, but that's what happens in a war. If you're not prepared to take losses in war, don't start one.

Ultimately, when the stated position of your enemy is that your nation and your peoples should be wiped from the face of the earth, you don't look for hidden meaning. You take them at their word. You then use every tool at your disposal to prevent your enemy from succeeding. Those who believe it can be done some other way, with fewer casualties, should share their military expertise with the IDF.

Opponents of Israel are basically calling for the dissolution of Israel. That's the only outcome they'll accept. That is not a negotiable position for Israel. As such, there is no compromise to be had, and must simply get on with the job of defending its borders from Iranian aggression.

I do wonder, though, if Israel's Western opponents have thought this through. Supposing the US withdrew funding and support for Israel and left them to it, Israel would then be under siege (more than it is now). There is no way it could integrate Palestinians and would have to maintain the borders. Israel only has to lose one pivotal battle on its borders, at which point, Palestinians spill into Israel on a rape-murder spree of biblical proportions, sparking a Jewish exodus, no doubt in the direction of Europe and America (not a great plan for antisemites), possibly to the extent where we see similar scenes to the evacuation of Kabul.

What follows, assuming it did not escalate into a localised nuclear war (which it almost certainly would), is an unholy civil war, making Syria's civil war look like a minor spat, displacing millions. As with Iraq, it becomes a magnet for ISIS style groups, and any sites of Jewish/Christian significance are bulldozed, and Israeli farms are trashed.

This does not look like German reunification. It looks more like Zimbabwe/South Africa, with similar levels of hyperinflation. Jews are thrown out of their homes, and anything that contributes to a functioning society and economy is trashed, and what's left is a dysfunctional basketcase, not unlike Lebanon, which then becomes a conduit for mass migration.

The idea that the territory of Israel/Palestine suddenly becomes a peaceful, tolerant, multi-ethnic, multicultural haven is about as stupid as the notion that it works anywhere else. It pretty soon becomes a kleptocratic Islamist enclave that can't even keep the lights on - and will still effectively be run by UNRWA for another span of decades. What replaces a largely functioning country will be an Islamo-marxist slum, plagued with starvation and illiteracy, and a festering cauldron of stone-age degeneracy that threatens Europe's security.

The entire issue, therefore, is a measure of basic intelligence. It is not in the national interest for Israel to be defeated. You don’t have to subscribe to the idea that Israel is “our greatest ally” to recognise the national interest. Nationalists cannot simply dismiss this as an irrelevant ethno-religious conflict. Isolationist neutrality is not a luxury we can afford.