Context:
The assault on Israel bears a striking resemblance to events like 26/11 and, to some extent, 9/11. In both cases, there was a use of sea and air incursions into a sovereign state, coupled with coordinated planning and execution of attacks—similar elements observed in the recent strikes in Tel Aviv by Hamas.
Relevance:
GS2- International Relations
Mains Question:
States should not indulge in sponsoring or supporting elements that do not listen to established norms of dignified human behaviour. Analyse in the context of involvement of external non-state actors in the recent Israel-Palestine conflict. (15 marks, 250 words).
Involvement of external non-state actors in the attack:
- The training and execution of the attack seem to have external support, possibly from Iranian or Pakistani elements.
- While many label this as an intelligence failure, it’s challenging to detect an attack when planned and executed from a different country not directly involved in the conflict.
- The collaboration between Hamas and Hezbollah, two entities that don’t typically work together, suggests a role for external forces.
- Hezbollah, openly supported by Syria and Iran, may have played a part in the attack, making it difficult for intelligence agencies to anticipate its magnitude.
Usage of modern military by Hamas and what it points to:
- Hamas executed a well-coordinated attack, infiltrating Israeli military bases through air, land, and sea.
- Drones and paragliders targeted Israeli armored vehicles with pinpoint precision, suggesting a high degree of intelligence sharing.
- The use of modern military technology in asymmetric warfare, challenging Israel’s conventional capabilities, points to a well-coordinated effort with external support.
- Kamikaze drones, powered paragliders, and rockets, including Fajr-3, Fajr-5, and M302, demonstrate a level of sophistication, with Iran and Turkey known for their expertise in such technology.
- The hybrid warfare tactics employed by Hamas extend beyond mere military strategy; they serve as a propaganda tool, showcasing capabilities and determination to supporters.
Way Forward:
- Non-state actors, lacking responsibility and ethics, are not held accountable for human rights violations.
- The transformation of the Taliban from a non-state actor to a state actor serves as a cautionary tale.
- Responsible states should refrain from supporting elements that defy international norm
Conclusion:
The Middle East is poised for significant turmoil, and the repercussions of the conflict in Israel and the Gaza Strip are expected to extend across political, military, economic, and diplomatic domains.The Israel-Palestine conflict urgently needs resolution, and the UN should play a central role, despite its past failures. However, the shortcomings of the UN should not justify countries supporting or arming elements that disregard international law.
