Israel is losing the diplomatic war

Editorial: The destruction in Gaza has been almost without pause for two months, yet the war is not going well for Israel – either on the ground or in the international arena

Benjamin Netanyahu should understand very well by now that he cannot take international support for granted (AP)

If the secret to successful diplomacy is, as Theodore Roosevelt famously urged, to speak softly and carry a big stick, then the present US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, has at least gotten halfway towards a balanced approach to the war in Gaza.

In his typically understated manner, Mr Blinken has said something very powerful about the manner in which Israel is conducting its military operations. Speaking in Washington on his return from his last mission to the region, Mr Blinken was consistent and clear: “It remains imperative that Israel put a premium on civilian protection … There does remain a gap between exactly what I said when I was there, the intent to protect civilians, and the actual results that we’re seeing on the ground.”

Flanked by David Cameron, who seems to have boosted Britain’s presence on the world stage and is making some influence on American policy, the softly spoken message to Benjamin Netanyahu needed little decoding. America will stand with Israel and “have its back”, in President Biden’s phrase – but its crucial diplomatic and military support cannot be given entirely unconditionally.

In recent weeks, it has been Lord Cameron who has been the more outspoken in saying the number of Palestinian casualties is simply too high, and now Mr Blinken has done much the same. It is not always apparent that international humanitarian laws have been observed (by either side), nor that the Israeli campaign has been proportionate, notwithstanding the sadistic horrors of 7 October.

Mr Blinken is yet to follow Lord Cameron’s example and publicly condemn the violence used by Israeli settlers against Palestinian civilians on the West Bank, but no doubt he’ll have voiced similar US disquiet more privately. The decision by Republicans in the Senate to vote down the aid package to Ukraine, which also authorised funds for Israel and Gaza, should also concentrate minds in Jerusalem about war aims and how to achieve them.

At this distance from the 7 October attacks, the scale of those atrocities is not diminished by the passage of a little time, nor does it erode Israel’s sovereign right to defend itself against aggression and the murder and mutilation of civilians and, indeed, its soldiers. However, what is far less clear is how the siege and constant bombardment of Gaza, with all the civilian casualties that have ensued, serve to promote Israeli security and the longer-term prospects for peace.

Some Hamas facilities seem to have been located, weaponry captured, intelligence gathered and fighters detained. Yet the military leaders of Hamas, and of assorted other militias, seem to have eluded the Israeli tanks, and the top political leadership of Hamas is mostly living in some comfort in Qatar.

Meanwhile, a disturbing proportion of the casualties in Gaza are children and babies, and their deaths and their misery are transmitted to the world’s screens, provoking outrage. Of course, all of these infants would all be alive and untroubled by Israeli firepower had Hamas not launched its gruesomely planned terrorist assaults two months ago.

It is also the case that Hamas are content to use innocent Gazans as human shields, and to abuse the sanctity of hospitals – war crimes. Yet Mr Blinken’s point remains. The dissonance between Israel’s avowed intention to minimise civilian casualties and the reality on the ground is all too apparent.

As far as can be judged, Mr Netanyahu has not formulated a clear war aim beyond the (unrealistic) desire to “destroy” Hamas, secure its “unconditional surrender”, and rescue the hostages. He has not done so to Israel’s friends and allies, including the United States, nor to the Arab states in the Middle East previously on constructive terms with Israel, and not even to the people of his nation. As has been pointed out many times, on the basis of long and bitter experience, even if Hamas was somehow cowed and broken in this war, some other militant group of terrorists would emerge to take their place, and the cycle of violence would continue for decades more.

The destruction and dislocation in Gaza is on a near-nuclear scale, yet the war is not going well for Israel – either on the ground or in the international arena. The UN secretary general, Antonio Guterres, has taken the extraordinary step of invoking Article 99 of the UN Charter and convened the Security Council to discuss the threat to world peace.

One of Israel’s newer regional friends, the United Arab Emirates, with which it recently forged full diplomatic relations, has tabled a motion calling for an urgent humanitarian ceasefire. It is a problematic approach, given the reluctance of Hamas to give up violence; but one that is gaining traction and, given the humanitarian crisis, one that would save lives. Certainly, it might lead to the release of more Israeli and other hostages held by Hamas.

Conditions in Gaza are obviously appalling, with the growing threat of an outbreak of cholera. The plight of the Palestinians is felt by people across the world. The war is consequently provoking protest and conflict in places far removed from the refugee camps, and the danger of regional escalation, drawing in Iran, Turkey and the Gulf states, remains. None of that helps the people of Israel to live in peace.

For the moment, America, loyal to Israel, is prepared to veto any such resolutions at Security Council level. But Mr Netanyahu should understand very well by now that he cannot take such support for granted.