As soon as the widespread devastation from Hamas became known, statements from around the world poured in to support the State of Israel. With Israel facing over 5,000 rockets from Gaza, shells fired from Syria and rockets launched from Lebanon, the region is a powder keg. Responsible nations must come together to reaffirm the importance of unshakable regional security and deterrence against terrorist threats.
On Oct. 9, 2023, leaders from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy did just that. The clear joint statement proclaimed: “Our countries will support Israel in its efforts to defend itself and its people against such atrocities.”
But can the international community stomach a prolonged war in Gaza? It is crucial that we do so for as long as it takes for Israel to eliminate the terrorist organization Hamas. The security and stability of the region and, ultimately, the world depends on it.
Israel’s mission won’t be easy and there will be more casualties on both sides. Hamas has a longstanding practice of using Palestinians as human shields and has threatened to kill hostages. Hamas purposefully stores weapons in densely populated civilian areas, reportedly putting its headquarters under the Al Shifa hospital. During the May 2021 confrontation, Hamas installed a military intelligence headquarters next to a kindergarten and rocket launchpads in a school yard. It also put military tunnels near a hotel, hospitals, schools, a mosque and even a school run by U.N. Relief Workers Agency.
Hamas has taken 150 people hostage — some Israelis, other dual nationals, including Americans. Hamas will use them as bargaining chips and as instruments of terror and manipulation against Israel and the international community.
The more recent atrocities committed by Hamas, similar to ISIS tactics, are frightening. Reports describe acts of sheer barbarism: whole families burned alive, people beheaded, babies killed, women raped and bodies mutilated. So far, more than 1,400 Israelis have been killed and thousands injured, with the number continuing to rise. At least 30 Americans have been killed and some are hostages.
In response, Israel will have to enter Gaza with ground forces. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken noted in Israel the importance of taking “every possible precaution to avoid harming civilians”; at some point, pressure will mount on Israel “to show restraint.” This will be the true test of who really supports Israel.
Let me be clear: Israel does not have a choice but to go into Gaza. Israel declared war against Hamas only after Hamas first declared war on Israel and its citizens. To protect its citizens from attacks not only from Gaza but from Syria, the West Bank, Lebanon and Iran in this crisis, Israel has had to mobilize 360,000 reservists. Thus, the most pressing threat must be eliminated, and the others effectively deterred.
Safe and unfettered humanitarian areas inside and surrounding Gaza need to be established to allow access for life-saving assistance and essential supplies, including fuel, to flow. But the aid must be distributed without diversion and without getting into the hands of Hamas. Egypt can help in this endeavor and provide safe passage for women and children as well as allow medical evacuations through the Sinai.
Israel needs to reestablish deterrence to combat this and any other existential threat for Israelis — as well as for the Palestinians. As the joint statement from the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Italy noted, Hamas does not represent the aspirations of the Palestinians and “it offers nothing for the Palestinian people other than more terror and bloodshed.”
Experience shows that appeasing terrorists only helps the terror entrench further.
In 2000, Israel withdrew from southern Lebanon. As a result, Hezbollah entrenched itself there and now holds significant influence in the country and partly controls southern Lebanon.
In 2005, Israel left Gaza. Hamas came into power two years later, turning Gaza into a launching pad for terrorist attacks against Israel. Previous ceasefires between Israel and Hamas have failed as Hamas used them as an opportunity to rearm and regroup.
Israel is now surrounded by the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Hezbollah — terrorist groups whose singular purpose is to annihilate Israel. In this, they have the support of Iran, which supplies them with more sophisticated weapons and advanced rockets.
However, Hamas has miscalculated. It thought that Israel was weak, with American support questioned. Israelis put their differences aside and are more unified than ever, evidenced by an emergency unity government that quickly came together.
The United States is also unified. Congress will come together in a bipartisan manner to replenish Israel with Iron Dome anti-missile batteries, munitions and other military equipment.
Hamas and Iran, perhaps, also assumed this attack would prevent the normalization effort between Saudi Arabia and Israel. Instead, this heinous attack should be an incentive to come together even faster and finalize normalization. The attacks orchestrated today by an Iranian proxy like Hamas against Israel could occur tomorrow against Saudi Arabia — just like when the Houthis used drones to attack Saudi Arabia in 2019, and the United Arab Emirates in 2022.
The USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group arrived in the Mediterranean with the USS Eisenhower Carrier Strike Group en route with two goals: show support for Israel and serve as a deterrence, so that Iran, Syria and Hezbollah back down from opening new fronts into the war. The U.S. has made it clear that it has Israel’s back — the international community should follow its lead.
Eddy Acevedo is chief of staff and senior adviser to Ambassador Mark A. Green, president and CEO of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. He was formerly national security adviser at the U.S. Agency for International Development and senior foreign policy adviser and staff director for the Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa for Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. This opinion is solely that of the author and does not represent the views of the Wilson Center.