FLASH
Shkruar nga Pamfleti
If Israel and the US have very different ambitions for an end state, this could undermine the US diplomatic position dramatically.
Israel's ambassador to Great Britain has insisted that there will be no Palestinian state and that Israel believes there is no prospect of a two-state solution.
But why is this significant?
The West - the US and Great Britain in particular - believe that a two-state solution is the only practical way to ensure peace after decades of conflict.
In the 1990s, Yasser Arafat, head of the Palestine Liberation Organization, and Yitzhak Rabin, then Israeli prime minister, signed the Oslo Accords - assisted by US President Bill Clinton. The Oslo Process began after secret negotiations in Norway, resulting in Israel's recognition of the Oslo Process and Israel's recognition of the Oslo Process as the representative of the Palestinian people.
The proposed two-state solution was based on the borders after the 1967 conflict, where the West Bank and Gaza fell under Palestinian rule and the rest formed the Israeli state. Although no final solution was agreed upon, all sides were rallying around a two-state solution, and Hamas has recently suggested that there would be merit in achieving one.
US policy regarding support for Israel was predicated on this desired end state, so the ambassador's statement is apparently in open opposition to 40 years of US presidential strategy.
What does this mean for Israel's military strategy?
Military strategy is directly linked to political objectives, so if a two-state solution represented Israel's objective, their military campaign would target Hamas but seek to preserve Gaza's infrastructure and minimize Palestinian casualties.
If Israel's goal was to expand the Israeli state, then the military objective could be to clear Gaza, level the infrastructure, create a humanitarian crisis, and seek to force the Palestinians out of the region, from the West Bank.
Regardless, this overt change in behavior puts the US (and the UK) in a very difficult position. The US vetoed a UN Security Council resolution that would have imposed a ceasefire to allow Israel to "finish the job".
However, if Israel and the US have very different ambitions for an end state, this could undermine the US diplomatic position dramatically.
Furthermore, this has major implications for the next phase of the war, not only in terms of Israel's military objectives, but also how long it will take for Israel to reach its end state of desired./SkyNews
Lini një Përgjigje