I'm thinking you're speculating a bit too much with too little information. For instance, you say Israel's strike near the embassy was a "deliberate act of escalation". I see it as a calculated targeted strike that they judged was worth the potential fallout. Put yourself in their shoes. If Israel can remove the top Iranian general who's planning attacks against them (through Hezbollah), then they set back those plans (or the quality of them) significantly. They did calibrate the strike quite precisely. So we know they carefully thought through what they were doing. They may have judged the Iranian response incorrectly, but it's hard to fault them without knowing the pros and cons they weighed in deciding to do the strike.
You also speculate that Israeli intelligence "allowed the October 7th strikes to happen". But that would be going against Occam's razor that would say it's more likely that they simply miscalculated what Hamas' plans were, and that they put too much confidence in their high-tech wall which Hamas got around quite easily. Just because they have reports telling them that Hamas is about to invade, doesn't mean that they believed the reports. Their arrogance got the better of them in my view.
But you make an error when you talk about the "IDF responding with disproportionate force". Would you have advised them to simply do a few small scale strikes and then go back to the way things were? And then what? Just wait for the next attack? And worse, allow international pressure to open up the Gaza "prison" enabling them to bring in even more powerful weapons to use against you next time? This is clearly a case where you don't want to push off the problem to some later day but tear out the root of the problem now. How many of their neighboring Arab countries actually want them to get rid of Hamas (though they can't publicly say it), because Iran wants Hamas to overthrow them as well?
Israel has been very clear about its intentions. It plans to remove Hamas from Gaza. To me, it looks like they just made a bargain with the U.S. -- we won't retaliate against Iran, if you allow us to go into Rafah. But negotiations in the Middle East aren't always what you think they are. They posture in part to get a better deal. So is the posturing real or is it a tactic? That's difficult to say.
It actually does not matter, why Israel struck. It was a deliberate action of escalation nonetheless. Occam's Razor is not actually a very good tool to analyze complex, or chaotic, decisions or rationales. A complexity theory would work better on this too. At the end, this has nothing to do with decision, but the information I've personally received, over many years, from Middle East intelligence community.
Well, the IDF response in Gaza has been disproportionate when you look at the casualties. I don't think you can root out Hamas by force. Genocidal actions just bring more support to it. They have been fighting for the same piece of land for, what, 5000 years. Maybe seeking a long-lasting co-operation and peace would work better.
I don't think Israel struck Iran just to make itself to look weak. There's something else buried here, I am sure.
I agree that the downside of killing lots of people in the attempt to root out Hamas brings more support for it, but the upside is that your enemy is less likely to attack you knowing you will wipe them out. If you fail to root them out, then you encourage them to do more attacks.
The question of course is what to do with Gaza after Hamas is defeated there. In my view, you have to give the people an incentive to build a future of peace, and to do that I think they should create two regions in Gaza. One where international funds would be used to rebuild it into what it always could have been given its amazing location along the Mediterranean sea, and all Palestinians who want peace would be welcome to start new lives there. Any who don't want peace or who plot terrorist acts would be moved to the other region - the one that would be effectively the prison like they've been in for so many years. In other words, they would only be in a "prison" if that is what they choose themselves. Hopefully, over time such a choice would cause them all to choose peace.
I'm thinking you're speculating a bit too much with too little information. For instance, you say Israel's strike near the embassy was a "deliberate act of escalation". I see it as a calculated targeted strike that they judged was worth the potential fallout. Put yourself in their shoes. If Israel can remove the top Iranian general who's planning attacks against them (through Hezbollah), then they set back those plans (or the quality of them) significantly. They did calibrate the strike quite precisely. So we know they carefully thought through what they were doing. They may have judged the Iranian response incorrectly, but it's hard to fault them without knowing the pros and cons they weighed in deciding to do the strike.
You also speculate that Israeli intelligence "allowed the October 7th strikes to happen". But that would be going against Occam's razor that would say it's more likely that they simply miscalculated what Hamas' plans were, and that they put too much confidence in their high-tech wall which Hamas got around quite easily. Just because they have reports telling them that Hamas is about to invade, doesn't mean that they believed the reports. Their arrogance got the better of them in my view.
But you make an error when you talk about the "IDF responding with disproportionate force". Would you have advised them to simply do a few small scale strikes and then go back to the way things were? And then what? Just wait for the next attack? And worse, allow international pressure to open up the Gaza "prison" enabling them to bring in even more powerful weapons to use against you next time? This is clearly a case where you don't want to push off the problem to some later day but tear out the root of the problem now. How many of their neighboring Arab countries actually want them to get rid of Hamas (though they can't publicly say it), because Iran wants Hamas to overthrow them as well?
Israel has been very clear about its intentions. It plans to remove Hamas from Gaza. To me, it looks like they just made a bargain with the U.S. -- we won't retaliate against Iran, if you allow us to go into Rafah. But negotiations in the Middle East aren't always what you think they are. They posture in part to get a better deal. So is the posturing real or is it a tactic? That's difficult to say.
Hi Dean. Thanks for these. Some replies.
It actually does not matter, why Israel struck. It was a deliberate action of escalation nonetheless. Occam's Razor is not actually a very good tool to analyze complex, or chaotic, decisions or rationales. A complexity theory would work better on this too. At the end, this has nothing to do with decision, but the information I've personally received, over many years, from Middle East intelligence community.
Well, the IDF response in Gaza has been disproportionate when you look at the casualties. I don't think you can root out Hamas by force. Genocidal actions just bring more support to it. They have been fighting for the same piece of land for, what, 5000 years. Maybe seeking a long-lasting co-operation and peace would work better.
I don't think Israel struck Iran just to make itself to look weak. There's something else buried here, I am sure.
I agree that the downside of killing lots of people in the attempt to root out Hamas brings more support for it, but the upside is that your enemy is less likely to attack you knowing you will wipe them out. If you fail to root them out, then you encourage them to do more attacks.
The question of course is what to do with Gaza after Hamas is defeated there. In my view, you have to give the people an incentive to build a future of peace, and to do that I think they should create two regions in Gaza. One where international funds would be used to rebuild it into what it always could have been given its amazing location along the Mediterranean sea, and all Palestinians who want peace would be welcome to start new lives there. Any who don't want peace or who plot terrorist acts would be moved to the other region - the one that would be effectively the prison like they've been in for so many years. In other words, they would only be in a "prison" if that is what they choose themselves. Hopefully, over time such a choice would cause them all to choose peace.