Some conflicts must be fought to their bitter end

The reaction of many world leaders in the immediate aftermath of Hamas’ October 7 attack was to express unequivocal support for Israel, its Prime Minister, and even the Jewish People. Within a week, however, some of those same leaders began calling for “restraint”, warning that unless the conflict’s “root causes” are addressed the “cycle of violence” will continue. We’ve heard it all before, and in a sense, these voices are correct: there is a root cause that must be confronted, but it isn’t what they think.

The real cause of the ongoing “cycle of violence” is the flawed peace process itself.

The sad truth is that to have a durable peace, some conflicts must be fought to their bitter end. History is replete with instances where disputes were settled, for better or worse, through armed conflict. The U.S. Revolutionary and Civil Wars are two clear examples, as is World War II.

Winston Churchill knew this. Resisting pressure to reach an accommodation with Germany after the fall of France in 1940, Churchill declared that his policy would be to wage war “in spite of all terror… however long and hard the road may be.” He warned that without victory, “the whole world… including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.”

What did victory look like? Speaking to representatives of Allied governments the following year Churchill elaborated: “Every trace of Hitler’s footsteps, every stain of his infected and corroding fingers will be sponged and purged and, if need be, blasted from the surface of the earth.”

Churchill understood that the issue between Germany and the democracies was not political or territorial, but rather the ideology of the Nazi regime and the character of its leaders. It was this ideology and character that drove Germany’s policy and shaped its agenda. Churchill knew that peace with Germany was impossible so long as the National Socialists were in charge, no matter what concessions they accepted or treaties they signed. The reconstruction and rehabilitation of Europe could only come with their total annihilation.

Similarly, the issue between Israel and Hamas is neither political, nor territorial, but the ideology of the organization and the character of its leaders. “The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them,” reads Hamas’ founding charter. “There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.”

For Israelis – and by extension Jews – the threat posed by Hamas and its allied organizations is not theoretical. The events of October 7 are ample evidence of Hamas’ commitment to this genocidal program.

Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was supposed to help secure peace. It did nothing of the sort. Instead, Israelis have been subjected to regular rocket attacks and innumerable terrorist incursions launched from the region. Israel has fought no fewer than five major engagements with Hamas since that group took power in Gaza in 2006 and purged (murdered) its political opponents. Each time Israel has refrained – in response to international pressure – from taking measures to destroy its enemy. Each time, Hamas was left to rebuild and strengthen its capacity to indulge its lust for Jewish blood.

These facts call into question the viability of the much-cherished “peace process” as it is currently envisioned. To repeat: the goal of Hamas and its followers is not Palestinian statehood, but the elimination of Jewish statehood and the eradication of Jews “from the river to the sea.” There is no middle ground from which a serious negotiation can be conducted, let alone a durable peace built. Yet a hopelessly clueless international community continues to indulge the fantasy that there is, pressuring Israel to accept a status quo within which the real casus belli festers until the next major eruption.

The bottom line is that the conflict will never be resolved until Hamas and its allies are decisively defeated and their ideology repudiated. Only then will conditions exist for a “peace process” to potentially bear fruit.

Any discussion of the current fighting must acknowledge the ordeal Gaza civilians are suffering. But casualty reports provided by the Hamas-controlled “Ministry of Health” need to be taken with the proverbial “grain of salt”. Setting aside their overall trustworthiness, conspicuously absent in these reports are details regarding how many casualties are combatants and how many are genuine civilians. I use the word genuine here because most Hamas fighters do not wear uniforms or other items clearly identifying them as combatants. This itself is a serious violation of the rules of armed conflict that endangers the lives of civilians by making the job of distinguishing between them and non-civilians extremely difficult.

Another unpleasant factor not fully appreciated or accounted for is the role “children” – by our privileged, and somewhat naive and insulated, understanding of the term – play in the fighting. If a 15-year-old boy armed with an AK-47 participates in combat and is killed, how should his death counted?

The point is this: While civilized people are right to morn the loss of life, not all those who have been reported killed are innocent bystanders, and it would be wrong to allow these feelings to veto the grim duty to rid the world of the scourge represented by Hamas. Failure to do so simply guarantees that the cycle of violence will continue, with both Israelis and Palestinians paying the price.