Eleven months have passed, and the war is still going on, with no one able to predict when it will stop and how. The U.S. veto in the Security Council aborted all attempts to pass a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire, and the refusal of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu aborted the conclusion of a ceasefire agreement through the mediation of the United States, Egypt, and Qatar. The agreement would have allowed a gradual process conducive to substantial change in the political structure in Gaza by marginalizing Hamas and enabling a reformed Palestinian Authority to control and administrate the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu’s pursuit of “absolute victory” over Hamas, and his insistence on maintaining an Israeli military presence on the border between Gaza and Egypt, and in the “Netzarim corridor” in the center of Gaza, made all efforts to achieve a hostages/prisoner exchange deal leading to a political process a nonstarter.

Hamas’s intransigence, including its insistence on the withdrawal of all Israeli forces from the entire Gaza Strip, also constituted an obstacle to securing an agreement. It must be understood, however, that Hamas cannot allow any act of reoccupying Gaza, and that its minimal condition is a return to the situation as it was prior to the October 7 attack. Netanyahu, and many of his ministers, in addition to present and former military generals and senior officers speak frankly about retaining some form of military territorial control over the Gaza Strip, reinforcing the Palestinians’ fears of Israeli intentions to reoccupy and resettle Gaza. This intention is embodied in the recent “Generals Plan,” which calls for the expulsion of the remaining 300,000 Gazans in the north of the Strip, including Gaza City, and starving those who remain to death.

The “Generals Plan,” means the continuation of the Israeli occupation based on changing the demographics of the Palestinian population in the Strip, as well as absolute Israeli control over the northern Strip and the destruction of Gaza City. It might also lead to the reestablishment of Israeli settlements in the area Israel has effectively annexed. The discourse of displacement, annexation, and settlement has become overt and prevalent in Israeli politics and applies to the West Bank as well as Gaza, as seen in Foreign Minister Katz’s remarks on displacing the residents of the Jenin refugee camp.

The war on Gaza, is an ongoing disaster for the civilian population of more than 2 million, with tens of thousands killed, and over 100,000 injured, and the total destruction of the Gaza Strip, must stop today, not tomorrow. And though the main victims of this war are the Palestinians of Gaza, the suffering of civilians on the Israeli side cannot be ignored, whether they be residents of southern Israel or the northern border with Lebanon, where Hezbollah is conducting a war of attrition that forced the evacuation of more than 100,000 Israelis from their homes. Meanwhile, more than 100 Israeli hostages remain in Hamas captivity, with the assumption being that only about half of them are still alive. In addition, the impact of the war has reached as far as Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, where militias are trying to carry out attacks against Israeli targets in solidarity with Gaza.

The problem did not start on October 7, and will not end with a ceasefire. The equation has two parts. On the one hand, Israel cannot allow a return to a situation where its southern cities and kibbutzim will be under military threat from Gaza. On the other hand, the Palestinians, whether in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank, cannot continue to be forced to live under the Israeli occupation and settlement policy, which practically is uprooting them from their homes and land and settling Jews in their place.

To end the suffering of both sides, this war should be a jumping board for a political process that will lead to the end of the occupation, the eradication of any military threat on southern and northern Israel, and a resolution of the conflict on the basis of two states living in peace and harmony along the 4 June 1967, lines with a just solution to the refugee problem according to the Arab Peace Initiative endorsed by the Arab Summit Meeting in Beirut in 2002.

This may look like wishful thinking given the current high level of hatred, suspicion, and acts of belligerency, but it is the challenge facing the two sides of the conflict as well as the international community, which will also suffer if this conflict develops into a regional or even a global war.

In this issue of the Palestine-Israel Journal, we have attempted to evaluate the current situation, the future implications and prospects, and the role of the international community in ending the suffering of the two populations, quashing the threat of regional or global war, and securing peace.