An unprecedented sea, land, and air operation was launched on the 7th of October by Hamas on the periphery of Gaza strip. Thousands of rockets were fired on several cities and settlements. According to the Israeli official sources around 1200 Israelis were murdered and over 200 were captivated. Following the attack, a “war cabinet” was formed by the Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu with Benny Gantz and the Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, and 300,000 reservists were called to join the military — the largest number that has ever been drafted. With the declaration of war, Israeli leaders pledged to “wipe Hamas off the face of the earth”. With no end in sight, the war that has been raging for over 100 days has since claimed over 27,000 lives, more than half of them women and children.

Why did Hamas attack?
Hamas has stated that the attack was motivated primarily by long-standing resentment of Israeli policy, notably recent outbreaks of violence at the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem and the expansion of the Israeli settlements. On several occasions, Hamas has also mentioned that the Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails are a “top priority”. In 2011, 1027 Palestinian prisoners were exchanged for the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. Now, over 200 people were abducted by Hamas following the operation. They believe that this could secure the release of all the Palestinian prisoners.

Hamas’ attacks also have a political dimension, beyond these rather ideological motives. Given the rapid normalization of Arab-Israeli relations and the growing inclination of Arab states to pursue peace agreements with Israel, as demonstrated by the 2020 Abraham Accords, the Hamas leadership felt obligated to respond. Hamas perceived the rapprochement to be weakening the significance of the Palestinian question for Arab leaders.  Indeed, right after the 7 October attack, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh would amplify this message in claiming: "we say to all countries, including our Arab brothers, that this entity [Israel], which cannot protect itself in the face of resistors, cannot provide you with any protection."

Most recently, Saudi Arabia's normalization talks with Israel were in progress. As Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman remarked during an interview with Fox News, “every day we get closer”. It is well-known that the normalization talks were linked to the kingdom’s accessibility to a nuclear program, so while Saudi Arabia had mentioned that there would be no normalization with Israel without a Palestinian solution, Hamas nonetheless felt that the prospects of a deal risked the long-standing demand for a two-state solution. Needless to say, Prime Minister Netanyahu’s remarks during a meeting of the UN General Assembly in September, while showing a so-called “map of the new Middle East" — which displayed the West Bank and Gaza usurped under Israeli territories — added to growing Palestinian skepticism regarding the intentions of the Israeli leadership.

Wider geopolitical ramifications
While the world is still to catch up with what is happening in Ukraine, the fracturing of Western support, and heated discussions regarding the future of the international system, what is going on now between the Israelis and Palestinians has added another layer of complexity to the ongoing turmoil many regional and global powers have found themselves contending with.

The predicament of the US is a case in point. The US has special relations and strong political and economic ties with Israel, making the latter a strategic ally. Lately, there was uncertainty among Palestinians officials whether the US can be a fair mediator, especially with the acceleration of certain policies and decisions that were implemented during the Trump administration like moving the embassy to Jerusalem. In the light of the current conflict, Washington has stressed on its affirmed and clear stance of supporting Israel and its right to defend itself. As Joe Biden, who has repeatedly said as senator and now as president of the US “if there were no Israel, we would have to invent one”. The US also sent the USS Eisenhower carrier strike group to unite with USS Ford carrier strike group in the Mediterranean. Weeks later, in November, a nuclear submarine was also deployed to the region. The US elucidated the deployments to be part of preventing the expansion of the war in the region, and to deter any possible hostile action towards Israel. Moreover, the US voted with 13 other members in the UNGA against a resolution calling for an immediate humanitarian truce, sending a clear message of its solidarity with Israel. While time passes and the war in Gaza continues however, the US position is put under increased pressure with a growing risk of escalation, and spill-over. With the election approaching, President Biden is also struggling to maintain the public support, particularly among young voters, owing to his policy towards the war.

The EU is too fractured over the Israeli-Palestinian war. While the EU leaders have sharply denounced Hamas' attack, they are struggling to maintain a coherent position regarding the war on Gaza, with some emphasizing Israel's right to self-defense and others emphasizing concern for Palestinian civilians. Indeed, in the early days of the war, European High Commissioner Ursula Von der Leyen faced criticism from EU capitals and parliaments of being biased towards Israel, and for failing to demand that Israel cease the blockade and its assault on Gaza in accordance with international humanitarian law. While all members except Hungary have recently called for an “immediate humanitarian pause that would lead to a sustainable cease-fire”, most EU members appear to still struggle with the decision over whether they should and to what extent to align their policy with that of the US.

China and Russia, on the other hand, have been closely watching the updates in the region. Since the beginning of the war, China maintained a rather muted and neutral stance calling relevant parties to keep calm and exercise restraint. Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning said in a press conference on October 9 that China opposes and condemns activities that harm civilians, and opposes the moves to escalate the war and destabilise the region. China also called for a large-scale and authoritative peace conference on the war in Gaza advocating for a two-states solution.

Moscow, similarly, to China, called for a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas as well as the restart of negotiations aimed at achieving a peaceful resolution. However, it has intermittently blamed the current crisis on the failure of US diplomacy. As President Putin claimed, "I think that many people will agree with me that this is a vivid example of the failure of United States policy in the Middle East,". For many in the West, this is hardly surprising since the developments in Gaza have provided Moscow with a rather useful distraction, diverting attention away from the conflict in Ukraine, as well as serving as a challenge to US and Western credibility.

How will it end?
The two-state solution is once again on the table for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian case forever and bringing stability to the region. However, Netanyahu has so far rejected the US calls for the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state. Instead, the Israeli government has designed a radical solution despite the cost, despite growing frustration for the Biden administration, and amidst global condemnation over the humanitarian catastrophe it has caused in Gaza. In the meantime, China and Russia are seeking to create a shift from the western-oriented system and advance their position. Both dynamics have important ramifications beyond Gaza. Forgetting that military means alone cannot create the basis for stable political solution will inevitably cause further suffering and insecurity for Gaza and beyond. And the geopolitical costs of allowing that to happen may possibly bring about a critical adjustment to the global system as we know it.