A combination of two intertwined tendencies is driving the behavior of Benjamin Netanyahu’s Israel: absolute exceptionalism and pre-emptive-ness that feeds on assumptions of the worst intentions.
Exceptionalism, in this sense, amounts to suspending the ordinary, with its laws and norms, and considering the capacity to impose this suspension an exclusive right reserved only to the party behind it. Meanwhile, the world is split into absolute enemies and absolute friends, with nothing in between.
Pre-emptive-ness, on the other hand, means assuming that the (Palestinian or Arab) "other" is inherently fundamentally evil and proceeding to behave accordingly. As a result of this tendency that borders on conspiratorial consciousness, there is no space for taking risks or experimenting with pursuits of peace. The cost of pessimism about the other, even when that pessimism turns out to be unfounded, remains far lower than the cost of optimism, since optimism, by definition, is never tenable.
These two tendencies have developed in sync with the Israeli assumption that the Palestinians have never wanted peace and never will, while most Arabs are highly skeptical of any peace that goes beyond a cold one. For this reason, plans for the future should not constrain the use of force, as there will be no future "between us and them" to begin with.
This view has grown increasingly prominent within the Israeli state, as its political equivalent has moved over the past quarter-century from an extreme to a more extreme government. On the Palestinian and broader Levantine front, this shift coincided with the empowerment of militias and the Iranian-Syrian axis managing to impose a veto on proposed and hypothetical peace initiatives.
As for the behavior that this worldview engenders, it is the prioritization of pure violence and building Israel’s relationship with the other on crime and killing. This is how the Jewish state deals with Palestinians, especially in Gaza, but also its immediate geographic surroundings, while indifference and contempt shape its relationship with a world that is on its potential list of "enemies."
And when wars reach this level of savagery, especially those least concerned with any law, a new kind of "wisdom" spreads. Its commonplace formulation, both metaphorical and literal: the children be killed, even the babies; giving them a chance at life is giving them a chance to grow up to become an enemy who will kill us. It is from this kind of mindset that slogans and chants of some of the most extreme Israelis, like "There are no innocents in Gaza," emerge, as does Israel's policy of greeting the political shifts in Lebanon and Syria with iron and fire.
Today’s world- where the notions of law and justice are on the back foot, where the US has granted Israel virtually absolute freedom of action, and where the principles of universality, shared humanity, and solidarity with the vulnerable are receding- leaves us in a deadlock the likes of which only a few peoples or nations have ever faced. Wars and resistance movements against Israel have no place on the agenda, and bridging the technological gap with Israel seems equally impossible, as does the Palestinians garnering the support of strong international allies in their struggle. As for the path of politics and diplomacy- the only one left- it is winding, difficult, narrow, and humiliating.
With the countries of the Levant being destroyed, Gaza evaporating, and Israeli troops setting up encampments near Damascus, the cultural and intellectual environment faces a burning question: What can we do?
Of course, some are determined to stick to the denunciations and lampoons; drawn from the reservoir of old rhetoric to develop formulations, coming up with colorful insults is the only creative exercise behind this rhetoric. Moreover, it has become extremely clear that, apart from invoking the spirit of “resistance” ancestors, these masters of prose have no practical suggestions for how to address our current state of affairs. In truth, the most we can do- at least in this environment- is to reexamine the past and the role it has played in leading us to this catastrophe, and then try to draw conclusions that could deepen our understanding of what happened while also seeking to spare the future from pains of the present. Meanwhile, it is left to politicians- who, dismal as they may be, are nonetheless ahead of the intellectuals- to take the harsh, narrow, and humiliating path of politics and diplomacy.
Only politicians, however modest their means, are capable of obtaining the necessary and possible. That is, only they can bring the current phase, with all its dynamics and implications, to a close, thereby creating space that new elements could fill- with the passage of time, by chance, or through an unpredictable reshuffling of cards. “The breadth of our eyesight” reveals “the short reach of our hand,” as the saying goes, and the state of the three administrations- Palestinian, Syrian, and Lebanese- suggests that closing this current chapter, along with how its grinding balance of power operates, is the inescapable starting point. Mind you, the only faint “glimmer of hope” is far away, weak, and far from guaranteed. The politicians of these three administrations are not “traitors” or “collaborators.” Rather, like the rest of us, they are in a deep hole and are struggling, very arduously, to climb out. As for Hamas and Hezbollah, who helped Israel dig this hole and drag us all into it, their refusal to surrender their arms or acknowledge defeat is perpetuating this phase that must end. Their intransigence allows Israel to continue pursuing its strategy where all horizons are closed off, our hole is deepened, and exceptionalism, and preemptive aggression are imposed.
