WAR WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION

The "indestructible cliff" has become the "protective edge" as predicted. There are hundreds of casualties, civilians are perishing, but it would seem that the politicians are not bothered about this, while they are resolving "vitally important" tasks pertaining to the fates of the State of Israel and the Palestinian autonomy.

The main aim of the Israeli operation has not changed, that is, the complete eradication of the military facilities and infrastructure of the HAMAS movement on the territory of Gaza. Properly speaking, this is not the first time of late that the Jewish state has attempted to fortify its "protective edges". The impression is formed that this is a systematic policy of bombing the Palestinians periodically every two to three years in order to weaken their leading radical force. After the "Cast Lead" operation at the end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009, there was an air war in 2012. And now, after almost two years, there is yet another "antiterrorist war".

The situation is recurring, but there has not been any radical breakthrough in the overall arrangement of the Palestinian-Israeli confrontation. In a couple of years, the pretty much defeated HAMAS has risen from the ashes like the mythical Phoenix, and everything has started all over again. In HAMAS, moreover, Israel is not dealing with a myth, but with a real political force, which enjoys considerable support among the population of Palestine. But neither in Tel Aviv nor in the United States which is backing it, are they taking this indisputable fact into consideration. The ever more serious Israeli strikes during the "Solid Rock" and "Protective Edge" operationare motivated by the fact that the radical Palestinians are firing on the territory of the Jewish State, not only with "Katyushas" rockets and locally manufactured "Qassam" missiles, but with the latest Iranian missiles capable of destroying any object in Israel, no matter whether these are military facilities or an international airport.

It would be difficult for Israel to withstand the hail of missiles, if it were not for the "Iron Dome" anti-aircraft defence system provided with the USA's help. Thanks to this system, Israel is managing to shoot down most of HAMAS's "missives". But in response "sky-rending" bombs are raining down on Palestinian civilians, whom, Israel asserts, HAMAS is using as human shields.

According to data from the Palestinian Human Rights Center, more than 80 per cent of the casualties caused by the Israeli bombardments are civilians, of whom 24 per cent are children. In spite of this,Tsahal [Israeli Defence Forces] Chief of Staff Lieutenant-General Benny Gantz is unrelenting: "We are firmly intent on continuing the "Solid Rock" operation and will fulfil all the tasks we have been set. The operation will continue as long as is needed for restraint to be restored so that the residents of Israel can have a peaceful life again."

Clear evidence of Israel's unwillingness to compromise is the fact that one of the country's prominent right-wing politicians, Reuven Rivlin, has taken up the post of head of state. It was precisely for him that most of the deputies in the Knesset [Israeli parliament] voted in the elections in June. A native of Jerusalem, a staunch opponent of ceasing occupation of the internationally recognised Palestinian territories, 74-year-old Rivlin has replaced Israel's president, Shimon Peres. Whereas the latter had the reputation of almost being a herald of the peace process with the Palestinians, but the Holy Land wasrepeatedly immersed in a bloody whirlpool of military actions, can we really expected some way of getting out of this Middle Eastern dead-end and the beginning of productive negotiations in the incipient period of Rivlin's presidency?

At the same time, the influential forces in international politics cannot or do not want to employ all the mechanisms at hand in the Middle Eastern peace process. Even the activists of Israel's Human Rights Organisation have stated the need to call a halt to the fighting as soon as possible, having sent an urgent letter to the Prosecutor General of the Jewish state on the serious violations  of international humanitarian law in the course of operations by the Israeli Defence Force in Gaza. The human rights activists stress that the alarm signals and warnings to the residents [of Gaza] do not turn their homes into legal military targets and do not relieve the army of its obligation to avoid random strikes on the region. Besides, it states in the letter, the breaching by the enemy of the laws of war does not justify Israel's own failure to meet its commitments to observe these laws. 

The UN Human Rights Council's decision to set up an independent commission to investigate the events in the Gaza sector may make a definite impact on the situation. But, taking into account the fact that the USA, the chief moderator in Middle East settlement, is opposed to this step, in view of the "one-sided and biased" approach in setting up an independent commission and describing it as "the latest in a series of anti-Israeli actions", the success of the UN Human Rights Council's mission cannot particularly be counted on. For the moment, the mission of US Secretary of State John Kerry, who has headed for the region to render assistance in bringing about a ceasefire between Israel and HAMAS, does not appear to be very productive. Butnews is coming in from Cairo where talks are being conducted that no marked progress, no specific results can be seen as yet.

Turkey's position with regard to the Middle East issue is full of paradoxes too. Ankara has scathingly criticised Israel's policy with regard to Palestine. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has, according to his own admission, ceased to have personal contact with US President Barack Obama, expressing his disagreement with Washington regarding the Syria-related problems and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Ankara is referring to Tel Aviv's action as "state terrorism" and "genocide" and is criticising the United States for supporting Israel. Moreover, Turkey has not in practice undertaken any particularly effective steps to support the Palestinian autonomy. To all appearances, Ankara, which is an ally of the USA and a member of NATO, is not interested in having any direct part in the conflict with Israel, and simply does not wish to take upon itself even a certain share of the responsibility for a Middle East settlement.

Nor can it be said that many of the Arab countries are taking any kind of constructive stance. The Arab monarchies are holding forth loudest of all on the misfortunes of the Palestinian people who are under Israeli occupation. But the actual value of their solidarity with Palestine is reflected in the amount of assistance granted by them to the Palestinian National Authority. While the "hostile Zionist regime" has allocated more than 300m dollars in humanitarian aid (since the beginning of the military operations Israel has also provided the Palestinian autonomy with fuel and electricity) since 2010, and the USA is giving the Palestinian Authority 100m dollars per year, the wealthiest oil countries like Saudi Arabia or the United Arab Emirates only send 20m dollars each per year to the Palestinian Authority. On the other hand, they provide various extremist organisations with hundreds of millions of dollars per year. The destructive activity of the latter purportedly in the name of "destroying Israel" is only making the situation of their "unfortunate Palestinian brothers" even worse.

Egypt needs to be dealt with separately. Not only the Egyptian radicals but also Palestine's HAMAS, which is considered to be a branch of the "Muslim Brotherhood" lost out when the "Muslim Brotherhood" government, headed by President Mohamed Morsi, was overthrown last year. The decision of the new Egyptian authorities headed by President Abdel Fattah Elsisi, on closing a number of tunnels linking Egypt with Palestine and playing an important part in the Palestinian resistance against the Israeli blockade of the Gaza sector is also indicative.

Against the backdrop of what is actually a lack of interest on the part of the most influential forces in world politics in finding a long-term solution to the Middle East conflict, the stand taken by the obvious defenders of Palestine is not able to have any cardinal effect on the situation. This applies to, let's say, Iran (the spiritual leader of the Islamic Republic Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has appealed to the people of Palestine to continue the military actions against Israel), the Lebanese movement "Hezbollah" (its leader Hassan Nasrallah has even stated its support for HAMAS, which has long been a rival of the Shiite radicals, and has expressed his readiness to collaborate with them "for the sake of victory by the Palestinian resistance") or far-distant Venezuela (whose president, Nicolas Maduro has instructed that humanitarian aid, "a solidarity cargo" should be sent to the Gaza sector).

Although the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is actually a global one, it needs to be recognised that the world community's stand is not playing a decisive role with regard to the prospects fora long-term settlement of the problem. The Middle East conflict involves specific issues, requiring their own solution. These are the status of Jerusalem, the problems of the Jewish settlements on the West Bank and the Palestinian refugees who fled their homeland back in 1948, and finally the main issue, that of setting up a Palestinian state. Unless realistic steps are taken to resolve these issues, a Middle East settlement is essentially impossible.

And there is another matter. Whether you like HAMAS or not, forthe Palestinians this is a real political force, which has to be taken into account. Implementing measures to eradicate HAMAS in place of this is doomed to failure from a strategic point of view and will only make a historic compromise in the Holy Land more difficult to achieve.

The current Israeli operation was launched soon after the two leading Palestinian organisations, FATAH and HAMAS, created a government of national unity. And Tel Aviv was "up in arms" precisely because this decision, which was contrary to the wishes of the Israelis who consider HAMAS a terrorist organisation, would legitimise the Palestinian radicals.

But even when taking into account that HAMAS's stance is in fact a reflection of the discontent of the Palestinians with regard to the status quo in the Middle East, measures are needed to ensure thePalestinian resistance's political policy is no longer a radical one andto spur on an all-embracing peace process. In any case, the issue of lifting the seven-year-long blockade of the Gaza sector needs to be dealt with first of all. Attention needs to be drawn to the fact that the HAMAS leader, Khaled Meshaal, refused to agree to Egypt's proposed ceasefire in military operations, stating that a truce would only be possible after the blockade of Gaza had been lifted.

So, an agreement has to be reached with HAMAS, just as Israel began to have talks with Yasser Arafat in his time, although he was regarded as Palestinian "terrorist No.1. The events that are taking place yet again, convince us that for the followers of the three monotheistic religions the long-awaited peace in the Holy Land can only be achieve through a full-fledged and all-embracing dialogue.