Is the World and mainstream media Rewarding Hamas for Its Atrocities and condemning Israel for defending itself? (Part2)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HAMAS SURRENDER NOW- WAR GOES ON UNTIL HAMAS SURRENDER.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The call for Hamas's surrender is not a universally adopted issue for a number of complex and interconnected reasons, which are rooted in political, historical, and ideological factors.
1. Hamas's Ideology and Strategic Goals:
Rejection of Surrender: Hamas, as an organization, fundamentally rejects the idea of surrender. Its charter and core ideology are based on armed resistance against Israel. Surrendering would be seen as a betrayal of its principles and a complete defeat of the Palestinian cause, as the group defines it. From their perspective, their actions are part of a broader "liberation" struggle.
Hostages as Leverage: Hamas uses the hostages as its most powerful bargaining chip. A unilateral surrender would mean giving up this leverage without securing any of its demands, such as a permanent ceasefire, the release of Palestinian prisoners, or the end of the Israeli blockade of Gaza.
2. Diverse International and Regional Perspectives:
Political Alignments: The international community is not a unified entity. Many countries and political groups have different relationships with Israel and the Palestinians. Some, particularly in the Global South and the Middle East, may view Hamas as a legitimate resistance movement against Israeli occupation, rather than solely as a terrorist organization. For these groups, a call for surrender would be seen as siding with Israel and ignoring the Palestinian struggle.
Focus on the Humanitarian Crisis: Many international bodies and humanitarian organizations prioritize the immediate cessation of violence and the delivery of aid to the civilian population in Gaza. They believe that a call for a ceasefire is a more achievable and humane goal than demanding a surrender, which could prolong the conflict and lead to more civilian deaths. Their focus is on alleviating suffering, not on a specific military or political outcome.
Distrust of Israeli Intentions: Some critics of Israel believe that a Hamas surrender would not lead to a lasting peace or a political solution for the Palestinians. They argue that Israel would simply consolidate its control over the region and that a post-Hamas Gaza would not be a viable, self-governing entity. They point to the long history of occupation and conflict as evidence that Israel is not genuinely interested in a two-state solution.
3. The Role of the Palestinian Population:
Hamas's Popularity: While many Palestinians do not support Hamas, the group's popularity has at times been linked to its role in providing social services and its perceived resistance to Israeli policies. For some Palestinians, a call for Hamas's surrender is viewed as a call to accept a status quo of Israeli control, which they oppose.
Lack of a Viable Alternative: There is no universally recognized or powerful alternative to Hamas to govern Gaza. The Palestinian Authority, which governs parts of the West Bank, is widely seen as weak and ineffective by many Palestinians. As a result, a call for Hamas's surrender without a clear and legitimate plan for a post-Hamas Gaza is seen as creating a power vacuum that could lead to even greater instability.
4. The Practical and Strategic Unlikelihood of Surrender:
Military Futility: From a purely practical standpoint, many observers believe that a call for Hamas's surrender is a futile gesture. Hamas is a decentralized and ideologically driven organization. Even if its top leaders were killed or captured, the group's ideology and capacity for resistance could persist, as has been the case with other armed groups in the past.
The "Forever War" Narrative: Some analysts argue that a call for Hamas's total elimination by force is a strategy that leads to a "forever war" and that a political solution, even if imperfect, is the only way to achieve a lasting peace. They believe that military action alone cannot solve a deeply rooted political and ideological conflict.
In essence, while the desire to see an end to violence is widespread, the specific demand for Hamas's unconditional surrender is not universally adopted because it is seen by different groups as either unrealistic, politically biased, counterproductive to humanitarian goals, or a failure to address the underlying causes of the conflict.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HAMAS SURRENDER NOW- WAR GOES ON UNTIL HAMAS SURRENDER.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The call for Hamas's surrender is not a universally adopted issue for a number of complex and interconnected reasons, which are rooted in political, historical, and ideological factors.
1. Hamas's Ideology and Strategic Goals:
Rejection of Surrender: Hamas, as an organization, fundamentally rejects the idea of surrender. Its charter and core ideology are based on armed resistance against Israel. Surrendering would be seen as a betrayal of its principles and a complete defeat of the Palestinian cause, as the group defines it. From their perspective, their actions are part of a broader "liberation" struggle.
Hostages as Leverage: Hamas uses the hostages as its most powerful bargaining chip. A unilateral surrender would mean giving up this leverage without securing any of its demands, such as a permanent ceasefire, the release of Palestinian prisoners, or the end of the Israeli blockade of Gaza.
2. Diverse International and Regional Perspectives:
Political Alignments: The international community is not a unified entity. Many countries and political groups have different relationships with Israel and the Palestinians. Some, particularly in the Global South and the Middle East, may view Hamas as a legitimate resistance movement against Israeli occupation, rather than solely as a terrorist organization. For these groups, a call for surrender would be seen as siding with Israel and ignoring the Palestinian struggle.
Focus on the Humanitarian Crisis: Many international bodies and humanitarian organizations prioritize the immediate cessation of violence and the delivery of aid to the civilian population in Gaza. They believe that a call for a ceasefire is a more achievable and humane goal than demanding a surrender, which could prolong the conflict and lead to more civilian deaths. Their focus is on alleviating suffering, not on a specific military or political outcome.
Distrust of Israeli Intentions: Some critics of Israel believe that a Hamas surrender would not lead to a lasting peace or a political solution for the Palestinians. They argue that Israel would simply consolidate its control over the region and that a post-Hamas Gaza would not be a viable, self-governing entity. They point to the long history of occupation and conflict as evidence that Israel is not genuinely interested in a two-state solution.
3. The Role of the Palestinian Population:
Hamas's Popularity: While many Palestinians do not support Hamas, the group's popularity has at times been linked to its role in providing social services and its perceived resistance to Israeli policies. For some Palestinians, a call for Hamas's surrender is viewed as a call to accept a status quo of Israeli control, which they oppose.
Lack of a Viable Alternative: There is no universally recognized or powerful alternative to Hamas to govern Gaza. The Palestinian Authority, which governs parts of the West Bank, is widely seen as weak and ineffective by many Palestinians. As a result, a call for Hamas's surrender without a clear and legitimate plan for a post-Hamas Gaza is seen as creating a power vacuum that could lead to even greater instability.
4. The Practical and Strategic Unlikelihood of Surrender:
Military Futility: From a purely practical standpoint, many observers believe that a call for Hamas's surrender is a futile gesture. Hamas is a decentralized and ideologically driven organization. Even if its top leaders were killed or captured, the group's ideology and capacity for resistance could persist, as has been the case with other armed groups in the past.
The "Forever War" Narrative: Some analysts argue that a call for Hamas's total elimination by force is a strategy that leads to a "forever war" and that a political solution, even if imperfect, is the only way to achieve a lasting peace. They believe that military action alone cannot solve a deeply rooted political and ideological conflict.
In essence, while the desire to see an end to violence is widespread, the specific demand for Hamas's unconditional surrender is not universally adopted because it is seen by different groups as either unrealistic, politically biased, counterproductive to humanitarian goals, or a failure to address the underlying causes of the conflict.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 day ago
