Ziad Ibhais - a researcher specializing in Jerusalem affairs

It is no longer a secret today that the Zionist entity is waging its current war driven by the psychological need for revenge and to heal the wound of the bloated self that it inflicted on October 7 in the soil, and that this war of revenge does not carry the minimum vision, and therefore is unable to achieve the minimum military achievement: it has not liberated A Zionist prisoner by force, and the resistance’s ability to carry on the war for the 88th day in a row was not affected, and it did not achieve a strategic goal from the resistance, be it a leader, a tunnel system, or a weapons depot, and this is what makes it today a war of killing for the sake of killing and destruction for the sake of destruction. .

Even crime and mass murder in war are used as a means to an end: the annihilation of the targeted group or people, or their removal from the geography. In this case, the criminal usually resorts to legitimizing his crime out of its utilitarian effectiveness. It achieved its goals. It is a “useful” crime, and this is what makes it acceptable. This is a logic that the Zionists themselves had previously used in the 1948 Nakba and in the 1982 war, and America had used it in Iraq and many places before. But the dilemma of the Zionists today is that their crime is difficult to justify even with this logic. It is A crime that does not achieve its goals: It cannot exterminate the people of Gaza or displace them despite having the full intention to do so, which makes it a crime for the sake of the crime, a crime that has the full specifications for holding its perpetrator responsible and for his partners to disavow him, and this is what we will witness from today onwards starting from this war.

The basic dilemma that explains this inability to achieve the final goals despite causing massive damage to Gaza is the absence of vision in the face of the legendary stability of the resistance and its incubator. What the colonial powers have become accustomed to is to organize their use of the surplus power, technology, and equipment they possess in a theory that clarifies the goals, means, and tools. ; It is not content with having a great advantage in force, but is keen to employ it in a way that guarantees breaking the thorn of any resistance, while the Zionists today are unable even to define logical, achievable goals in war; Since the beginning of the war, their leadership has insisted on general goals such as: eliminating the resistance, displacing the people of Gaza, disarming the resistance, and liberating all prisoners by force, but the army, in its practical exploration, re-presents goals such as a buffer zone in Gaza, And the occupation of the border axis with Egypt...the political leadership is looking at the upper limit, while the army is looking for the lower limit without a clear horizon for imposing it. 

In the face of the inability to define goals, developing means and tools to achieve them becomes impossible, and betting on the effects of force becomes closer to gambling than to an organized plan: striking the opponent with all force, hoping that he will surrender, and with most of the strikes being directed at the civilian incubator and the inability to break the fighter’s strength, the Zionists are waging war today with the mentality of a gambler. The more he loses, the more he insists on continuing to gamble to regain everything he lost until he emerges penniless... Perhaps this explains today’s tolerance of society and the Zionist leadership to losses that were beyond their imagination until recently.

If this analysis is correct, it shows us the picture of the Zionist contradiction in this war: the insistence on the will to war despite its inability to achieve the goals. It means that the end of this war could come in one of two ways: Either a party concerned about the Zionists intervenes to rationalize their behavior and persuade them to limit the loss and put An end to the war, or they will continue the war until they run out of breath, and the end point of the war then will simply be the inability to continue it. 

The only party capable of rationalizing Zionist behavior is the United States, but the chances of that seem slim if we consider its continued support even for Zionist options that it does not like, its miserable experience in Ukraine, its inability to encourage agreement when it was possible, and its inability to prevent a reversal of war. To the extent of absolute loss; This leaves us with the second possibility: the inability to continue the war.

The inability to continue is linked to several indicators related to the army’s structure, morale, and equipment, the readiness and cohesion of society, the cohesion of the political leadership, and the continuation of international cover, but there is no doubt that they are not all of the same importance, and perhaps the central indicator among them is the ability of the armored force. The Zionist soldier does not accept to enter Gaza except in a fortified vehicle, and this is what the resistance has experienced well since the second intifada, and therefore it focuses its war against the armored force, because the end of the war will be imposed when the ability of the armored force to conduct ground attacks ends, and for this reason it also chose Kat.-! The Department requested that the anti-armor missile be named after its founding commander: the Al-Yassin missile, as it is the mainstay of war and the gateway to its resolution.

The Armored Corps has so far lost no less than 900 armored vehicles if we exclude jeeps and bulldozers from the announced numbers of vehicles targeted by the resistance. This is a number equal to half the size of the armored corps ready for combat. Which is estimated by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) at approximately 1,840 armored vehicles, given the exclusion of thousands of M-113 armored vehicles from the calculations after the massacre of troop carriers in July 2004, in which the resistance was able to kill 11 soldiers who were turned into pieces inside those armored vehicles with single-headed armor shells. This led to the decision to prevent the entry of this armored vehicle into Gaza and the initiation of manufacturing plans for the Tiger tanker.

By the standards of reason, it is assumed that the Zionist occupation has already announced the end of the battle, but this psychological rush for revenge and to heal the inflated arrogance of power makes stopping in the face of the estimated loss absent from calculations. The loss of 50 armored vehicles in the Battle of Wadi al-Hujair in the 2006 Lebanon War was enough to end the war when Al-Rushd was It is still present in the management of the Zionist war, but today, almost half of the armored forces do not push to end the battle, which makes it closer to fighting a drunken enemy who realizes his losses when he wakes up from his drunkenness, especially since he is high on the pain, blood, and siege of the civilian incubator of the resistance.

in conclusion; This battle is open to Zionist and American resistance to the balance of power, and to a Zionist attempt to extend the duration of the war by opening a new front, and an attempt to implicate the United States in becoming a direct party in the war, which explains the Zionist initiative to escalate on the Lebanese front in recent days, and the American initiative in return to withdraw the aircraft carrier. Gerald Ford, to confirm that it does not want to be drawn into this war. As for the possible time horizon for the end of the war, it is the arrival of the Armored Corps to a number that is unable to meet the needs of the battle, and this is a point likely to be achieved by the end of the month of 1-2024, with the possibility that a discussion will be opened before that about supplying the army. The Zionists with German and American armor, perhaps prolonging the war.

Despite the intense pain and the high price, this is a war whose strategic consequences will increase the longer the Zionists continue its resistance to the balance of power, and after that it will open the gates of major cracks in the political system and in the Zionist settler community, and this is what the Al-Aqsa flood began when it started from the title of a Zionist dispute, which is religious replacement in Al-Aqsa. The Zionist Supreme Court strengthened it yesterday by opening the door to the constitutional crisis, and Netanyahu and his government are strengthening it with their expedient leadership, and after that the gates will be opened to build on the outcome of this war by resuming the battle in the West Bank and in Al-Aqsa Mosque.