A permanent end to the bombing of targets in Gaza by
the Israeli air force has become inevitable. It should
happen at once, regardless of the wider issues
concerning freezes, pauses, hostage-exchange truces
or ceasefires in the broader campaign. Indeed, it is not too
soon to ask what good it has done for the Israeli cause,
compared to the damage it has done to Hamas. It has
certainly brought death and injury to thousands of civilians,
done great harm to Israel’s international reputation and
dampened international support for its actions. Large areas of
Gaza City have been reduced to rubble. If it is true, as the
Israeli government claims, that Hamas mainly operates
through a network of underground tunnels, the logic of
destroying residential apartment blocks one by one, above
ground, is obscure. It calls to mind the phrase from Tacitus,
“They create a desert and call it peace”.
Israel has made sincere efforts to reduce civilian casualties
before each bombing raid. Nevertheless, many civilians
among those not evacuated in time have died under collapsing
structures and falling masonry. The Israel Defence Forces
have not said how they know which buildings are being used
by Hamas, and so are valid targets. Given the failure of Israeli
intelligence to anticipate Hamas’ 7 October incursion,
viciously killing at least 1,200 civilians and taking hostage
hundreds more, the watching world is entitled to be sceptical
about the extent of the knowledge the government claims to
have about what goes on inside Gaza.
So what is the point of the bombing, if not just to vent the
Israelis’ rage? Their leaders may hope that Palestinian opinion
would turn against Hamas. There have been few signs of that.
The lesson of history is that bombing raids, even ones as
severe as the RAF’s against Hamburg in July 1943 which
killed an estimated 37,000 people and destroyed 60 per cent
of the city’s houses, stir up anger and resentment rather than a
wish to capitulate. The continuation of the bombing is only
making an eventual peace even more elusive.
Bishop Bell of Chichester, who vehemently opposed the
saturation bombing of German cities, was on the right side of
the argument, and Air Chief Marshal “Bomber” Harris’
reputation has always been clouded by misgivings. He at least
did not pretend that his aircrew could avoid civilian targets.
Neither could they see the wholesale terror, death and
destruction their bombs were causing to old people, women
and children. Unlike warfare on a conventional battlefield,
aerial attacks are impersonal for the perpetrator. The
horrendous suffering happens on the ground and in hospitals.
And, in the case of the attacks on Gaza, is seen on television.
This is a battle for world public opinion that Israel has thrown
away. Its air force was never the answer to Hamas – it might
even have been the response Hamas wanted.