In these nine months of its air and ground operations in Gaza in response to the terror attack of Hamas on October 7 last time, Israel has forcefully displaced 80 per cent of the population there, killed over 37,000 people including a large number of Palestinian women and children and dropped as numerous losers in the region as the aggregate of those thrown on Europe in World War II. The military action of the Israel Defense Forces( IDF) against Hamas not only raises the issue of disproportionate collateral losses in an army action but also questions the introductory strategy of effectively fighting terrorist organisations, itself. It's true that Hamas exercising terrorist methodology is also a military outfit that combined the tactics of first unleashing an open bullet attack and also using it as a cover to insinuate across the Israeli border to resort to magpie blasting with automatic rifles killing a large number of civilians — nearly 1200 — who were sharing in Israel’s Memorial Day function near by. In the brutal obnoxious Hamas took down nearly 250 hostages substantially women and children. Israel as a popular state was completely justified in taking to a military response to discipline Hamas but its action has over time been reduced to eyeless destruction of the mercenary areas and establishments where the Hamas zealots were anticipated to be taking sanctum in the underground coverts. Indeed in situations where two rival armies brazened each other a certain quantum of mercenary casualties might do as necessary collateral damage but in Gaza, the IDF went all out against the unnoticeable adversary hidden behindnon-combatant civilians — women and children included and in the process considerably bombed the domestic areas. It's possible that numerous of the civilians were laboriously supporting Hamas — the Oct 7 attack on Israel had transferred down a surge of excitement and appreciation across Palestine. They might indeed be sheltering Hamas zealots therefore running the threat of inviting corrective action at the hands of the Israeli army but the stage of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Hamas would be excluded indeed if the IDF had to destroy the entire Gaza that was necessary in furnishing a cover to the terrorists, would surely lead to adverse political consequences for him in his own country as well as in the transnational community. Counter-terror operations have to be intelligence- grounded, particularly where the Army is used for them, because the unseen adversary would only be excluded when his identity and position were known — heavy ordnance was no guarantee of their success. As matters stand the desolation of mercenary life and property in Israeli military action is only helping to spread the support for Hamas not only in the Muslim world but away too. A terrorist force thrives on presenting itself as a “ victim ” of retaliatory action indeed though it might have caused the original provocation — because it banks eventually on the battle of perception and draws advantage from the loss of innocent lives in anycounter-terror operations. In the case of Israeli operations, the scale of destruction has attracted the attention of the entire world. It can not be explained down by the natural differential that exists between the damages caused by a “ covert ” terror attack and an “ open ” military descent. The blame for this large asymmetry of loss of mortal lives is getting passed on to Israel notwithstanding the fact that the Hamas terror attack of October 7 was a planned one not condonable at all. Over decades Israel has lived a life of constant trouble to its very survival and the history of Israel- Arab conflict attributable largely to the turndown of numerous Arab countries to indeed accept the right of Israel to live, did justify an extreme public perceptivity on the part of Israeli autocrats about putting up with any unfaithful descent from its opponents. Of course, valid questions have been raised about the capability of Israeli intelligence in regard to the Oct 7 attack of Hamas particularly in the light of the fact that thousands of Palestinians came to Israel for their diurnal occupation and some “ harkening posts ” for Israel were anticipated to live among them. Before the current Israel- Hamas battle broke out, there were some moves towards bringing about an Arab- Israel conflict. Some members of the Arab League — UAE, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan — had shown an inclination towards normalising relations with Israel and accepted the idea of the Abraham accord at the egging of the US. Indeed Saudi Arabia with its extreme Sunni fundamentalism appeared set to recognize the proposition. The new conflict between Israel with Hamas has given a reversal to this thinking. mortal suffering and loss of innocent lives — of women and children in particular — are creating an aversion towards Israel among people far and wide. Arab opinion is putatively turning not only against Israel but against the US as well. What's extremely significant is that Arab thinking has started tipping favourably towards China and this can edge US- China contest in the Middle East — this peak is formerly showing up away across the globe. The negativity of the terror profile in the figure- up and working style of Hamas is getting pushed to the background as the religious contradiction between Islam and Zionism is coming to the fore in the fate of the current Israel- Hamas conflict and affecting the entire Muslim world. Ayatollah’s rule in Iran was politically inimical towards the US and Israel and this hostility had made Iran side with Hamas notwithstanding the fact that Sunni Islamic radical forces considered both the US and the ‘ deviationist ’ Shiites as their high adversaries. Iran’s political opposition to Israel as a rival in the Middle East guides its responses. Iran has set upon Israel its delegates — Lebanon- grounded Hezbollah and Yemen- grounded Houthis — and reached out to China and Russia, the political adversaries of the US and Israel. Islamic revolutionaries of ISIS are active in Syria- Iraq and their indigenous outfit called ISIS- K carried out an attack in March this time on a musicale on the outskirts of Moscow — causing the death of 130 persons and injuries to numerous others. They had a beef that Russia supported Syrian President Bashar Al Assad — an Alawite — against their loyal opposition to him. One outgrowth of the Israel- Hamas battle that should beget real concern to the entire popular world is that it had the eventuality for pushing the global order towards faith- grounded conflicts indeed as there were formerly signs of the reappearance of a wider Cold War between the US- led West and the China- Russia axis. Religion- driven alignments feel to be farther bolstering this global peak. Iran coming closer to China and Russia, the Taliban- led Kabul Emirate striking a give- and- take adaptation with China and the Arab world siding with Hamas against Israel because of the introductory contradiction between Islam and Zionism — are all trends that signified the significance of religion as the abecedarian driving force of concinnity booting political differentiations. China under President Xi Jinping is seeking to come a Superpower on the strength of profitable growth and technological advancement though its service might is also being erected- and is playing its cards in the Ukraine- Russia fortified battle in a manner that would keep Russia on his side without letting the conflict acquire the confines of a world war. The Middle East is setting an illustration of how indigenous conflicts may be determining the cause of global peace and how indigenous interests could be guiding the approach of world powers to similar conflicts. The world opinion is against nuclear battle which further helps the play of the old doctrine of ‘ mutually assured destruction ’ as a interference against any move of “ first strike ”. As a result, transnational conflicts driven by religion feel to be affecting the global scene of our times further than the possibility of reanimation of the Cold War. India is in the midst of a foreign policy challenge because the new geopolitical shifts have had the effect of causing a reset of the strategy of handling transnational relations. India’s emphasis on mutually salutary bilateral connections that didn't compromise with the case for global peace and mortal weal, has proved to be extremely fruitful as it has enabled India to develop a natural fellowship with the US as a leader of the popular world without letting this affect the strategically deep India- Russia bonds. It has made it possible for India to demand outspoken that the Ukraine- Russia military battle be broke to allow for agreement for peace on the base of an understanding of the security enterprises of both sides. A alternate element of India’s foreign policy has been an unequivocal commination of terrorism of any kind or origin. This covers Pakistan’scross-border terrorism in Kashmir carried out by Pak ISI — patronized Islamic militant outfits like Hizbul Mujahideen, Lashkare Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad that were India-specific to which had been added the Islamic ‘ radical ’ forces like Al Qaeda and ISIS that were adding their hold in the Muslim world and reaching out to other regions encyclopedically. Prime Minister Narendra Modi on a visit to Moscow for the India- Russia bilateral peak with President Vladimir Putin on July 9, condemned the recent ISIS- K attack at Moscow and refocused out how India had for long suffered Pak- instigatedcross-border terrorism in Kashmir and away. India had denounced the Oct 7 terror attack of Hamas on Israel but as the IDF executed huge mercenary loss of life in Gaza, it didn't vacillate to call for the cessation of Israeli operations and resumption of addresses for a result to the long-standing Palestinian issue on the base of the ‘ two state ’ formula. Eventually, the two high security enterprises of India are the radicalised Pak- Afghan region that witnessed the continuing patronisation of the Kabul Emirate by Pakistan and the heightening Sino- Pak alliance that was leading to these two adversaries bearing covert operations against this country. India is legitimately disappointed that the US is still not taking acceptable notice of Pakistan’s part in fostering Islamic unreasonableness and bellicosity. On the other hand, Russia sounded to more understand the trouble of ‘ radicalisation ’ that bothers India. In any case, it's India that has to fight Pakistan and China largely on its own and it's a matter of great satisfaction that the Modi government was completely geared to handling this challenge.
