The implications of defeat at the end of the war on Gaza
-
Batool Subeiti
- Today 13:16
3 Min Read
The grimness, shame, and sense of failure among those within the Israeli occupation entity who supported the agreement are evident, despite attempts to justify it by claiming certain goals were achieved.
-
The West will take account of the war's results and its inability to dismantle the Resistance when shaping policies (Illustrated by Zeinab al-Hajj; Al Mayadeen English)
Trump hastened to announce the war's end before its official declaration, framing it as an achievement. This proves that the war was seen as a burden and undesirable, with its conclusion viewed as an accomplishment. Trump sought to distance himself from the war before assuming office to avoid being tied to its continuation or support. The war on Gaza ultimately became a burden and a source of shame for its advocates.
Evil wars often invite celebrations upon their conclusion as they bring embarrassment and blame to those who wage them. All wars associated with the Israeli occupation entity follow this pattern: a desire to swiftly bring them to an end. Such wars are justified endlessly, adorned to appear righteous. Just wars, however, are a source of pride for their initiators. No matter how long they last, steadfastness in a just cause is itself a victory.
The war on Gaza has been a moral burden for its proponents. America’s relentless efforts to provide justifications and support to the Israeli occupation entity in the context of the captives situation reflect an attempt to excuse something inherently shameful. Furthermore, America has tacitly acknowledged its failure to achieve its goals.
The grimness, shame, and sense of failure among those within the Israeli occupation entity who supported the agreement are evident, despite attempts to justify it by claiming certain goals were achieved. Meanwhile, critics within the entity have condemned the deal as disgraceful and humiliating. For the occupation entity, a true military victory would have meant achieving its objectives without resorting to a deal or what they refer to as "complete victory". Instead, the agreements in both Lebanon and Gaza signify the Resistance's victory: it was neither defeated nor subdued and ultimately forced the entity into negotiation.
Khalil al-Hayya, a senior Palestinian Resistance official, has declared what many view as a symbolic victory of the Axis of Resistance. The specifics of the deal hold little significance, as the Resistance’s progress and evolution operate independently of external approval. Both historical and current experiences prove that the Resistance’s strength consistently outpaces its adversaries’ ability to dismantle it, despite their advanced strategies.
Preparation and readiness are ongoing across all fronts of the Resistance. The moral impact of its victory will take on a new dimension, like a snowball growing in the support base of the Resistance, the region, and the world. The Resistance will grow and expand. Thousands within the Resistance’s sphere of influence are ready to join, provided that they are mobilized effectively.
Governments linked to the West will slow down normalization efforts. The West will take account of the war's results and its inability to dismantle the Resistance when shaping policies. This represents a failure to the occupation entity and the West after a long timeframe of over a year.
The Resistance in Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen remains strong and renewed in terms of manpower, equipment, infrastructure, and combat expertise. Even if the Israeli occupation’s aggressions persist, it will not alter the outcome. In assessing the battle's results, moral resolve outweighs material preparation. It is this indomitable spirit that empowers the Resistance to endure, innovate, and ultimately prevail—and this is precisely what has transpired.
