Why Top Leaders of Israel as well as Hamas Should Resign | Bharat Dogra

As the Middle East crisis continues to aggravate, the possibilities of peace can still improve if some of the top leaders of both Israel and Hamas can resign. Which ones should resign? On the Israeli side the Prime Minister Mr. Benjamin Netanyahu should definitely go, as also a few of his most aggressive colleagues. Similarly a few of the most aggressive Hamas leaders should resign, particularly those identified more closely with the planning and execution of the October 7 attack. On both sides those more amenable to very early peaceful resolution of conflict and to immediate ceasefire should come in the place of those who leave.

Some people would say that this is merely wishful thinking and so should not be discussed. This writer is nevertheless stating this because with the kind of leaders calling the shots now on both sides ( above all with Netanyahu as Prime Minister) peace is most unlikely to emerge , and peace is what we need most of all. Hence one possibility for ceasefire and peace is for international and domestic pressure to obtain some key resignations and replacements on both sides, so that both sides have leadership more capable of clinching ceasefire and peace.

The reason why the most aggressive leaders of Israel should resign are obvious. Their aggression has resulted in the known direct killing of about 39,000 persons with about an additional 10,000 buried under rubble. Those who have died indirectly from the impact of hunger, thirst, disease, and destruction of sanitation, shelter and health facilities are likely to be about four times the number of those who have died directly from violence. Some of the most inhuman aggression seen anywhere has been on display in Gaza in the course of the Israeli attacks since October 2023. In addition, Israeli actions have been largely responsible for the deaths and destruction in the West Bank region and for aggravation on other fronts.

At the same time, however, Hamas cannot escape its share of the blame for the colossal human tragedy of recent months. Surely anyone familiar with Israel under Netanyahu’s leadership would have known that the response to the October 7 type of big attack would be hugely disproportionate and as a result, the people of Gaza would end up paying a very heavy price for this in the form of thousands of deaths, injuries and disabilities. Nevertheless, knowing this and realizing all the implications, Hamas leaders went ahead with the terrible attack, killing innocent persons and taking innocent persons as hostages, who in turn have suffered a lot in captivity for months. However much more tragic harm has been suffered by the people of Gaza, and this could have been anticipated rather easily. Those Hamas leaders who planned the October 7 attack cannot escape their share of the blame for the huge tragedy and they too should resign from their leadership positions.
Hence if we follow the established version of the events, the case for the resignation of the top and most hawkish leaders of Israel and Hamas is quite strong.

One part of our argument ends here.

The second part starts with the assertion that there are several loopholes in the established version of the events and there is need for questioning this and for considering alternative possibilities of what really happened.

There is a lot of evidence (based on videos in wide circulation, reports of documents existing with Israeli leadership, official reports regularly made by Israeli surveillance officers, claims of advance warnings given by Egypt and others) that the Israeli leadership was well aware of open training and preparations being made by Hamas for this attack and hence knew about the impending attack but chose to ignore all this. This, along with the extraordinarily lax security on the day of the attack, the delay caused even in the inadequate response of that day and the killing of own personnel allegedly on the basis of Hannibal doctrine all indicate that what happened was different from the official version or the established version.

There is a lot of evidence which indicates the possibility of a certain degree of collusion between a section, probably only a very small but nevertheless influential section, of leadership on both sides in making the October 7 attack a reality.

Of course, the two colluding sides must have had very different motives which, however, converged for a while.

If this is true then the blame attached to such leaders on both sides for causing such a huge tragedy is even greater.

On the other hand, if we follow only the established, officially accepted version of events, then also the blame on the more aggressive leaders on both sides is serious enough to support the demand for the resignation of the most aggressive leaders on both sides so that more moderate leadership can emerge on both sides to clinch immediate ceasefire and then to move towards durable peace.

(Author: Bharat Dogra is Honorary Convener, Campaign to Save Earth Now. His recent books include Planet in Peril, Protecting Earth for Children, A Day in 2071 and Man over Machine)