The Israel-Hamas conflict is a long-standing and complex dispute between Israel and Hamas, a Palestinian organization.
What this session covered
This session took the form of a dialogue between two speakers — the institute's president and a retired Army general officer serving as its director — offering a compressed historical background to the Israel–Hamas conflict. The discussion traced the dispute from its late nineteenth-century origins and a 1917 British declaration favouring a Jewish homeland, through the violence of the 1920s, the establishment of Israel in 1948 and the first Arab–Israeli war, the armistice arrangements that placed the West Bank under Jordan and the Gaza Strip under Egypt, and the 1967 war in which Israel took control of both territories. The speakers also touched on the founding of the Palestine Liberation Organisation, the Israeli hostage-rescue operation at an airport in Uganda, later peace accords, and the division that left the West Bank under the Palestinian Authority and Gaza under Hamas after Israel's withdrawal from the Strip. One line of argument advanced was that Israel, while retaining control of Gaza's airspace, territorial waters and travel corridors, had indirectly facilitated Hamas through the provision of civic facilities, with the effect of deepening the rift between Gaza and the West Bank leadership. The contention over the holy places in Jerusalem, sacred to Muslims and Jews alike, was noted as a core grievance.
Turning to the attack of 7 October, one speaker described it as a well-planned and executed operation, distinguishing between Hamas's political wing based in Qatar and its militant wing in Gaza, and suggesting the timing was connected to talks between Israel and Saudi Arabia and to a desire to break Israel's hold over the Strip. The discussion observed that Israel's forces, generally regarded as among the most capable, had been caught unprepared. Both speakers condemned the attack, and both also condemned in strong terms the scale of the Israeli retaliation — the air strikes, the ground offensive and the resulting destruction and civilian casualties in Gaza, including the deaths of infants and the collapse of medical care. Figures cited in the discussion included about 1,400 killed in the initial attack, some 6,000 Palestinians held in Israeli jails against 224 Israeli hostages, and a Gaza population of approximately 2.2 million affected by the war.
On the way forward, the speakers differed on one point: one suggested a ceasefire would come only once the hostages were released, while the other argued that hostage release was not the real objective of the Israeli campaign but a pretext. Both regretted the failure of the ceasefire resolution moved at the United Nations, and set out their shared views: that the UN's role should be strengthened rather than diluted, that Western powers — the United States in particular — should use their influence to end the war, that the Arab League should restrain the leaderships of Hamas and Hezbollah, and that negotiation, as in India's own independence movement, remains the only durable path. The session closed with plans for further dialogues, including on how the attack penetrated Israel's defences.
Key points raised
- The session was a two-speaker dialogue tracing the conflict's history from the late nineteenth century through 1948 and 1967 to Israel's withdrawal from Gaza and the rise of Hamas.
- One speaker described the 7 October attack as a well-planned operation, linking its timing to Israel–Saudi talks and to Hamas's wish to break Israel's hold over Gaza; both speakers condemned it.
- Both speakers also condemned the scale of Israel's retaliation, citing civilian casualties, the deaths of children and the humanitarian collapse in Gaza.
- The speakers differed on whether the release of hostages was Israel's genuine objective; one argued it was a pretext.
- Shared prescriptions included strengthening the UN's role, Western — particularly American — pressure to end the war, and Arab League restraint of the Hamas and Hezbollah leaderships.
- Further dialogues were planned, including on how the attack succeeded against Israel's defences.
