IDF’s Shayetet 13 force in Sufa. Credit: ‘YNET’ FB page.

Background History

The Battle of Sufa, which occurred on October 7, 2023, was a significant military engagement as part of Hamas’ Operation Al-Aqsa Flood. The village of Sufa, which borders the Gaza Strip, became the focal point of this conflict. It housed a military outpost manned by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), in the Nahal Brigade’s Reconnaissance Unit, positioned only 3 kilometers from the border with the Gaza Strip.

Initial Ground Assault

The day began with a sudden and intense assault by Hamas on Israeli targets around the Gaza Strip, starting around 6 a.m. This operation included a barrage of rocket fire and a coordinated ground and air attack. The attackers initially faced resistance from a small group of armed civilians in Sufa, followed by the overtaking of the IDF outpost. The outpost’s Golani Brigade soldiers, caught off-guard, suffered casualties and some evaded capture by hiding inside a bunker.

Assault on the Outpost

In response, Israel’s elite Shayetet 13 unit, along with reservists, was rapidly deployed to the scene from their base in Atlit. Arriving by helicopter, these naval commandos engaged in heavy combat with the Hamas militants. Despite being significantly outnumbered, they managed to regain control of the outpost. Their intervention was crucial in turning the tide of the battle.

Shayetet 13’s involvement was pivotal, not only in combat but also in rescue operations. They coordinated with other IDF troops to rescue hostages and eliminate Hamas terrorists. In the midst of heavy fighting, they successfully eliminated more than 60 terrorists and rescued about 250 hostages. The battle saw some of Israel’s bravest, including Lt.-Col. Eli Ginzburg and First Sgt. Ofek Russo, lose their lives.

Evidence from Survivors

IDF’s Or Ben Yehuda. Credit: Diana Krayin’s FB page.

Survivor accounts highlight the intense and prolonged nature of the fighting. The Nahal Reconnaissance Unit engaged the terrorists for many hours, facing a situation of being outnumbered and nearly running out of ammunition. Reinforcements, including the Karakal Regiment led by Lt. Col. Or Ben-Yehuda and Shayetet 13, played a pivotal role in clearing the outpost of terrorists and rescuing hostages. The Shayetet 13 commandos were instrumental in saving some 250 hostages, including civilians and fellow soldiers.

The Battle of Sufa is remembered as a testament to the resilience and strategic capabilities of the IDF, particularly in the face of overwhelming odds. The success of the Shayetet 13 unit in rescuing hostages and eliminating the militant threat underlines the effectiveness of Israel’s military response to sudden and intense terrorist attacks.

Second Intifada. Credit: Palestine ‘SunBird’ FB page.

The Second Intifada, also known as the Al-Aqsa Intifada, was a pivotal and intensely violent conflict in the Israeli-Palestinian history, spanning from 2000 to 2005. This comprehensive article delves into the background, timeline, impact on the Oslo Accords, and international involvement in this conflict.

Background

The Second Intifada emerged from a matrix of long-standing frustrations and immediate provocations. Key among these was the failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit, intended to achieve a final agreement in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process​​. The Oslo Accords, signed in 1993 and 1995, had set the stage for these talks. They included Israel’s commitment to withdrawing from parts of the Gaza Strip and West Bank and affirming Palestinian self-government in these areas. Conversely, the Palestine Liberation Organization recognized Israel and took responsibility for internal security in evacuated areas. However, the on-ground realities left both parties disillusioned​​.

Impact on the Oslo Accords

Oslo Accords Signing. Credit: ‘History In Pictures’ FB page.

The Second Intifada severely impacted the Oslo Accords. The Palestinians’ build-up of arms and security forces, in violation of the Accords’ terms, contributed to the breakdown of peace talks​​. The violence and distrust deepened, halting any progress toward peace and leaving both sides more entrenched in their positions​​.

International Involvement

Internationally, there were attempts to mediate peace, including the Arab Peace Initiative by the Arab League in 2002. This initiative proposed normalizing relations between Arab countries and Israel in exchange for a comprehensive peace agreement and the establishment of a Palestinian state. Despite wide support, this initiative was not implemented, and the conflict continues​​.

Context in Israeli – Arab Conflict

The Second Intifada is a defining moment in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It underscored the profound desperation and frustration of Palestinians and their commitment to fighting for freedom. Simultaneously, it highlighted the resilience of the Israeli state and its determination to maintain control over the Palestinian territories​​. The high death toll and the lack of significant progress towards resolution left a legacy of increased distrust and further complicated the Israeli-Palestinian relations​​.

Conclusion

The Second Intifada, with its deep roots in historical grievances and immediate triggers, not only resulted in significant loss of life and suffering but also marked a significant shift in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Its implications on the peace process, particularly the Oslo Accords, and the heightened international attention it drew, continue to shape the geopolitical dynamics in the region.

Israel PM Rabin, PLO president Araffat and USA President Bill Clinton signing Oslo Accords. Credit: ‘History in Pictures’ FB page.

The Oslo Accords, a cornerstone in the history of the Israeli-Arab conflict, represent a pair of pivotal agreements between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Initiated with the Oslo I Accord in Washington, D.C., in 1993, and followed by the Oslo II Accord in Taba, Egypt, in 1995, these accords marked the commencement of the Oslo process. This peace process aimed at achieving a peace treaty based on United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, focusing on the Palestinian right to self-determination. The Oslo process began after secret negotiations in Oslo, Norway, leading to mutual recognition between the PLO and Israel. The PLO recognized Israel’s statehood, while Israel acknowledged the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people and a partner in bilateral negotiations.

The Oslo Accords were rooted in the 1978 Camp David Accords, sharing similarities in their approach to peace. The Camp David Accords envisioned autonomy for the local Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. At that time, Israel considered the PLO a terrorist organization and preferred to negotiate with Egypt and Jordan instead. The Oslo negotiations differed as they were direct dialogues between Israel and the PLO, aiming for an interim agreement to pave the way for a complete settlement.

Negotiation Partners

The negotiation process only gained momentum after Israel’s acceptance of the PLO as a negotiation partner. In the Letters of Mutual Recognition, signed just days before the Oslo I Accord, each party agreed to accept the other as a negotiation partner. The PLO acknowledged the State of Israel, and Israel recognized the PLO as “the representative of the Palestinian people”.

Outline of the Peace Plan

The Oslo Accords set goals including Palestinian interim self-government and a permanent settlement of unresolved issues within five years, based on Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. A core aspect was the withdrawal of the Israeli military from Palestinian territories, planned to be executed in phases. This withdrawal was to be accompanied by a transfer of security responsibilities to Palestinian authorities. The first step involved a partial Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and Jericho and the transfer of some civil responsibilities to the interim Palestinian Authority.

Israel’s Withdrawal from the West Bank

The Oslo Accords stipulated the Israeli military’s withdrawal from populated Palestinian areas and the establishment of Palestinian elections to form a council that would replace the Palestinian Authority and dissolve the Israeli Civil Administration in the West Bank. Further redeployments of Israeli troops were planned upon the inauguration of the council, with the aim of dissolving the Israeli military government in the West Bank.

Permanent status negotiations on remaining issues were scheduled to start by May 1996 and conclude by May 1999. These negotiations were intended to lead to a peace treaty to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Contextual History of the Israeli-Arab Conflict

The Oslo Accords were born from a historical context of complex and prolonged conflict. The Israeli-Arab conflict has roots in the early 20th century, evolving through various phases, including the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, the Six-Day War of 1967, and the Yom Kippur War of 1973. These conflicts led to significant territorial changes and political shifts in the region, setting the stage for the eventual Oslo Accords.

Opposition and Criticism

The Oslo Accords faced significant opposition from both sides. Many Palestinians, including various militant groups, opposed the accords, with Palestinian-American philosopher Edward Said likening them to a “Palestinian Versailles.”

Conclusion

The Oslo Accords stand as a landmark in the Israeli-Arab conflict, representing a unique attempt at peace between Israel and the Palestinians. While they laid a foundation for future negotiations and temporary governance structures, the accords did not lead to a definitive resolution of the conflict. The creation of the Palestinian National Authority and the international acknowledgment of the PLO as Israel’s partner in negotiations were significant outcomes. However, the accords left many issues unresolved, including the status of Jerusalem, security control, and the Palestinian right of return.

The legacy of the Oslo Accords remains mixed. They symbolize a significant step towards peace but also highlight the complexities and enduring challenges of achieving a lasting resolution to the Israeli-Arab conflict.