After weeks of talk about a “humanitarian pause,” a fragile truce is finally in place.
It’s been a long road, largely because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants endless war – partly to delay his current domestic political and legal problems, and partly because he claims to want to continue the almost impossible task of eliminate Hamas. .
Meanwhile, Hamas knows that its only hope of being seen as victorious – however Pyrrhic such a “victory” may be – is to secure an indefinite ceasefire.
With this scenario unlikely, they must also maintain a narrative of escalation and use rhetoric to ensure that their regional allies remain prepared and ready.
This is the case of the rise of anti-diplomacy, which James Der Derian, specialist in international security studies, describes as “war by other means”. This encompasses practices that effectively perpetuate a form of violence against the traditional process of diplomatic mediation and reconciliation.
This anti-diplomacy is partly explained by an increase in attacks against those who advocate mediation, reconciliation and peace – often involving disinformation and propaganda. These attacks are multifaceted and occur at national, regional and international levels.
On November 23, the Israeli account on X, managed by the country’s Foreign Ministry, posted a edited video showing an Israeli soldier allegedly navigating a Hamas tunnel near al-Shifa hospital in Gaza – adding to a growing series of such videos. Interestingly, the video references Qatar three times, specifically highlighting the tunnel’s proximity to the “Qatari complex” and the “Qatari building.”
The phrase “Qatari building” in the context of al-Shifa has only been used since November 16, with the first mention appearing to come from a video. job by the Israeli army. Usually, the Qatari building refers to the “Qatar Reconstruction HQ”, located 3 km away.
The use of such language is not a coincidence. With propaganda, nothing happens by chance. Word choices, especially the mention of particular countries or people, are carefully selected to convey certain messages.
In this case, it is part of a broader attempt to link Qatar to Hamas and the Israeli narrative that al-Shifa serves as a command and control center for the Palestinian armed group.
For what?
Qatar has played a leading role in mediating peace in the context of the current war. His work was at the heart of the negotiations that led to the release of Hamas and Palestinian prisoners by Israel, starting Friday.
By trying to undermine the mediator’s credibility, Israel hopes it can pressure Qatar into getting a better deal for itself – sometimes, even when its efforts are at odds with what the United States says and does, their closest ally.
In October, for example, the Israeli army deleted a video criticizing Qatar after US President Joe Biden praised Qatar for its mediation efforts, highlighting a tension between US policy and Israel’s domestic politics.
In other words, Israel’s attempts at anti-diplomacy were met with the United States, which emphasized its confidence in Qatar’s mediating role.
Global anti-diplomacy
There are also other examples of anti-diplomacy at work. The United Nations Special Rapporteur for the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Francesca Albanese, was target of a smear campaign accusing him of violating the UN Code of Conduct.
Albanese, an expert in international law and a staunch defender of peace, publicly refuted accusations promoted by pro-Israeli propagandists around a trip to Australia, specifying that the trip was officially funded by the UN as part of its mandate.
Albanese became one of the most eloquent and credible voices calling for an end to the war with a ceasefire. His sharp criticism of journalists’ ill-informed questions often went viral, earning him growing popularity on social media. In Australia, a pro-peace demonstrator even held on a sign bearing his photo and the slogan “The Real Albanian” – in reference to the country’s Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese.
For Israel, the end of the conflict may also mean the beginning of the process of accountability. This is why influential diplomatic voices like Albanese’s, calling for peace, are targets of disinformation.
With over 100,000 followers on X, her social media reach and expertise make her a threat to Israeli anti-diplomacy forces. The war against attempts at rapprochement – diplomacy writ large – is taking place on college campuses in the United States and Europe, which have become battlegrounds of public opinion. There have been allegations of university protests promoting anti-Semitism and anti-Palestinism.
Yet these countries are also the subject of anti-diplomacy campaigns designed to promote division and conflict. The Hillel branch of the University of British Columbia, an organization dedicated to promoting Jewish life on campus, reported that one of their contractors, unbeknownst to the organization, had placed stickers around campus with the message “I love Hamas.” The aim was clearly to manipulate concerns and defame pro-Palestinian activists as pro-Hamas.
And Hamas?
Hamas will have its own propaganda plans for this truce period. And in the absence of a full ceasefire – with Israel making clear its intention to continue the war after the pause – Hamas may have reason to worry.
Currently, global public opinion, including in the West, appears to favor a ceasefire – although Western politicians appear less likely to support this sentiment.
Mainstream media and social media play a vital role in shaping opinions. Hamas knows this and knows it needs relentless global pressure against the war.
Hamas not only needs Gaza to remain in the news, but it also needs the Palestinians to be humanized. Will the world stop caring so much if the temporary cessation of bombing slows the tide of horrific videos on social media showing slaughtered civilians streaming out of Gaza?
As Israel prepares to continue the war, Hamas must prepare both militarily and rhetorically.
Enter anti-diplomacy again. On November 23, after the truce was announced and less than a day before it took effect, Hamas’ military wing released a video calling on “all resistance fronts” to intensify confrontation with Israel.
It may seem counterintuitive to call for escalation just before a break achieved through arduous negotiations. But Hamas will not want the truce to send a signal to its allies in Yemen, Lebanon, Iraq and Iran that they can relax their support for the Palestinian group in the war against Israel.
The threat of regional escalation – yes, on “all fronts of resistance” – has been one of Hamas’ trump cards in trying to encourage American efforts, however reluctant, to call a truce.
So, what can I expect in the next few days?
Israel will seek to keep public opinion mobilized in favor of war and to weaken mediators or those who call for peace. For its part, Hamas will want to generate maximum sympathy for Palestinian suffering, while maintaining a level of hawkishness to maintain the support of its allies.
On November 25, the agreement that allowed a pause in fighting faced a new crisis when Hamas delayed the release of captives, accusing Israel of reneging on aspects of the deal.
It is difficult to say which side is responsible, or whether both sides share responsibility – but the drama has underlined the fragility of the truce.
The bombing may have stopped, but the war continues in other ways.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of Tel Aviv Tribune.
