On October 17 at 19:30, an attack was reported on the Al-Ahly Baptist Hospital located in the Gaza Strip. According to some Telegram channels, the information we received at that time was that an Israeli missile hit a medical center and caused 800 deaths. This information, released by the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip Health Ministry, changed over the course of minutes, even hours. Even the Arab press reported different numbers of deaths depending on the country in which each news outlet was based. Hospital authorities said there were 250 dead, while the United States said between 100 and 300 people died. On the other hand, Israel claimed that the explosion was caused by an Islamic Jihad missile and posted videos on social media confirming this thesis. These videos, according to some analysts, did not really show anything and did not make it clear what happened.

There is no international investigation underway, and neither Hamas nor the rebel groups that control the Gaza Strip are interested in clarifying anything. Not from Israel, which considers its version of events justified. It appears that some OSINT (Open Source Intelligence) reports agree with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and others with Hamas. This tragic event broke out on the streets of the Middle East. But even if it is proven that this was Islamic Jihad, the Arab community will continue to hold Israel responsible for what happened, directly or indirectly. A fact that shows us to what extent truth or reality is not important in this conflict, since every answer is based on history. And this story adapts to the needs of each state involved.

An example of this is the conflict resolution promoted by some Arab states such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Although they do not recognize Israel and have not taken significant steps to do so, the solution they propose for the current conflict is based on the 1967 ceasefire lines, which are the recognized borders of Palestine for many states in the international community. The fact that states that do not recognize Israel are proposing a so-called “two-state solution” is another example of the importance of this story. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has now said that Hamas is a liberation group and not a terrorist group, but Turkey has recognized Israel since its creation and also advocates a two-state solution.

Another story that is becoming increasingly popular is that of cooperation and assistance to the Palestinian cause, which seemed to have been buried along with the Abraham Accords. Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, Oman, Iraq, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, as well as Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria, have mobilized humanitarian resources to help the population of the Gaza Strip. Israel has now allowed a few aid trucks to enter after bombing the border zone, out of hundreds waiting to enter at El Arish and the Rafah checkpoint.

On the other hand, Bahrain’s Minister of Economy said on October 25 that economic relations between Tel Aviv, Manama and Abu Dhabi should not be affected by the situation in the Gaza Strip as the economic consequences would be bad. That is, while history represents full support for the Palestinian cause and its demands, no one seeks to antagonize or sever diplomatic relations with Israel. Thus, the two-state solution has acquired particular relevance in the Arab world. There is a gap between political decisions made on the basis of pragmatism and the voice of the street, which goes much further in its hostility towards Israel.

And on the Israeli side we see a struggle between different political narratives. The government is trying to show that it can guarantee the security of its citizens, but there is also a story about the democratic quality of the Israeli state.

The attack on Israel by Hamas and other terrorist groups on October 7 will be a before and after event in the region, and I think also in the world. Not so much because of the attack itself, but because of its direct and indirect consequences.

On the one hand, Israel’s history as a safe state for its citizens was destroyed just as it was destroyed in 1973, with the Yom Kippur War. There were 50 years of false security when history showed that the situation, despite specific escalations such as two intifadas, was under control. From the construction of bomb shelters, various walls, the Iron Dome system, etc., we have seen various ministers asking their citizens to arm themselves. And at the same time, they declared a state of war for the first time in five decades.

The security breach left more than 1,400 Israelis dead and 224 kidnapped by a group believed to be under control and under strict surveillance. This led to street protests by relatives of victims and abductees against the government, as well as clashes between families of abductees and victims and government supporters. This is a tense and serious situation, surrounded by an atmosphere of uncertainty about what will happen next. There are even complaints about the few speeches by government representatives and the exaggerated press conferences of the Defense Forces representative on all types of issues, from military to political.

The Israeli government’s goal of ending Hamas creates uncertainty about whether it will actually achieve its goals, or whether there are other internal keys to Netanyahu’s political survival.

And also a story about the democracy of the state itself. Despite the propaganda of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, PFLP and DFLP, Tanzim and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, among others, which reaches us from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, be it the famous documentary “Pallywood”, there is also a journalistic blockade of Al -Jazeera (Qatari station) and journalists who were victims of Israeli bombings. Added to this are UNRWA reports that paint a scenario of disproportionate public opinion reaction not only in the Arab world, but also in Israeli and Western society. The Israeli government’s goal of ending Hamas, and what it has said it will do, raises uncertainty about whether it will actually achieve its goals or whether there are other internal keys to the prime minister’s political survival. Benjamin Netanyahu.

In conclusion, as the US President notes, Joe Biden, we have to be skeptical about what comes to us from the Gaza Strip. On the one hand, because the information coming from there is partial, for example, published by the Ministry of Health, prepared by Hamsas and his allies. In fact, more and more media outlets are pointing out that the reported death tolls are produced by the Ministry of Health and not by an independent or watchdog international organization. And on the other hand, as I said Ayman SafadiMr. Foreign Minister of Jordan, the international community cannot have double standards regarding the Israeli bombings and the Hamas bombings, because civilian casualties are still innocent victims, be they Palestinians or Israelis.

We will have to be attentive to what is happening and also to how the Arab world, Turkey, Israeli society and the so-called international community are moving. At the moment, Spain is in the spotlight with its proposal for peace and recognition of two states. Let’s see.

Guillem Pursals He is a Doctor of Law, Master of Security, and a specialist in conflict, public security and state theory.