By Matt Underwood The sheer scale of the attacks against Israel during the first 600 days of the recent conflict is staggering: nearly 30,000 projectiles launched. It’s easy to overlook this immense figure, to focus on isolated incidents like October 7th, but the constant barrage of attacks deserves consideration. This unrelenting assault forced Israeli civilians into bomb shelters on a near-daily basis for two years.
This reality contrasts sharply with the perception of the conflict by many. Israel’s investment in advanced defense systems and bomb shelters is often highlighted, but the reality for its citizens is still a harrowing experience. Meanwhile, the enemies of Israel invest in strategies like hiding terrorists in tunnels, forcing their own population to bear the brunt of the ensuing conflict.
The staggering number of projectiles launched—nearly 30,000—highlights the sustained and determined nature of the attacks. Even with a significant interception rate, a substantial number of projectiles still impacted Israeli territory. The financial cost of this ongoing assault is immense, with estimates placing the cost of intercepting a single projectile at a minimum of $100,000. This translates to a potential $3 billion spent on defense against these attacks. Moreover, this cost doesn’t account for the indirect costs, such as the economic disruption and psychological toll on Israeli society.
This relentless bombardment doesn’t happen in a vacuum. The resources used to launch these projectiles are resources not used for the well-being of the civilian population launching them. A nation that prioritizes military spending over the basic needs of its people, one that allows its citizens to starve while amassing weapons, presents a unique challenge to peace negotiations.
The international response to this situation has been uneven at best, often characterized by double standards. Imagine a similar level of sustained attacks against another nuclear power, such as the United States or China. The response would almost certainly be far more forceful and decisive than what has been seen in this case. This disparity raises important questions about the international community’s commitment to the protection of all its members.
The argument that Israel should simply “accept” this situation is patently absurd. No nation could or should be expected to tolerate a near-constant barrage of attacks against its citizens without responding. The current situation is not merely a matter of “offense” or “defense”; it is an ongoing conflict fueled by the deliberate choices of actors on both sides.
The role of organizations like UNRWA is also a point of contention. The accusation that UNRWA, often cited as a crucial aid provider, may be infiltrated by terrorist groups warrants serious consideration. Reform or restructuring this organization to align it with a human rights-focused model like the UNHCR might be a step towards a more efficient and unbiased approach to humanitarian aid. The cost of this ongoing conflict, measured in both human lives and financial resources, far exceeds the potential cost of such reforms.
The long-term solution to this conflict is complex and multifaceted, with no easy answers. Proposals such as a two-state solution or a one-state solution each present significant challenges and drawbacks. The fundamental issue revolves around finding a path to peaceful coexistence and mutual security, which requires a commitment from all involved parties, and an equally committed and unbiased response from the international community. This must involve a shift away from reactive responses to proactive measures aimed at establishing durable peace and stability.
The narrative surrounding this conflict is frequently skewed, influenced by selective reporting and differing perspectives. It’s imperative to consider the context and scale of the attacks on Israel, not just in the immediate aftermath of major events, but consistently, over the long term. Only by understanding the entirety of this conflict can we begin to effectively address its root causes and work toward a lasting resolution. Failing to acknowledge the sheer volume of projectiles launched, and the continuous state of threat experienced by Israel, is to ignore a crucial aspect of this deeply complex situation.