Analysis reveals how extremist religious zionist settlements influenced Hamas attacks in the west bank, suggesting deeper historical roots.
A necessary condition for the success of the 7 October 2023 Hamas deadly incursion into Israel was the absence of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) from that region. The IDF was involved in helping the settlers in their conflicts with Palestinians on the West Bank, many miles from the Gaza border. Absent the settlers, it is likely that either the Hamas attack might not have occurred or would have been blunted at the outset, yielding a much more measured Israeli response. Hence it is imperative that we understand the origins of the settler movement. It is to be found in Biblical injunctions that were to be amplified considerably by the outcomes of the extraordinarily successful Six-Day war of 1967 and its sequel the Yom Kippur war of 1973. In the third chapter of the Book of Genesis, that is, of the entire Hebrew Bible, God commands Abraham to leave his current domicile and travel to Canaan where a great nation would be formed. Effectively, this is the religious foundation of the connection between the people of Israel and the land of Israel, then called Canaan. The contrast between the outcomes of 1967 and 1973 was striking. Instead of a lopsided victory in the earlier war, the human losses in 1973 were surprising, even terrifying. This intense ephemeral gain combined with a world view defense engendered by mortality salience established the basis for later religious Zionist extremism. The vastly increased number of casualties in 1973 set the stage for the victory of Likud, much more amenable to West Bank settlements than the ousted Labor government had been. Religious Zionists leaped at this opportunity, justifying this activity by referring to God’s commandment to settle the entire land of Israel in the West Bank territories using their Biblical Hebrew names: Yehuda (Judea) and Shomron (Samaria), whatever the cost in violent Palestinian land dispossession.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Manus I. Midlarsky (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: