The real reason Hamas attacked Israel on October 7

The following text is a translation of the original post published by Shai Eden. The original text, in Hebrew, could be found here. Shai wishes to clarify prior to his text the following:

“These are my personal conjectures based on information that is already available and public on the internet. I’ve simply drawn connections between several pieces of information.”

Anyone who believes the attack was merely a result of Hamas’s intense animosity towards Israel and a bid to free their prisoners is missing the larger context. I’m not only referring to the regional implications, but to a much broader perspective.

Reports from international sources in September suggested that around 500 Hamas and Islamic Jihad militants took part in drills under the guidance of Quds Force officers. For those who are unfamiliar, the Quds Force is the external operations branch of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards. the Quds force is led by General Ismail Kaani, who was reported to have been involved in the training personally. Global intelligence sources allege that Iran was the instigator behind the attack.

The Wall Street Journal, citing top officials from Hamas and Hezbollah, stated that the resolution to act was decided upon at a meeting in Beirut on October 2, which included the presence of their leadership. This account of Iran’s hand in the events was echoed by an adviser to the Syrian government and a European official.

So, it circles back to Iran. But what is their motive?

Despite their deep-seated animosity and intent to destroy Israel, the Iranian leadership acts with deliberation. They engage in direct conflict strategically. Clearly, they anticipated that such a flagrant assault would provoke Israel to retaliate aggressively against Hamas leaders and try to debilitate the organization. So, what was the rationale of the Shiite leadership in inciting such turmoil in Gaza?

The answer may lie in the very chaos they sought to create: a catastrophe for Gaza.

For those unsatisfied with the notion of sheer lunacy as a reason, it’s prudent to follow the money trail. Yes, the familiar adage applies yet again. It’s always about power and wealth. But on this occasion, the stakes are significantly higher. It’s not merely about the millions from Qatar to Hamas or the funds America disburses to regional nations. It’s far beyond that — we are looking at the largest financial conflict in our history.
Welcome to the post-Cold War era.

Let’s track the most substantial money flow, which has always been in energy: oil and gas. Recently, Russia declared Hamas is not a terrorist organization. This statement seems peculiar, doesn’t it? Why would Russia, a country that has itself been a victim of terrorism, issue such a declaration? Why are they fanning the flames of conflict against Israel? What interest does Russia have in the Israel-Palestinian dispute?

I’m not suggesting that Russia orchestrated these events against us. However, one thing is clear, and the logic is straightforward: the biggest winner of the conflict could very well be Russia, along with China and Iran.

The most expansive energy pipeline project in the world falls under Russian government ownership. It represents the most significant investment in the sphere of global energy transport — a centerpiece of Putin’s two-decade tenure. Russia has constructed an extensive network of pipelines, a veritable lifeline of energy, extending from its own territories to half the planet, including Europe. Indeed, this collaboration with the West has resulted in a network so extensive it borders on the inconceivable. In a matter of years, Russia has achieved an astonishing level of sway over Europe’s energy supply, a feat at times bordering on the surreal.

Prior to the conflict in Ukraine, Russia was responsible for providing around 50% (!) of all the natural gas in Europe, standing as the primary provider — an almost inconceivable share that has since dwindled to approximately 20% due to the sanctions imposed in the wake of the Ukrainian conflict, and now it’s even less. It’s crucial to understand that in Europe, gas isn’t just about electricity or cooking; it’s a lifeline. On days when snow blankets the landscape, gas heats homes; it’s what ensures the availability of hot water from the tap. Gas isn’t just a commodity; it’s synonymous with life itself.

Until the conflict in Ukraine, Russia held the reins of the Western energy market, wielding power over the gas and oil supply. However, since then, this dynamic has started to shift.

Iran, too, reaps substantial benefits from this situation. Familiar with Iran’s dealings, you may recall that just last July, they entered into a $40 billion gas agreement with Russia. This is in addition to a multitude of other transactions between the two nations and their mutual business with China. Sitting atop the world’s second-largest gas reserves, just behind Russia, Iran is eager to find buyers. Leveraging Putin’s infrastructure, Iran has managed to channel gas sales to an unlikely customer — the West. Surprising, isn’t it? Sanctions on Iran seem to vanish when Russian intermediation is involved.

In the previous year, despite sanctions due to the conflict in Ukraine, Russia still garnered a staggering $138 billion from gas and an additional $218 billion from oil exports. Europe has been a lucrative market for Russian energy.

Putin’s pipeline transcends an economic venture; it’s a project emblematic of colonial power and dominance. This pipeline granted Russia a near-monopolistic hold over the market. Putin’s strategic acumen in this sector has positioned him as the preeminent gas supplier to a dependent Europe.

This expansive project unfolded at a breakneck pace over the last two decades. The “Nord Stream” pipeline, a venture partnered with European nations, was completed in just a year and a half. And in 2020, the “Turk Stream,” a collaborative effort with Turkey, began funneling gas from Russia into Europe, further completing a complex network of pipelines.

While America was preoccupied with conflicts in the Gulf, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria post-9/11, one could argue that it was caught napping as Putin quietly carved out Europe’s energy dependency, with China claiming stakes in the East and South. The West was engrossed in tactical maneuvers, while Russia engaged in a game of strategic dominance.

However, the war in Ukraine shuffled the deck entirely.

America and the West, late to the game, scrambled to recapture the control they had ceded. The fear in the West was palpable: Russia and China might wield their energy dominance as a weapon against them.

This anxiety materialized during the Ukrainian conflict when Russia restricted energy access to the West as leverage against their support for Ukraine. Moreover, the “Nord Stream” pipeline, a crucial conduit of gas to Germany, was compromised by a mysterious act of sabotage. The once cordial relationship soured as gas prices in Europe skyrocketed, forcing many families to endure the cold, choosing not to purchase prohibitively expensive gas. Consumer prices for gas and oil surged by up to 700%, leading to an unprecedented energy crisis. Europe was plunged into an existential trepidation, with some of its more vulnerable nations teetering on the edge of calamity.

Confronted with the reality of their over-reliance on Eastern energy, America and its Western allies recognized the urgency of a strategic pivot. The prospect of Putin wielding energy supply as a tactical weapon in geopolitical conflicts — closing pipelines under the guise of “maintenance” — was no longer tolerable. The West’s counter was to significantly reduce their dependency on Russian energy, slashing Putin’s share from 50% to under 20%, and in this year, to a mere 13%. They thwarted his Nord 2 pipeline ambitions and increased imports of liquefied natural gas from the USA, while also transitioning towards cleaner energy alternatives that circumvent Russian infrastructure.

In a move of strategic ingenuity, America progressed towards an additional, grand solution. If Putin’s influence extended from the North, they’d outmaneuver him from the South. The aim was clear: not only to diminish the flow through Putin’s pipelines to Europe but to create an alternate route that would nullify his stranglehold on Ukraine and bypass him entirely.

The US-led economic initiative was christened with a congenial moniker, the “Abraham Accords”. This initiative is multifaceted — signifying not just a monumental stride towards peace but also the creation of an extensive economic corridor rich in oil and gas. The envisioned corridor spans from India, through the Gulf States, including the UAE, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and Jordan, engaging Israel — well-known for its strategic prowess — and extending to Greece and Cyprus, eventually linking with Europe. The intent is to establish a southern counterweight to Russia’s northern dominance, securing the Mediterranean Sea as a vital conduit.

This effectively sets the stage for two distinct alliances: the Russian-Iranian-Chinese axis versus the Western-Sunni-Israeli bloc — a geopolitical “Game of Thrones”.

Below is the so-called “Corridor of Peace”, as heralded by Netanyahu in a speech on September 9 this year, a month prior to October 7 — when Hamas launched its terror attack.

A critical juncture remains — Saudi Arabia and Israel lack formal diplomatic ties, a considerable gap in the regional puzzle.

Nevertheless, Saudi Arabia is actively seeking avenues to export its oil and gas, amidst internal threats from the Shiite factions in Yemen and external pressures from the Iranian nuclear program. With the Shiite crescent inching closer to Russian and Chinese spheres, the Sunni kingdom finds itself at a crossroads, gravitating towards the West as the apparently ascendant power.

Hence, we may soon witness a new alignment. Saudi Arabia stands to gain substantially by aligning with the West — selling oil and gas, competing with its rival Iran, and fortifying its defenses through alliances with America and Israel.

In essence, America has devised a strategy to circumvent the Russia-China-Iran trinity, forging a new Southern route for the flow of goods, arms, and energy from its Sunni Arab allies to the Mediterranean — a direct competitor to the Northern hegemony. There’s even talk of Saudi Arabia entertaining nuclear energy ambitions, though the prospect of American approval remains contentious.

This strategic momentum was palpable over the summer, as discussions of a historic peace between Israel and Saudi Arabia, spearheaded by Biden and Netanyahu, began to surface. Then, at the G20 conference on September 9, Biden unveiled his visionary “Peace Train” project — a proposal that would reshape the regional dynamics, in Biden’s own words.

The concept involves a high-speed, state-of-the-art train that will facilitate the transportation of goods along the axis of nations part of the Abraham Accords, stretching from India to Europe. This in itself is a remarkable vision. However, beneath this train route and its noble aim lies another strategic objective — a gas pipeline. This infrastructure is designed to carry oil, weaponry, and merchandise, alongside a conduit for refined clean gas, effectively shifting the control of Europe’s energy back into Western hands.

I invite you to watch the following video from the ILTV channel, dated September 9th of this year. Pay particular attention to Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, as she makes mention of a “pipeline of clean gas.” While she does not overly stress it, the subtext is clear. “Clean gas” here refers to hydrogen gas, which is more eco-friendly and efficient than what current Russian pipelines offer, positioning this new pipeline as a superior alternative, rendering Russia’s offerings outdated and its grip on Europe less necessary.

Biden’s plan is to introduce a more extensive pipeline network.

Putin is facing setback after setback. His ambitions in Ukraine remain unfulfilled, and now his role as Europe’s energy provider is diminishing with a polite, yet firm, dismissal.

Moreover, this Indian pipeline is set to integrate with the Eastmed pipeline, a venture agreed upon by Netanyahu with Greek and Cypriot leaders in January 2020. Eastmed is projected to be the world’s longest pipeline, stretching from Israel to Greece, and onward to Italy.

Saudi Arabia, in light of these developments, finds itself in dire need of this new alliance. It aims to counteract the Iranian threat and circumvent the Russian-Chinese stronghold over European trade routes. The urgency is such that, during the G20 conference, the Saudi Crown Prince declared a staggering 20 billion dollar investment into the initiative, a move made even prior to formalizing a peace treaty with Israel. This suggests that peace is not a matter of if, but when.

The United States has effectively issued a stark warning to the Russian and Chinese leadership.

It is widely acknowledged that such an economic passage, augmented by this pipeline, poses a significant challenge to Russian and Chinese interests. A setback for them also spells trouble for Iran, as it strengthens its Sunni enemies in the south and connects them with its “zionist” enemy from the west.

For Iran, a coalition between Sunni Saudi Arabia and Israel is an unspeakable calamity. It brings together Saudi Arabia’s financial clout with Israel’s military might, positioning both nations as pivotal players in the global energy domain. On the flip side, Iran, with its Shia majority and nuclear aspirations, remains an adversary of Saudi Arabia.

So, what’s the strategy to bolster this emerging front?
The answer is simple: undermine the peace.

And where does this disruption begin? In Gaza.

In the days following the announcement, members of Hamas were already undergoing training in Iran. Merely three weeks later, a meeting between Hezbollah and Hamas set into motion a campaign aimed at derailing the peace efforts.

On October 3rd, just four days before a planned attack, Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei openly criticized Saudi Arabia’s peace initiative, decisively declaring that it would not succeed. Iran has made its opposition to the Saudi-Israeli deal crystal clear and is unwavering in its resolve to see it fail.

Iran’s choice of Hamas as an ally is strategic. Hamas, a Sunni organization, enjoys popularity in Sunni-majority Saudi Arabia. While many perceive the conflict as a struggle for territorial liberation or a deep-seated religious battle, underlying it all is a quest for wealth and, more significantly, power. Power seems to have an irresistible allure; its pull is puzzling and profound.

For Hamas, attacking Israel is perceived as a divine mandate — a means to liberate prisoners and provide the Palestinian people with a sense of triumph. And Iran? Their motives are aligned, with an evident thirst for conflict. However, Iran’s concern is not truly with the welfare of the small Sunni faction that governs Gaza. The animosity between Shiites and Sunnis runs so deep that some suggest it surpasses even their hostility towards Jews. This deep-seated enmity is encapsulated in a notorious saying that compares Sunni Arabs unfavorably even to dogs.

If Iran’s sole aim were warfare and bloodshed, it could have easily chosen Hezbollah to lead the charge, likely with greater success. Hezbollah, Iran’s direct Shiite progeny and a religious entity, is under Iran’s guardianship. In contrast, Hamas, the Sunni ‘outcast,’ also seen as an unruly Arab force, can be readily sacrificed for the greater objective of disrupting the major Saudi-Israeli deal. Muhammad Deif, known for his extreme and violent tendencies, is all too willing to orchestrate assaults against Jews and the degradation of Israel. His actions are as predictable as the flow of gas through Russian and Chinese pipelines prior to sanctions.

To effectively sabotage a peace deal of this magnitude, a minor assault will not suffice. It won’t trigger an extensive military response like “Operation Pillar of Defense”, which could lead to a restoration of peace and support for Biden’s vision. A significant, groundbreaking event is needed, one that will send shockwaves through the Arab world, making Saudi Arabia recoil at the mere thought of peace. An act that could instigate years of unrest. Israel must be provoked to such a degree that not even Biden could intervene. What is needed is a devastating, unforgettable mega-attack — a September 11. War is essential.

And so, the vile incident in the Gaza periphery began. Not in the name of a Shiite religious crusade against Zionist occupation, but for the sake of profit. This wasn’t a battle over Gaza — it was a battle over gas.

Yet, there’s an unexpected turn. Saudi Arabia isn’t hastily scrapping the peace deal. Because as long as they do not officially declare the peace process dead, the overarching goal remains unmet. It’s noteworthy that the Saudis are maintaining a conspicuous silence. They’re grappling with the conflict, all while clumsily striving to preserve a sliver of hope for peace with Israel and the monumental project they hold in high regard. It seems likely that Russia, China, and Iran might attempt to escalate and prolong the war through various stratagems, such as calculated hostage situations and well-funded global protests, all aiming to eventually impinge upon Saudi sensibilities.

Russia and China have openly opposed Israel. It seems their current strategy involves casting Israel in a negative light as pure evil to extend the negotiations for a peace deal with Saudi Arabia. This stance undoubtedly serves Russia and China’s interests amidst the crisis. Such a move complicates America’s position and has the potential to distance Western support from Ukraine.

On a personal note, I remain hopeful that both Saudi Arabia and Israel will exhibit the wisdom and fortitude to sidestep this snare. This peace agreement represents a historic leap towards peace in the region.