In the realm of social phenomena and organisational behaviour, the concept of the tipping point holds significant relevance. Coined by sociologist Malcolm Gladwell, the tipping point refers to the critical juncture at which a small yet influential change leads to a larger, often unforeseen impact. Understanding the tipping point is crucial in analysing social phenomena, such as conflicts and societal transformations, where seemingly minor events can trigger significant consequences. A case in point here is Bushnell’s self-immolation and the looming Israeli assault on Rafah.
Applying the concept of the tipping point to the current situation in Gaza, let us consider the self-immolation act committed by an active USA serviceman, Aaron Bushnell. It will send a ripple through the USA armed forces. Known for their patriotism and commitments, such an act could have only resulted out of inability of USA servicewomen and servicemen to reconcile the values they have been indoctrinated with and the acts that they have been asked to commit. They are led to essentially serve Israel’s interests rendering the USA interests secondary. While this will have a percolating effect on the domestic landscape of the USA in an election year, it is unlikely to trigger a tipping point in the conflict.
On the other hand, examining the potential of the impending assault on Rafah turning into a tipping point reveals a different picture. Three factors could emerge from this assault that would prompt Israel and the USA to change their approach to the conflict in Gaza or force them to do so: humanitarian intervention, domestic politics, or concerns over regional stability. While the latter two are self-interest driven and will contribute directly to Netanyahu’s political survival or sustained Israel’s existence, the likelihood of them occurring is quite high. Human intervention, by contrast will directly serve to alleviate the plight of the Palestinians. However, it will require concerted international effort to mobilise against Israel and the USA. Alas, this is possible but improbable.
An assault on Rafah may become a tipping point due to the resultant escalating casualties exacerbating current humanitarian crises in Gaza. It may spark global outrage and trigger an evaluation of a possible humanitarian intervention in the form of a military action to save Palestinians from the atrocities committed by Israel with the help of its allies.
Humanitarian interventions are aimed at ending human rights violations of individuals other than the citizens of the intervening state(s). Humanitarian interventions are only intended to prevent human rights violations in extreme circumstances. The situation in Gaza will logically and naturally qualify. Attempts to establish institutions and political systems to achieve positive outcomes in the medium- to long-run, such as peace-building and development aid, do not fall under this definition of a humanitarian intervention. Humanitarian interventions occur with and without explicit UN authorisation and host-state consent.
Given the complex geopolitical dynamics involved, the likelihood of invoking the principle of humanitarian intervention against Israel remains uncertain. It would require a significant shift in the international community's stance towards the conflict and a consensus on the need for outside intervention to address the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
In addition, assessing domestic politics within the USA and Israel as a potential trigger for the tipping point is pivoted on public opinion, protests, and electoral considerations that may push leaders to modify their policies to align with popular sentiment or strategic interests. Three separate yet related development suggest that fragmentation and cracks have started to show in the Israeli domestic landscape and international solidarity with Israel: a recent article published by the BBC under the title Netanyahu is a survivor, but his problems are stacking up, the change in attitude of the President of the USA towards the excessive Israeli use of force in Gaza, and the growing protests against Israeli genocide against Palestine.
Domestically, though calls for Netanyahu to resign are driven by concerns over the fate of Israeli hostages, the outcome, i.e. his resignation, will definitely have a resounding impact on the course of events in Gaza. His confirmation of the assault on Rafah has indicated to the families of hostages that he is prepared to pay any price to achieve his political aims. This could be a tipping point for the internal political landscape. The expected loss of lives on both sides will be catastrophic, at the least. This will be further compounded by a humiliation of Israel armed forces for not achieving their strategic targets.
Finally, concerns about regional stability, security threats, or the risk of border conflict escalation may lead to a reassessment of tactics. The potential for destabilising effects on neighbouring countries or the wider Middle East region could prompt Israel and the USA to seek alternative strategies. Egypt has already indicated its readiness for a retaliation if Israel encroached on its sovereignty. This could destabilise the region and have Israel lose its immediate and strongest Arab ally.
It is essential to recognise that while potential triggers for change in the Gaza conflict are multifaceted and interconnected, only triggers that serve the interests of Israel do have a chance of changing the course of events.
Oman Observer is now on the WhatsApp channel. Click here
