Hebron -

A year after its occurrence, observers still believe that the battle of the "Sword of Jerusalem" between the Palestinians and Israel constituted a turning point for the interest of the resistance and its movement, and that its repercussions were resounding in Israel on both the official and popular levels.

The battle lasted from the tenth to May 21, 2021, during which the Palestinian resistance launched missile strikes into the Israeli depths, following the settlers' storming of Al-Aqsa Mosque and Israeli plans to deport the residents of Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in Jerusalem.

In their reading of the course of that battle and its repercussions, analysts who spoke to Al Jazeera Net conclude a set of features that distinguished the "Sword of Jerusalem" and qualified it to be a "strategic battle" in the history of the conflict that spanned more than 7 decades.

The "Sword of Jerusalem" is considered the first battle launched by the resistance, and even set its launch hour and goal, thus increasing the area of ​​deterrence it created in the 2014 war, according to analysts.

Part of the popular marches in the Palestinian interior regions during the Battle of Seif al-Quds (Al-Jazeera)

the unity of the people

In his reading of the course of the battle and its results, Director of Research at the Palestinian Center for Policy Research and Strategic Studies Khalil Shaheen points to conclusions, foremost of which is the unity of the Palestinian people in the West Bank, Gaza Strip, the occupied territories in 1948 and the diaspora, who rose up against the occupation at the same time.

This unity embodied the consolidation of agreement and circumvention around the second dimension of the battle related to the status of Jerusalem in the context of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, as it is the core of the Palestinian cause, according to Shaheen.

Here the researcher also refers to the Arab and international dimension that the battle gave to the issue of Jerusalem through solidarity demonstrations around the world.

One of the symbols of the conflict that emerged in the battle of "Sword of Jerusalem" last year... dropping their banner and raising ours in Lod.

pic.twitter.com/4yhMKh9pId

- Sari Arabi (@sariorabi) May 10, 2022

The decision of the battle and the unity of the squares and issues

Among the important transformations in “The Sword of Jerusalem,” Shaheen mentions the decision of the battle itself, leaving the circle of demands to lift the siege and defend the Gaza Strip to “considering the Gaza Strip as part of the comprehensive Palestinian national concern,” which is termed as “the unity of the squares and the unity of the Palestinian response.” .

According to Shaheen, this means "expanding the scope of the Palestinian national strategy to include the defense of all issues, not just the Gaza Strip," in a way that, in turn, requires the presence of Gaza in the Palestinian national and popular work with all Palestinian gatherings in the homeland and the diaspora.

On the operational level, Shaheen says that the battle constituted a paradox, especially at the starting point, by striking "the center of the Israeli entity", indicating that the Palestinian resistance "works with patience, steadfastness and effort to develop its capabilities."

He says that the "Sword of Jerusalem" not only showed the capabilities of the resistance, "but also showed the fragility of the Israeli home front, and the extent of confusion among the Israeli military and intelligence establishment."


A new Palestinian consciousness

The Palestinian researcher takes us back to the 2014 aggression against the Gaza Strip, and how he "established a new Palestinian awareness that restored the relationship with the occupation to normal: a people under occupation and an occupying power, a relationship of resistance, resistance and steadfastness."

This image is the opposite of the image presented by the Palestinian Authority through economic relations and security coordination with the occupation, despite the Israeli strategy that works to push the authority on a coercive path, the result of which is turning it into an agent that extends the life of the occupation instead of shortening it, according to the Palestinian analyst.

The first battle that the resistance begins

For his part, writer and political analyst Talal Okal says that the battle of Sif al-Quds was "the first battle launched by the resistance factions, in reaction to a dangerous Israeli escalation in Jerusalem."

"The resistance factions saw that they could not remain committed to the previous rules of engagement, so it is time to link Gaza and Jerusalem," Okal added.

In terms of capabilities, the writer says that the resistance factions presented new weapons in that round and showed potentials that greatly confused Israel, especially with regard to missiles and their explosive ability.

He added that the battle "created something of deterrence better than the previous one," thwarted Israeli intelligence plans, "and put the resistance in a position to be proud of."

He pointed out that the battle lasted for 10 days, but its effects remain, especially "in creating new rules for linking Gaza and Jerusalem, and perhaps it was established to develop this equation to link Gaza and the West Bank in general and not only Jerusalem, as the Palestinian people appeared unified."

Okal touched on the activities of the Palestinians in the 1948 territories, "which would show the extent of Israel's racism, and at the same time affect its internal front."

The commander of the Gaza Division, Brigadier General Nimrod Aloni, said in an interview with the settlers in the Gaza envelope: “Hamas has an aerial tractor unit and with it they will try to cross the fence. The


Hamas engineers are talented. And we attacked them too, >>> pic.twitter.com/NYZWTN5OQj

— Saeed Bsharat Saaed Bsharat (@saaed_bsharat) May 13, 2022

mutual deterrence

On the Israeli front, Imad Abu Awwad, a researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Israeli Affairs Studies, sees "Seif al-Quds" as a different battle from its predecessors.

He added, "If the 2014 battle led to mutual deterrence with a difference in strength, then the 2021 battle contributed to increasing the area of ​​deterrence in favor of the resistance."

He demonstrated his opinion that "the resistance was the one that started the war with the first blow, and ended it with the last."

As for the important variable in the opinion of the Palestinian researcher, it is "the entry of the Palestinian insider on the line and the fear of igniting the Arab Bank."


Backlashes in Israel

In his review of the effects of that battle and its repercussions on Israel, Abu Awad says that it constituted a blow to the security level that did not improve dealing with the various Palestinian fronts, and his assessments were wrong about it.

The security level is an intelligence failure in not appreciating the participation of a Palestinian insider in the confrontation, and operationally in assessing that a war cannot be fought on more than one front, and in its failure to face the challenge on the three fronts, according to researcher Abu Awad.

On the operational level, he says, the "dangerous and major security blow" was the Israeli inability to find sufficient forces and move forces from one place to another.

News from "Israel Today" today:

"69% of the Jews in Israel are afraid for the fate of the state, and 67% believe that it is necessary to use weapons and fines to prevent riots and frictions between Jews and Arabs. These are some of the results of a poll by the "security" movement, against the backdrop of the wave of terrorism and the anniversary of the Guard of the Fences campaign."

- Yasser Al-Zaatreh (@YZaatreh) May 10, 2022

Escape for trust

At the level of the Israeli interior, Abu Awwad points to the emergence of future fears, "for the first time the Israeli public feels that it is under direct threat, not only due to the impact of rockets, but also to the impact of internal life and the relationship with the Palestinian inside."

"For the first time, the settlers have been forced to flee from the city of Lod, as 40 families decided not to return to it, and this indicates a loss of confidence in the political level and a decline in personal security," he added.

Abu Awwad refers to an opinion poll stating that only 40% of Jews are optimistic about the future, compared to 60% who are not.

As for the repercussions of the battle on the Palestinians, Abu Awad says that it raised the level of confidence among the Palestinians in the resistance’s ability to achieve achievements, and the contradictions and terminology of division faded, and the scene turned into two currents: a broad one representing the resistance, and a narrow one representing the authority and the path of settlement.

He believes that the battle, to the extent that it established a Palestinian for a new stage intellectually, and for a new generation that believes in resistance, has contributed to deterring the occupation from thinking again about starting a war with Gaza, and caused him to seek to pick up the cards in the West Bank and the occupied interior.

According to the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 261 Palestinians were killed in the battle, including 67 children and 41 women, and more than 2,200 Palestinians were wounded, while 13 people were killed in Israel and 710 others were injured.