Christmas should have been a time of joy – instead, Gaza is mourning

In his Christmas sermon, the Reverend Dr Munther Isaac, of the Evangelical Lutheran Christmas Church in Bethlehem, referred to the church’s unusual nativity display, which featured the baby Jesus, draped in a Palestinian keffiyeh, lying amid rocks rather than oxen, wise men and shepherds: “If Jesus were to be born today, he would be born under the rubble in Gaza.”

Christ in the rubble was the symbol the pastor chose to highlight the suffering of the civilian people of Palestine, and to underline that the population of Gaza includes a small Christian community. His address deserves to be treated as historic, not least for its powerful invocation of the true meaning of this season: “It is not about Santa, trees, gifts, lights, etcetera. My goodness, how we have twisted the meaning of Christmas. How we have commercialised Christmas.” Instead, said Rev Isaac, the Christmas message is that Jesus, who miraculously survived a massacre, was “born among the occupied and marginalised. He is in solidarity with us in our pain and brokenness.”

The reverend spoke of mass killing and of how those in the West who have failed to prevent it are “complicit”.

His words have been echoed and reflected on by other Christian leaders. The Pope reminded the world that Jesus’s message of peace is being drowned out by the “futile logic of war”. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Justin Welby, said that the “skies of Bethlehem are full of fear rather than angels and glory”.

Rightly, Dr Welby also referred to the atrocities committed against Jewish people when Hamas invaded Israel on a deadly terror mission on 7 October: “Today a crying child is in a manger somewhere in the world, nobody willing or able to help his parents, who desperately need shelter. Or in an incubator, in a hospital low on electricity, like al-Ahli Hospital in Gaza, surrounded by conflict. Maybe he lies in a house that still bears the marks of the horrors of 7 October, with family members killed and a mother who feared for her life.”

It should not be forgotten that some 1,200 Israelis were murdered that day, and Hamas are still holding many of the hostages they seized during their operation. Had that attack not been launched, there would be no war taking place today.

Not for the first time, then, the Holy Land is suffering the effects of war during a sacred religious festival. On Christmas night, according to the Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza, an Israeli airstrike killed at least 70 people in al-Maghazi refugee camp in central Gaza.

Although the figures are sometimes disputed – given the scale of military operations, the destruction of hospitals and infrastructure, and the siege conditions – there seems little reason to doubt Hamas’s claim that around 20,000 civilians have been killed since the start of Israel’s response to the 7 October atrocities.

For its part, the Israel Defence Forces says that more than a Israeli dozen soldiers have been killed in Gaza since Friday, bringing the total since the ground offensive was launched following the 7 October attack to 156. Saturday was one of the deadliest days for Israel’s military so far in the conflict, but the country’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said there was “no choice” but to keep fighting.

Perhaps he sees things that way, but there is always a choice available to commanders as to how they conduct a war, and this war is not going so well for Israel. Put at its simplest, Israel is killing too many civilians, many of them children and infants. It is losing vital support among its otherwise staunch friends and allies in the West, including the United States.

It has been condemned by the United Nations, not least for the unprecedented level of death and injury inflicted on UN personnel. Not that Mr Netanyahu takes too much notice of the UN; he has recently called for its secretary general to quit. Far more important, and for Israel far more worrying, is that the war is not in the Israeli national interest.

Mr Netanyahu has set impossible war aims – to destroy Hamas – and has pursued those aims crudely and increasingly disproportionately, going against international conventions. Yet for all the savagery, there is no doubt that terrorism, perpetrated by Hamas or by some other group, is not going to stop for good – and that thousands more Palestinians will join an armed struggle born of the present violence.

Precious few Hamas commanders have been captured – and the political leadership of the organisation is living in comfort, far away in Qatar. Tunnels have been discovered and blown up, but they were empty.

Damagingly for Mr Netanyahu, hostages remain in the hands of Hamas, and three were even shot dead by Israeli troops – a single incident that gives rise to profound concerns about operations on the ground. From the point of view of enhancing Israel’s prospects for long-term stability and security, this war is proving counterproductive.

Yet it would not be Christmas without hope. Egypt, which would have much to lose from the collapse of Gaza, is constructing an initiative that may lead to some kind of respite, even if a lasting peace and a political settlement seem remote. The initiative draws on various international endeavours that have taken place in recent weeks. The first phase of the ceasefire would see a humanitarian pause of seven to 10 days, while Hamas would release all civilian hostages in exchange for some Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails.

Phase two would see Hamas release all of the female Israeli soldiers it is holding in return for more prisoners, along with the repatriation of the bodies of those killed since 7 October. The final phase would last for a month, during which negotiations would take place over the release of all remaining military personnel in exchange for a final tranche of Palestinian prisoners and Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. The constant bombings would end.

In itself, it is hardly a long-term peace plan, but Egypt’s proposal would buy some time – and suspend further suffering. Reportedly, it has not been rejected out of hand by either Israel or Hamas, and it would involve Qatari and American mediation.

It certainly deserves broad international support. True, the plan would postpone, rather than confront, vital questions such as Hamas’s stated intention to destroy the state of Israel, but it would also represent a pause in the pursuit of that aim, and break the current dynamic of the war. From the Israeli point of view, it would offer an exit from what could become even more of a military quagmire – an endless, unwinnable war of occupation, fought over rubble.

There are also signs that a decisive Western naval response to attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea, which have threatened global oil supplies, could soon allow normal traffic to resume.

The danger of the conflict spreading to draw in Iran – as well as its proxies in Yemen and beyond – seems to be receding. Even so, and despite the chance that this war will wind down before too long, the situation remains, as of now, just as Rev Isaac described it: “This should have been a time of joy; instead, we are mourning. We are fearful.”