Another Possible Aim of Barbaric Attack

It is already fresh in murmur that one likely aim of the mass slaughter of defenseless Israeli citizens last weekend was to undermine Saudi Arabia’s impending rapprochement with Israel. The news that the Saudis put their planned deal on hold appears to bear testimony to some instrumental value the attackers realized from the carnage. 

What else? Is there a long game in which Hamas contrived to accumulate points? Consider: The terrorist playbook may accommodate a good deal of improvisation, but its individual plays tend to be limited to asymmetric options and geared to maximizing publicity through shock. There is one more factor to consider. 

In the Atrocity Olympics, points go on the scorecard for luring one’s opponent to sink to the same level by instigating reciprocal savagery. 

- - - - - - - - - 

As Dev Sol* showed the world when murdering unsuspecting police and other authorities in Turkey during the 1990s, terrorists perceive value in such actions because they (a) undermine public confidence in government’s ability to protect citizens, and (b) bait responding forces into brutal over reaction that ultimately costs the responder popular support and an erstwhile reputation as the good guy in a given conflict.  

The net result, and a strategic aim, is to heap reputational attack on top of a barbaric body count. And in the case of Hamas, that objective may appear worth the cost in loss of life and livelihood for Gaza-based Palestinians whose lot is already miserable and showing no signs of improving under an authoritarian Palestinian regime. In 15 years of autonomous rule sanctioned by Israel, that regime has delivered 70% unemployment amid unbridled railing against Israel and Israelis. In the calculation of Hamas leaders, what do they have to lose by sacrificing this abject population of unfortunates to a greater aim of striking a political and reputational blow against Israel, while basking in the publicized infamy attending the historic carnage they carried out?

This is by no means a rationalization or even a remotely justifiable objective for any civilized leadership to champion. But does it align with the agenda of barbarians? One has to wonder. 

* For an overview of Dev Sol's evolution over time, see https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/dev_sol.htm

Why Insight Matters

 Bottom Line Up Front: It's not so much that people don't know what they want; it's that people can't tell you what they want.

This was the epiphany that data scientist Howard Moskowitz realized after exhaustive surveys and focus groups and taste tests when he was trying to understand the secret behind how consumers choose spaghetti sauce. Malcolm Gladwell, in turn, immortalized this epiphany by showcasing it in a TED Talk that became so popular, it sometimes steals his own thunder when he attempts to promote his new projects. 

An enduring lesson to harvest from this epiphany is that social science research, which has never approached the precision of mathematics, must remain ever humble once recognizing its inherent limitations, no matter how impressive its methodology or presentation. Hence the need for continuing to question, to explore, and to examine alternative hypotheses -- rather than to succumb to the social sciences researcher's fatal flaw of presumptive omniscience.

Not only are there times when we don't know what we want. There are also times when we just cannot explain it.

Look here for Gladwell's talk, which has aged better than many:  https://www.ted.com/talks/malcolm_gladwell_on_spaghetti_sauce