Researcher names factors behind the resilience of weaker sides in wars — Jerusalem Post
In Israel, Boaz Golany, a senior research fellow at the Neaman Institute and professor emeritus at the Technion, examined in a column for the Jerusalem Post the reasons why armed movements that are militarily weaker can resist stronger armies for a long time. As examples, he cited the Houthis in Yemen, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and Hezbollah in Lebanon.
According to the author, military superiority is not equivalent to strategic endurance. He believes that such movements can use socioeconomic problems, ideology, weak state institutions, external support, and time as key advantages.
Resources for prolonged confrontation
Golany noted that in countries where young people have few opportunities to find work, live with dignity, and see convincing prospects for the future, armed organizations can offer money, status, camaraderie, protection, and purpose. At the same time, he stressed that poverty does not mean inevitable recruitment into armed groups, but it creates a broader potential recruitment base for them.
According to the author, ideology turns military confrontation into a moral struggle in the eyes of its participants. Religion, nationalism, Marxism, ethnic identity, or revolutionary ideas can play such a role. If the state does not provide security, justice, water, electricity, education, or jobs, an armed movement can take over some of these functions and become a parallel social structure.
More current news is available on the UA.News Telegram channel Telegram.
Time and political pressure
Golany named external support as a separate factor. He noted that funding, weapons supplies, training, intelligence, and technology from an external power can significantly strengthen a local movement. As an example, the author mentioned Iran's support for regional armed groups.
The author also drew attention to the political constraints of democratic states, whose societies over time expect protracted wars to end and take into account casualties, the deployment of reservists, economic consequences, and elections. In his assessment, the weaker side does not necessarily need to achieve a quick victory: it may be enough for it to survive and wait until the stronger opponent faces internal political exhaustion.
Golany mentioned Vietnam, Afghanistan, and the war in Gaza as examples that military superiority does not guarantee a political outcome. He also called underestimating the opponent and the stronger side's overconfidence dangerous factors, referring to Israel's experience during the attack that, according to him, was led by Hamas on October 7, 2023.
