The following article was written for RaymondIbrahim.com by Joachim Osther
In the wake of the massacres carried out by Hamas on October 7th, many in the West called for cease-fire and questioned the need for Israel to engage Hamas inside of Gaza. One reason for the IDF offensive may lie in the objectives of the antagonists—objectives that have long marked the historical conflicts between militant Islam and the West.
In his book, Defenders of the West: The Christians Heroes Who Stood Against Islam, Raymond Ibrahim traces centuries of warfare between Western and Islamic armies, providing historical insight that may inform the rationale for Israel’s current riposte.
Notably, one Christian warlord employed a very different strategic approach in his efforts to defend his nation from Islamic conquest. His name was Janko [John] Hunyadi.
The White Knight of Wallachia
Ottomans led by Murad II and his successor, Muhammed II, were at the helm of the 15th Century effort to Islamize Europe. A fractionated Europe had lost its resolve to liberate the surviving indigenous Christians of the Middle East and the holy city of Jerusalem, along with the requisite unity necessary to prevent the Ottomans from invading the West. As Europe lowered its collective guard, the Ottomans gained ground along the southeastern corridor framed by the Balkans and southern Hungary.
From this forward position, the Ottomans built forts and launched unrelenting raids to weaken both the physical defenses and the will to resist. The strategy was to move incrementally northwest into Europe with the objective of conquest, enslavement and destruction of Christianity through death or conversion. Using contemporaneous sources, Ibrahim details the reasons for Western fear as borne out of the ignominious magnitude of slaughter, rape, enslavement, and mass beheadings resulting in “great mountains of [Christian] heads.”
Using present-day parlance, the 15th Century Ottoman objective can be described as an all-encompassing goal of conquest, death or conversion “from the Danube to the sea [Atlantic].”
At that time, the strategic mindset of the various Western warlords was defensive in nature. This posture allowed the Ottomans to dictate the timing and manner of aggression, and, crucially, this also enabled the replenishment of troops and materiel—the key to offensive military campaign vivacity.
However, it was in this strategically pivotal frontier that the Ottomans would face a confounding foe. A man whose style of warfare was unusual, highly effective, and through which the strategic residue of Israel’s current actions can be traced. His name was Janko [John] Hunyadi, and through his military genius, his valor, and his bright armor, he became known as The White Knight of Wallachia. Ibrahim describes how Hunyadi was both a master of the implements of war and a keen student of the art of war. He was consummate military thinker who closely studied military strategy from ages past and was said to be “especially fond of Caesar’s military journal.”
In 1441, Hunyadi was named voivode (“warlord”) of Transylvania and placed in charge of the southeastern border of Hungary. In facing such a daunting and existential threat, Hunyadi reconfigured his fighting forces by adding an infantry element, some armed with firearms, to the existing cavalry regimens. More importantly, however, he viewed a defensive posture as de facto acquiescence to constant aggression—a strategic presupposition he found to be unacceptable. Instead, Hunyadi embraced a strategic approach that Ibrahim describes as “unthinkable” at that time: he went on offense.
Wasting little time, in the very year he was designated voivode, Hunyadi left the defensive ramparts behind and crossed the Danube to engage and rout a large Ottoman army camped along the frontlines.
The offensive strategy became the modus operandi of the White Knight who meted out defeats to the Ottomans not merely along the Hungarian frontlines, but deep within their own territory. In doing so, the Ottomans were unable to reorganize, resupply, and mount their continuous assaults on Hungary. It was a strategy of both preemption and of psychological warfare as the hunters became the hunted.
For a time, his actions and successes inspired other European nations to join in the efforts to ward off the Ottoman armies. Not surprisingly, the consequent response throughout Muslim-held lands was one of defense. The fear that Hunyadi may suddenly descend upon them was so great that defensive preparations were made as far off as Cairo.
Israel’s White Knight Strategy
Hunyadi left a long-lasting legacy of military strategy that kept the Ottomans at bay for decades following his death, and elements of his strategic approach is currently on display
As Israel faces a 21st Century embodiment of the militant Ottomans, it surely recognizes the string of historic proclivities exemplified by Hunyadi’s antagonists, as the stated overarching objective of Hamas is not merely land and spoils, but the eradication of the Jewish people “from the river to the sea.”
Similar to Hunyadi, Israel understands that it must respond when attacked or before they are attacked—that it must go on the offense and the concept of preemption must be sown into its military doctrine. Using what could be called “The White Knight Strategy,” Israel has repeatedly kept radical Islamists at bay from their modern rebirth in 1948 until the present. This strategy has clearly been adopted as manifest policy seen in the Six Day’s War, Operation Orchard, the ongoing efforts to cripple Iranian nuclear capabilities through a variety of means, and yes, in their current war with Hamas.
The Intent of ‘Cease-Fire’?
There is one more notable similitude tying past conflicts to the current war.
In the present, protestors angrily call for Israel to ‘cease-fire.’ A similar refrain calling for armistice came in 1451 when Muhammed II succeeded Murad II. In reality, the cease-fire was to buy time for the new Sultan to consolidate his power and amass a formidable fighting force. Once his power and military were primed, he reneged the agreement and besieged the Christian seat of the Byzantine Empire: Constantinople. An unprepared West had ignored Hunyadi’s warnings of the coming disaster and thus Constantinople fell in 1453. Eyewitnesses who recounted the scenes following this Ottoman victory, describe with eerie similarity the grotesque details that emerged from Israel on October 7th, 2023.
In his works, Ibrahim details the constancy of making and breaking peace treaties to such a degree that it seems to be a counterstrategy rather than an intended settlement. In his book, Sword and Scimitar, lies a noteworthy description of Constantinople’s conqueror’s call for truce – “peace was on his lips while war was in his heart.”
It would seem that past actions of Hamas and certainly the current inflamed tenor of the anti-Israel protests convey a similar sentiment.
Joachim Osther is a multi-disciplinarian – a freelance writer focusing on the intersection of culture and Christianity. Osther holds a master’s degree in theological studies while working as a strategist, advisor, and published author in the life sciences.