While Hamas holds 50 hostages in Gaza and continues avoiding full payment for the October 7 massacre as state and security leadership proclaimed when horror images and blood scent remained fresh, a substantial layer of decision-makers apparently concluded that passions have cooled and border threat elimination no longer constitutes a priority.
Attempts to promote such sentiment dominate prime-time news coverage for months, seemingly infiltrating excessive media coverage of disputes between Defense Minister Israel Katz and IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir – coded as political versus military echelon conflicts. Hamas terrorists sitting in tunnels and celebrating their multi-phase plan's success for defeating Israel naturally benefit while starving hostages and rejecting every war-ending proposal in formulas Israel could accept.
Practically, all advocates of "end war at any price" policies should remember that Hamas demands for war conclusion and hostage return (theoretically complete) include total IDF perimeter withdrawal, weapon retention and Strip governance directly or indirectly, plus reconstruction initiation with Hamas dictating generous terms for "massacre success." Every interviewed former senior official confronting this demand suddenly stammers "I lack detailed knowledge, but..."
These details, for those avoiding amnesia, represent Hamas's identical attempt at Israeli state destruction and citizen murder. Consequently, alternatives should remain straightforward – nothing short of Hamas defeat.
Pathways toward this goal merit debate. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's current Gaza Strip conquest approach amid military resistance proves far from optimal. Political and military echelons argue extensively that chief of staff cannot face coercion into executing disagreeable plans. Many acknowledge that the chief of staff's Hamas defeat strategy through Operation Chariots of Gideon failed completely, achieving neither declared objective – Hamas toppling nor hostage recovery.
Under proposed planning, Military Advocate General opposition to pressuring Hamas terrorists in combat zones (weekend revelations in Israel Hayom remaining undenied) will harm soldiers while distancing goal achievement.
Consequently, upcoming days require military and political leadership to identify solutions through intensive discussions for improving war strategies before deploying additional soldiers. Endless quarreling between chief of staff and defense minister benefits neither party while intensifying concerns among families required to send relatives toward front lines repeatedly.
Beyond public relations considerations, military officials and Diplomatic-Security Cabinet should convene frequent consultations addressing prosecutorial limitations incompatible with warfare restrictions anywhere on Earth, plus determining middle-ground approaches between maintaining military capabilities for Hamas strikes while trapped in tunnels without providing recovery time.
Discussions regarding new formulas presented to Hamas require Israeli deadlines, otherwise Hamas time-extension objectives succeed again. Proposals need enforceability, with refusal costs measured through time and accumulating expenses. Unlike Operation Chariots of Gideon threats subsequently canceled through Doha negotiation chambers, Israel must demonstrate determination this time, possibly marking the first occasion since October 7 of following through completely. This represents the exclusive method for ending attrition warfare and returning hostages home.
