The re -preparation of Israel in Gaza is a strategic catastrophe

Digest opened free editor

Rola Khaleda, FT editor, chooses her favorite stories in this weekly newsletter.

The writer is the former Prime Minister of Israel, the Minister of Defense and the Chief of Staff of the Israel Defense Army

After nearly 20 months of the October 7 2023 massacre, Israel faces a fateful option: it reaches a deal to bring all hostages home and end the war-or a full attack on Gaza in seeking to achieve Mirg’s “full victory” over Hamas.

But the government also faces another deeper option: compatibility with right-wing ministers such as Itamar ben-GVIR and Bezalel Smotrich, who are pushing for the reshaping and resettlement of Gaza, or turning towards the international community, the vision of US President Donald Trump for regional peace and international law.

Recently, Trump According to what was stated, he was warned Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: “We will abandon you if this war does not end.” France, Britain and Canada have already demanded that Israel renew humanitarian aid or the consequences of confrontation and the United Kingdom Declare Talks will be attached to a bilateral trade deal. Real pressure – rising.

The deal would undoubtedly benefit Israel. This means the return of the remaining hostages, the end of the combat crisis and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, the beginning of the reconstruction-which gives Israel the opportunity to integrate into a new regional structure, including normalization with Saudi Arabia and participation in the economic corridor in India Middle East.

For Netanyahu, however, this path is fraught with risks. He threatens his extreme right -wing alliance, and opens the door to renew the invitations to the October 7 Investigation Committee and can accelerate the prolonged corruption trial. more than 70 percent From the Israelis, he holds it responsible for the failure of October, and More than half I think he behaves on the basis of personal interests – not patriotism -. A deal that can distinguish the end of his long term.

The war, on the other hand, protects it politically. But strategic, it is disastrous. Israel has already destroyed most of Hamas and infrastructure. I think another round of fighting will bring more destruction, but it will end at the same point. “The complete judiciary” of Hamas, a group included and hides among more than 2 million civilians, is not a practical military mission. In fact, a renewed attack in Gaza does not offer any strategic gain – and the renewed fighting will be more hostages to death. This alone must end the discussion.

Many Israelis see the quality of Netanyahu’s quality of Gaza as it is: a political war to protect his fragile alliance, which denies it as a security necessity. And when it ends inevitably – under global pressure, humanitarian collapse or local turmoil – Israel will find itself again as it started, and needs to replace Hamas with a legitimate alternative. So why sacrifice the hostages and soldiers and more innocent conquests to get there?

To understand the depth of the strategic error of Netanyahu, one must remember the assets. October 7 was the darkest day in the history of Israel. He created a convincing necessity: Make sure that Hamas does not rule again Gaza or threatens Israel. However, Netanyahu did not deal with this challenge correctly. This is the same man Claim In 2019, “it must be against a Palestinian state” for ” transfer Foreign money to Gaza portion Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. Netanyahu facilitated an estimated $ 1.5 billion in the Qatari boxes flowing into the hands of Hamas (to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe, as he claims). But it is more likely part of it it’s all over In tunnels and messages.

The first war law – which was confirmed by Clausewitz to Kissiner – is that it must serve a political purpose. Netanyahu ignored this rule and failed the basic test of leadership: maintaining calm, sober and strategic under pressure. From the start, IDF and WAR cabinet pressed him to determine the “next day” in Gaza. to reject. Why? Because it would have led to an uncomfortable political fact: the defeat of Hamas means replacing it with an acceptable government by regional partners, the international community and the Palestinians themselves.

This is likely to require a force led by the transitional Arabs backed by the Arab League, and if necessary, the United Nations. Funding can come from the Gulf states. Governance will fall on the technocrats and a bureaucracy of the Palestinian Authority, and a new security apparatus can be built gradually under the supervision of the Arab and the United States. Israel, for its part, will re -spread its forces to the vicinity of Gaza and require that one person from the Hamas military branch be part of the new ruling entity; The Israeli Defense Army will not withdraw until after completing pre -directed security standards.

This plan was on the table for more than a year. It was easier to implement before the sentence was destroyed. It is still applied now, albeit more difficult. But it is still the only realistic way to sustainable victory.

Today, Israel can claim important achievements: Hezbollah’s threat was shattered from Lebanon, and it may neutralize a lot of Syrian military ability and hit deep into Iran, while she was defending itself when Tehran took revenge. From this position of strength, Israel can now bear the costs of the axis towards a broader deal: launching all hostages (living and death), ending the war and following a peaceful regional matter.

Hostering this path would break the Netanyahu alliance and may end his political career. The Prime Minister does not act in the national interest; He behaves purely to preserve the self. Each other argument is a chimney screen.