Recently, several reports have appeared in the Israeli and International press, opposing the Israeli Government's plan to conquer the city of Gaza, where Hamas maintains its last military stronghold. These journalists and experts argue that Israel should unilaterally declare victory over Hamas, withdraw from the Gaza Strip to a narrow security perimeter, impose a complete blockade on the area, and then negotiate the hostages' release in exchange for humanitarian relief and reconstruction. The argument follows the following logic:

1. The majority of Israelis want the war to end (and even oppose an attack on Gaza City) and demand the hostages be released at almost any price, even at the expense of destroying Hamas. 

2. What remains of Hamas' military capabilities no longer poses a viable military threat to Israel.

3. Since Hamas is unlikely to surrender and will fight to the bitter end, any attempt to conquer Gaza City will bring minimum overall benefit at the expense of high casualty rates amongst Israeli forces.

4. The attack on Gaza City is a death sentence for any hostages who remain alive.

5. The civilian population cannot be evacuated from the city. Either Hamas will not allow the removal of its human shield against Israeli attacks, or the civilians themselves will not agree to go into voluntary displacement. Therefore, any attack on the city will result in high civilian casualty rates amongst the local population.

6. As a consequence of the inevitable humanitarian crises and high civilian casualties, international support for Israel will sink to an unprecedented low and she will face arms embargos and economic sanctions from even her most staunch allies. At the very least Israel will lose massive popular support even amongst Republicans in the USA.

7. Therefore, Israel's best option is to unilaterally withdraw from Gaza as Hamas has consistently demanded as a binding condition for any comprehensive hostage deal and make any future humanitarian relief and reconstruction efforts contingent on the release of all remaining hostages (both living and dead). 

This argument is full of internal contradictions, makes no real rational sense, defies the realities of regional politics and ignores inherent cultural perceptions. Let us begin by looking at each one of the points listed above:

1. There is no evidence to substantiate any claim that most Israelis prioritize the release of hostages over the defeat of Hamas. Most polls published in the mainstream media have a clear political agenda and are more concerned with influencing public sentiment than presenting a factual account of a complex public debate. Most polls ask simple yes/no questions that ignore multifaceted realities and clashing moral dilemmas. Obviously, most Israelis would agree to end the war in return for the release of the hostages, but only on the condition that Hamas agrees to surrender, disarm, and go into permanent exile (even if this means that they will never be prosecuted for their crimes of 7^th October). When asked directly if they would support the release of the hostages and an end to hostilities, at the expense of allowing Hamas to remain in Gaza, either as a military or civilian power, the vast majority of Israeli's respond negatively.  The thought that Hamas will remain in power inside the Gaza strip after the atrocities it committed on 7^th of October (and wishes to commit once more should the opportunity arise) is a complete anathema to a considerable majority of the Israeli public.

2. It is certainly true that Hamas currently does not pose a clear and present threat to Israel and cannot launch attacks into Israeli territory under current circumstances. But the emphasis must be on the word "currently". Who can guarantee that Hamas will not pose a threat to Israel in the future if it is allowed to hold on to power in the Gaza Strip? We shall address this issue in more detail later on.

3. The assumption that Hamas will never surrender under military duress may be true of the organization's fanatical leadership (who may have nothing left to lose), but I doubt this is also true for the rank and file, many of whom are recent recruits who may not necessarily be ideologically motivated and may lack the will to sacrifice themselves when faced with ultimate annihilation. In truth, I am less convinced of the Hamas leadership's willingness to sacrifice itself and think there is a good chance that they will use the release of the remaining hostages as last-minute leverage to get Israel's consent to surrender and exile themselves to Turkey or Qatar (with their families) where no doubt they will be welcomed as heroes and freedom fighters and live in luxury in five star hotels or modern mansions without facing any legal or physical ramifications. Not a single Israeli will refuse such an offer if it brings the hostages home and brings the war to a victorious conclusion (ergo the eradication of Hamas power in Gaza). 

4. Even so, wars are inevitably bloody and deadly affairs. Victories cannot be achieved without significant sacrifice (and every death is of course significant). However, we should be careful not to scare ourselves into submission. Ever since this war began the scaremongers have been warning us of massive IDF casualty rates as a consequence of intense urban warfare and Hamas's nightmare underground tunnel network. And yet, the IDF has repeatedly proven the pessimists wrong. Through the right combination of defensive and offensive measures, and cautious progress, military casualties can be drastically reduced. Since the beginning of the conflict Israel has suffered approximately 450 mortalities and thousands of non-mortal casualties (many of them debilitating) in the Gaza Strip alone, yet these numbers come nowhere near to the estimations banded around by the pessimists at the beginning of the war. Why should the battle in Gaza City be any different?  

5. If the battle for Gaza City is indeed devoid of any practical benefit, then every casualty is certainly a wasted life. But the primary aim of the war has always been to remove Hamas (and all other terrorist organizations) from Gaza, both as a military and political force, and prevent the Strip posing any future threat to Israel's security. So long as Hamas refuses to surrender and lay down its weapons such an outcome can only be achieved by the use of substantial military force.

6. And what of the hostages? Can they survive if the IDF invades Gaza City? There is no definitive answer to this question. Israelis must accept the fact that the coming battle will certainly endanger the hostages, either from friendly Israeli fire or from execution by Hamas gaolors who may decide to murder their captives prior to fleeing the Israeli onslaught. However, in some cases the opposite may be true. Hamas has no interest in killing all the hostages, who cynically and cruelly remain its most effective and valuable bargaining chip. Hamas will most likely preserve the hostages so long as it believes they give it some sort of leverage over Israel's conduct of the war effort and over Israeli public opinion and media coverage of the conflict. Tragically, Hamas used this card in the past already, executing six hostages in cold blood in June 2024, while exploiting the event for maximum psychological effect.

It has always been my belief that public demonstrations in support of a hostage agreement at any price have inevitably only incentivized Hamas to adopt a tougher stance. But Hamas knows that at this stage in the war, the cold-blooded execution of hostages is more likely to incense Israeli and international opinion and destroy any chance of a negotiated surrender.  But is there really any other alternative? Does anyone really think that Hamas will release the hostages and voluntarily lay down arms and agree to depart the Gaza Strip? So long as the Israel public and government continue to signal to Hamas that the hostages are Israel's Achilles Heel Hamas' leadership will never free all the living hostages. They will hold on to as many as they can, for as long as they can, prolonging the negotiations to test Israel's endurance and torturing the Israeli public into moral and physical fatigue. They will do so by releasing the hostages one by one at a pace that will drag out any ceasefires to the maximum time possible, knowing full well that the more they delay, the greater their chance of survival.

1. Just the thought of delaying the attack on Gaza City until elections are declared in Israel (which could potentially happen at any moment particularly when the Knesset votes on a budget on 31^st March and which are in any case scheduled to take place no later than October 2026 preceded by at least 4 months of campaigning when fighting will suspended or severely limited because of the political implications) is enough motivation for Hamas to filibuster negotiations in the hope that a left-wing government will eventually replace Netanyahu's coalition and seek an immediate end to the conflict. At this stage only the use of military force has any potential of saving the hostages in a reasonable timeframe, even if it comes at a heavy cost.  

2. Can the civilian population be persuaded to evacuate Gaza City? One has to assume that once the dangers of remaining in a city under military siege and under constant aerial bombardment can no longer be avoided, most of the civilian population will relocate elsewhere. Since the war began, and despite the warnings of the usual doomsayers, the IDF has succeeded on multiple occasions to relocate civilian populations from one district to another, even before there were any aid distribution centers. Should the IDF succeed in setting up easily accessible humanitarian zones as planned, there is no reason why evacuation efforts should not succeed. Hamas will lose its ability to prevent an evacuation once it is on the defensive and has to go underground in order to hide from Israeli forces. Furthermore, Israel has had great success in limiting civilian casualties despite the challenging circumstances and there is no reason to think that this trend will not be maintained. The fact that the international community is doing little to help civilians leave an active war zone, so long as UNRWA is out of the way and the much more efficient GHF mechanism is in place, has given Hamas more motivation to prevent civilians abandoning the city. That in and of itself is a war crime and a crime against humanity, but then international uproar about the plight of Gazans has never really been about love for the Palestinians but rather animosity toward Israel and the Jewish people. 

3. And this brings me to another important point: International pressure on Israel and the fear of extreme international sanctions and arms embargo. While certainly not something to be dismissed lightly, such sanctions are not inevitable (considering the unprecedented support Israel is getting from the Trump administration). Nonetheless, despite the dangers, Israel cannot allow herself to be blackmailed by international pressure (whether sanctions, international recognition of a Palestinian State or criminal prosecution for war crimes) into a unilateral withdrawal and a de facto surrender. In the same way  that Israel must show its enemies that it will not submit to blackmail through the taking of hostages. It must show the world that it cannot be pressured into submission by  immoral and irrational international public opinion kowtowing to every lie and every perverse accusation made up by terrorists and Hamas propagandists and by so doing fan the flames of a hatred fermented by fanatical genocidal jihadists that manipulate, exploit and instigate incredible suffering amongst their own civilian population as a propaganda and psychological weapon, and cause far more harm and  destruction amongst the Gazan people than any force initiated by the IDF or IAF.

Let us not forget that international public opinion turned against Israel from almost the moment the war began. The bodies were still being counted, and the families had not yet buried their loved ones, and already public opinion throughout the world and particularly on left wing campuses was already expressing sympathy for Palestinian murderers, rapists and baby-killers. If the tragedy from 7^th October could so easily be forgotten, why should anything Israel do in this war make any difference to the obsessive hatred directed at the world's only Jewish state.

1. International denunciation has been an inevitable development in all of Israel's wars over the last 40 years. No matter what resulted in the conflict, no matter how hard Israel tries to avoid civilian casualties, no matter how much humanitarian aid Israel gives its enemies, it will always face irrational international condemnation. Are we therefore really supposed to believe that if Israel withdraws from the Gaza Strip and holds only a narrow defensive perimeter inside Gaza that public opinion will suddenly be on our side? Do we really think that public opinion will support Israel withholding humanitarian aid to Gaza and preventing the area's reconstruction, unless the hostages are released and Hamas surrenders? Within a week or two there will once again be a public outcry that Israel is starving the Gazans and creating a humanitarian crisis that collectively punishing a civilian population for the crimes of a tyrannical leadership. Israel will be forced by public pressure to desist from its blockade, aid will flood into Gaza, the hostages will never be released and Hamas will use the flow of humanitarian aid and building materials to rebuild its military and civilian infrastructure and within 10 years the region will be exactly back to where we started: In Israeli eyes a Hamas controlled terrorist state on Israel's southern border just waiting to commit another atrocity , and in the eyes of Israel's enemies and detractors, the world's biggest open-air prison. Back to square one. Hamas will declare victory (and rightly so). It will become the poster boy for all Israel's enemies, who will understand that all you need to defeat Israel is by make a deadly brew based on a recipe whose ingredients include capturing masses of hostages, making sure as many of your civilians are killed as possible by using them as human shields, telling innumerable and incredulous lies to gullible left-wing progressives in western countries, using Arab and progressive money to buy votes and influence in international organizations, and throw in massive lawfare efforts based on baseless interpretations of international law. Hamas' victory will ensure the perpetuation of the Middle East conflict for decades to come and embolden Palestinians into an unassailable belief in the fulfilment of the only core principle of the Palestinian national movement: the complete destruction of the State of Israel.

2. However, the biggest fault in the logic of those proposing an Israeli withdrawal, is the very notion that one side can unilaterally declare a victory in a military conflict. The very idea that Israel can decide when it has won a war, regardless of what the other side thinks, is at best ludicrous and at worst an intentional lie we tell ourselves to make us feel better about the embarrassment of running away with our tail between our legs. Because that is exactly how such an act will be interpreted by Israel's enemies. More important than winning a conflict is making sure that the other side accepts that it is defeated and acknowledges the other side's victory. For Hamas and the Palestinians, anything less than Hamas' complete eradication in the Gaza Strip will be considered a huge victory. Hamas will have proven that with the right tactics, with enough resilience and self-belief, with uncompromising faith in Allah and Jihad, even a mighty military power can be forced to its knees. Hamas's survival will give it a legendary status that will make it the unchallenged leader and a role model not just for the Palestinians but for all Jihadists and fanatical Islamists throughout the world. This threatens not just Israel's future but the future of Western civilization in general. In the same way that the surprise attack on 7^th of October and the capture of hundreds of hostages set the tone of the Gaza war and gave Hamas a psychological advantage that has never been completely erased even after all the destruction of the last 20 months, a resurgent post-war Hamas will claim a victory that will dominate the historical narrative for the Gaza War for decades to come. This must not be allowed to happen. If it does, Israel is finished.

3. Hamas must be defeated in a way that leaves no room for false narratives. Certainly, Hamas's genocidal ideology will continue to live on in the hearts of some Palestinians but with Hamas gone and its political preaching banned from schools and public institutions, the Gazan population (whatever small percentage of it that decides to stay when given the option of immigrating elsewhere) will eventually be “dehamasified”, so to speak, and Israel's enemies will never forget the consequences of awakening a sleeping tiger. Force and ruthless uncompromising victory are the only language that has any real value in the Middle East and lies can only be defeated through raw physical truths. The Middle East must understand that Israel and the Jewish people are here to stay. The international community must understand that the raison d’être of Palestinian nationalism is the annihilation of Israel, and until the Palestinians accept the Jewish people's right to exist peacefully as a nation in their ancestral homeland, they must never be allowed to have even the most limited form of political autonomy. 

Is this really a viable vision for the Middle East or shall we call it what it really is: a dangerous concept that makes a mockery of the suffering of the last two years? Israel must stand firm and prove to its enemies once and for all that inhumane, immoral and cowardly tactics can no longer pressure Israel into surrender or withdrawal, and that terrorism and destructive ideologies will only be met with one response: a defiant victory.