The complexity of the fighting in Gaza, and especially in light of the Arab world's "dragging" of cooperation with Trump's plan, must raise additional options for creating a different situation in the Gaza Strip, a situation that does not allow for the re-emergence of a strategic threat to the State of Israel from within the Gaza Strip.

A military victory is defined as a situation in which the enemy's fighting power is significantly weakened, its military infrastructure is damaged, and its territories are occupied. 

This description is very similar to the situation currently prevailing in the Gaza Strip, with the exception of the issue of its total occupation, and hence it is difficult to define unequivocally that the IDF has reached a complete victory vis-à-vis Hamas in Gaza – the reasons are the complexity of defining the decision against terrorist organizations in the current era and in the foreseeable future, with the exception of the full occupation of the territory, and holding it for many years.

Military Decision Against Terrorist Organizations: Challenges and Complexities

Achieving a military victory against terrorist organizations is more complex than against organized countries and armies, because these organizations do not have a defined, clear territory, and they can declare victory even without any real achievements on the ground. Moreover, many terrorist organizations define any end of hostilities that is not a "Nakba" as a victory, a concept that erodes deterrence. Therefore, there is a real difficulty in defining a military victory against terrorist organizations, which requires in-depth thinking about the objectives of the fighting and the ways to achieve them.

The Russian Struggle in Chechnya: A Case Study of Achieving Stability

Russia's struggle in Chechnya demonstrates the complexity of achieving stability after a confrontation with terrorist organizations. Russia has conducted many rounds of fighting in Chechnya, including operations that destroyed cities. After taking over and appointing a puppet government, Russia was able to eliminate the leaders of the Chechen underground. 

Despite this, the fighting continued at a low intensity, and became an anti-terror operation. Although Russia declared an end to the state of emergency in 2009, in practice terrorist acts and military confrontations continued. An analysis of the Chechen case shows that a complete military victory is rare, and that stability is usually achieved through a combination of military force and political efforts.

The Projection of the Chechen Model on the Gaza Strip

The Chechen case demonstrates that even after a military takeover of territory and the elimination of terrorist leaders, ongoing efforts are required to maintain stability. The Chechen case shows the challenges facing Israel in the Gaza Strip vis-à-vis Hamas. 

Like Chechnya, the Gaza Strip requires a combination of determined military action to neutralize terrorist capabilities, along with long-term efforts to rehabilitate the region and strengthen moderate elements. The use of military force alone will not lead to a decision, but rather requires a holistic perspective that includes political, economic, and social components. 

An in-depth understanding of the challenges of military decisiveness and the unique complexities of confronting terrorist organizations is essential for strategic planning and effective conflict management.

How do these things fit in with the president Trump's Idea for Gaza?

At the beginning of his presidency as the 47th president, US President Trump has already declared that Gaza must be completely evacuated of its residents and rebuilt. So far, Trump's initiative has not received significant cooperation from Arab countries, but it is likely to be implemented in a format similar to that formulated in Chechnya. This requires a complete takeover of the Gaza Strip and the complete eradication of Hamas. Afterwards, there is a need to establish a new regime in the Gaza Strip, headed by a "representative" leader who is fully supported by the regional power and cooperates with it. 

President Trump has already declared that after the Gaza Strip is cleared of terror and the residents leave, the United States will "take over" the Gaza Strip. If the United States under Trump adopts Gaza, he will install a ruler on his behalf, along with a military and civilian force that will rebuild the Gaza Strip and maintain stability under American auspices. Is this model feasible? For Putin, this model has worked quite well for at least two decades, and the question is whether Gaza will remain as it is.

In any case, it is clear that the implementation of the model described will require the occupation of the Gaza Strip and its cleansing – and as it seems, there are not many "volunteers" for the mission, i.e., the task will be assigned to the IDF, unless the international effort succeeds in harnessing the Arab states and creating a momentum of total surrender of Hamas leaders, including their expulsion from the region.