A price beyond imagination

In an unprecedented interview on Channel 11’s “It Will Be Good,” Brigadier General Amit Saar, former head of the Military Intelligence Research Division, offered a revealing confession. This man, whose task had been to warn of Hamas’s October 7th attack, not only acknowledges his failure but admits he never imagined Hamas would dare assault Israel the way it did. Following the announcement of the judicial reform, he had indeed warned the government several times about the danger of war erupting against Israel due to the internal fracture in Israeli society, but he had thought the threat would come from the north.

While watching the interview, I found little that truly surprised me, until one statement struck me like a hammer – a statement that explains Israel’s current situation on the eve of the hostage deal. While explaining his opposition to a proposal raised in the General Staff on October 11th to eliminate Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, he said: “The main reason was that in my view, we cannot conclude this event without extracting from Hamas an unimaginable price, one never before extracted from any enemy at any stage, and this cannot be achieved if we shift the spotlight to Lebanon.” Thus, the objective was to exact a price “beyond imagination.”

The instinctive response of this general, who had monitored Hamas and was supposed to warn of the danger, proves he was entirely blind to what was unfolding before his eyes. This, despite surveillance operators who repeatedly warned of Hamas’s intentions while monitoring its movements.

The reason for this is that Hamas’s October 7th attack was truly “beyond imagination.” There was nothing rational about this murderous assault, which included the kidnapping of civilians – among them teenagers, young women, infants, and elderly – as hostages, in addition to soldiers. The officer’s response seems to mirror Hamas’s behavior. Faced with a murderous action beyond imagination, he responded with a reaction that was equally so—and outside the realm of rationality.

From that moment on, nothing that happened in Gaza could be explained rationally. For over a year, the military, politicians, media figures, columnists, and commentators have been demanding that the government present a “day after” plan. However, as we approach the conclusion of the current phase of the war, the government has refused to present any political plan for the post-war period. It has limited itself to establishing three strategic objectives: first, eliminating Hamas’s military capabilities; second, dismantling Hamas’s governing capabilities; and third, returning the hostages.

“An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is the undeclared motto of this war, which better serves the instinct for revenge than the conduct of a rational military campaign.

As the general outline of the hostage deal emerges, it becomes apparent that the third objective contradicts the first two. In fact, the government added the third objective of returning the hostages due to public pressure. But it turns out that securing the hostages’ return comes at the expense of achieving the two main strategic objectives. Hamas continues to maintain military capabilities, evident in the fighting in northern Gaza which is extracting a heavy toll from Israel, and it remains the exclusive governing authority in Gaza. “Absolute victory”—Netanyahu’s slogan—has not materialized. The opposition accused Netanyahu that his position amounted to opposing a hostage deal, and thus it has turned out: one cannot achieve both absolute victory and the release of hostages.

The second reason why the war’s objectives cannot be achieved stems from the government’s continued refusal to discuss “the day after.” In other words, the government has no alternative to Hamas’s rule in Gaza. The absence of an alternative was the main reason why Israel, with its army and acclaimed generals, was caught with its pants down on October 7th. This lack of an alternative had led successive governments and the entire security establishment to compensate by trying to tame the monster. The purpose of allowing suitcases of Qatari money into Gaza, and avoiding confrontation, was to bring Hamas to a point where war would not be worthwhile, since they would have too much to lose.

This conception was undoubtedly rational, but it failed because it encountered an organization whose rationale is not rational – one willing to sacrifice its people to achieve its messianic goal. Thus, we arrive at a situation where thousands of Israelis take to the streets demanding the return of hostages while Hamas documents the horrors of war in a transcontinental public relations campaign. In the same breath, Hamas declares its willingness to sacrifice hundreds of thousands of Gazans for its sacred cause while abjuring responsibility for their fate.

It appears that the hostage deal reveals who is the winning side and who is the losing side. In Israel, people are horrified by the idea that Hamas will remain in Gaza, by the release of hundreds of terrorists, and by the fact that the strong failed to defeat the weak.

In light of the emerging details about the deal, Yoav Zitun, military correspondent for Yedioth Ahronoth, allows himself to state explicitly today: “The dismantling of Hamas’s civil and military rule is not a war objective. It’s a lie fed to the public since the first week of the war. It’s a fabricated spin, as long as it lacks the crucial missing piece: who will govern instead of Hamas over 2 million Gazans, from among whom and under whose auspices Hamas developed into a terror army, and still survives and will survive for years to come.”

Here, another question arises: who is feeding the public these spins – the government or the military? The military says that it cannot achieve the war’s objectives because the government has not set a political goal. However, it was the military itself that vetoed replacing Hamas’s rule with Israeli military governance. To this end, it invented the method of repeated raids on territories it had previously conquered and withdrawn from. This method not only results in numerous military casualties, but it also causes enormous destruction in Gaza and unbearable harm to the civilian population.

Thus, the military too has no alternative to Hamas and no answer for the day after. Talk of Arab states coming to rescue Israel from Gaza was and remains a pipe dream. Before or after October 7th, the equation remained unchanged, leaving only two alternatives – either Hamas or Israel. Since Israel rejects both, what remains is interminable chaos.

Consequently, the government has failed to achieve its primary objectives. Hamas has been neither militarily nor administratively demolished, but it has indeed fulfilled the wish of the Israeli general who was responsible for intelligence warnings. Israel has indeed extracted a price “beyond imagination.” And to be clear, it is not just Hamas that has paid the price, but also, and above all, the civilians of Gaza. “An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” is the undeclared motto of this war, which better serves the instinct for revenge than the conduct of a rational military campaign.

In light of this situation, it is very difficult to predict what the day after the return of the hostages and the start of a ceasefire will look like. Hamas will remain in Gaza as a governing force and will continue to impose itself on the population while relying on what remains of its military power. Yet Gaza has been completely destroyed. It has become Ground Zero, and the displaced have nowhere to return to. The situation is beyond imagination, and it’s unclear what Hamas’s “rule” can possibly mean. Therefore, it is so difficult to imagine what will happen in the future – who will provide for residents’ needs, who will rehabilitate the ruins, what will happen to an entire generation of children left without schools or homes in which to do their homework?

It turns out that not only does Israel have no idea what will happen the day after, Hamas has no idea either. Thus, the Israeli government and military have created a reality that is beyond imagination, and currently, there is no Israeli or Palestinian entity capable of offering a solution. The thesis that this conflict has no solution, and that nothing remains but to manage it, is what led us to the abyss. The only rational solution remains what it has always been: peace, equality, and democracy for Israelis and Palestinians alike.

About Yacov Ben Efrat