8 months of war. Where is this government leading us?

How a complex operation that brought home four hostages and a political circus devoid of any connection to reality in Knesset fits into three days in modern Israel is a big question.

In recent years, we’ve posed very few such questions, often treating them as purely rhetorical. We occasionally marvel at our politicians’ cynicism but proceed without pressing for answers, continuing to entrust our fate to those whose words and actions so often sick our guts.

Meanwhile, questions serve as vital tools for critical thinking. When someone rushes to sell you a vague product without providing details, you start asking questions. When any information is presented as an absolute truth without room for any other perspectives, you start asking questions. And when you ask about one thing and get a evasive response on an entirely different issue, you get back and ask questions.

For eight months now, with our full consent, the government has been selling us some vague product, following only categorical, one-way statements and not answering any questions directly. It is high time we asked ourselves the hard questions and waded through the maze of populism, slogans, and manipulations.

After all, the right questions often have the power to clarify even the most bewildering situations, exposing underlying issues or our actual attitudes to them.

War. Hostages. Communication Failure and Zero Transparency.

After eight months of battles without achieving our goals, it’s time to confront several honest questions, starting with: are our goals achievable at all?

Is the goal of returning the hostages compatible with the goal of eliminating Hamas’s political and military power? If compatible, what is the tangible plan to achieve them in a close perspective, and why are we still far from achieving them after eight months?

If not compatible, then what are our actual national priorities? What is more crucial: to bring people back or to continue fighting even at the cost of their deaths?

If getting people back is more important, why are we not making the necessary concessions as part of the deal negotiations? If that requires ending the war and withdrawing troops, what political means do we have to maintain pressure on Hamas and prevent their resurgence? And what might our strategy be next?

If our priority is to overthrow Hamas, even at the cost of the lives of hostages, why doesn’t the government explicitly state this, instead of giving false hope to families? If we are committed to continuing the war, what is our strategy? What can we achieve in one, two, three, or six months of ongoing warfare? What assurances do we have? What risks do we face? What are the diplomatic and economic costs of prolonging the war? Are there sanctions to consider? Can we sustain the economic burden of the conflict, given, to put it mildly, the considerable state budget deficit and the increasingly expensive loans we are taking out to cover it?

Besides, why has the war effort been proceeding at such a leisurely pace since February? Is it because we lack resources for a more intensive war or because intensity does not make sense in terms of the asymmetric warfare we’re facing with Hamas? If it’s the case, then once again, what are we looking for in prolonging this type of war?

Finally, is the deadlock we find ourselves in occurred due to our own poor decisions, or was this inevitable regardless of our actions during the war? If our current situation is partly self-inflicted, can we persist only to correct our mistakes?

After 8 months, Israeli society at least deserves clear, coherent, honest, and transparent answers to these questions from its government. What do we see instead?

The government and our Prime Minister do not give a single clear answer and continue to talk to us with hollow concepts, hiding behind cardboard scenery, where there is no room for complex issues and hard truth, where everything is categorical, loud, and monochromatic.

Furthermore, after a five-month marathon of weekly press conferences, the prime minister has apparently grown tired of Israeli journalists’ probing questions once again. For several months now, he has opted to communicate solely through video messages and conversations with American journalists and podcast hosts.

From the rather monotonous video messages and interviews, we get to know where our wind is blowing. We learn that somehow, we are still fighting for ‘total victory’ and the unconditional destruction of Hamas, although no substantial plan follows these words. A couple of months ago, we were within arm’s reach of victory, but today, that message has been dropped from the speeches. Now, it’s just total victory, but without a binding timeline.

We hear no response to the criticism from numerous military experts who claim that this goal is an illusion and an impossible task. There is no refutation in the form of even a rough plan for further operational tasks. Military allies, U.S. partners, and a host of experts argue that while fighting to the end may be feasible, without political solutions and the introduction of alternatives, destroying Hamas remains unachievable.

The Prime Minister continues to assert that Hamas must be dismantled first before considering alternatives, yet there’s no clear plan on how to achieve this. Tzachi Hanegbi, head of the National Security Council, recently stated vaguely that we may remain in a state of war for at least another seven months. Again, with no vision of what will happen in those seven months, what can be achieved during this time, even by the most conservative estimates, or any clarity on whether the potential risks and losses are justified.

Having nearly exhausted all unconditional public trust since the onset of the war, it would be prudent, if not essential, for decisions crucial to the country’s future to at least inform the people about upcoming prospects.

Hostage negotiations have been following the same vicious circle since January. Proposals emerge in which Israel makes more and more concessions but fails to agree to Hamas’s primary demand for a permanent ceasefire and withdrawal. Hamas rejects the deals; Israel argues that more military pressure is required and continues military action, but after a while, comes to the negotiating table again, agreeing to more concessions.

And even when the language of the agreement specifically allows it to be interpreted both in the direction of Hamas’ demands for a complete ceasefire and Israel’s insistence on a temporary one, Israel’s prime minister and his staff hastily issue multiple conflicting statements, essentially undermining what the proposal suggests.

Once again. Israel has already entered into negotiations with Hamas terrorists and is attempting to reach an agreement with them on certain terms; it sends an offer, and at the same time, the Israeli Prime Minister declares from every stage that, despite the terms of the offer, Israel will continue the war and destroy Hamas, with whom we are trying to reach an agreement. You might as well just offer Hamas to capitulate and expect them to go along with it for some reason.

“We are working tirelessly and doing everything possible and impossible to get our hostages back. I think about them and their families all the time. And that’s why we made a big offer. But we will not rest until we destroy Hamas.” B. Netanyahu

Reasonable questions arise as to why the Prime Minister repeatedly resorts to questionable actions that could have been avoided whenever the other party considers the deal. This raises justifiable doubts about whether the Prime Minister is interested in the agreement at all and whether he is even deliberately trying to derail it. But yet again, no answers, no attempt to dispel doubts, just vague statements that suggest the hostages are not forgotten. Just another communication failure on a highly sensitive issue, distressing the families so eager for these deals.

Regrettably, alongside the misleading stance on this issue, many coalition MKs are also presenting an exaggerated and manipulative narrative about the end of the war, which is effectively required for the return of the hostages.

Ending the war and withdrawing troops is portrayed as an outright defeat, almost automatically leading Hamas to a complete restoration of its capabilities and an inevitable repeat of October 7. However, several aspects in this regard are simply overlooked:

  1. All of this could happen within a few years solely on the assumption of our complete inaction or the continuation of the policies that preceded October 7. No one deprives us of the opportunity to learn all the lessons and prevent it from happening. No one prevents us from dictating our terms or deprives us of the tools of political pressure in negotiating a post-war settlement and beyond.

  2. October 7 occurred because of a military and political failure on several levels. Had it not been for a fateful coincidence, had Hamas’ motivation not been misjudged, and had more troops been amassed at the border, the terrorist breakthrough could have ended only with heavy fighting in the border area without massive casualties among the Israeli population. The Hamas attack was not imminent and should have been prevented or at least repulsed. And with the right approach, such attempts in the future should be nipped in the bud.

Indeed, suppose we decide to make concessions, end the war, and confront the reality that Hamas is entrenched both ideologically and organizationally; it will raise challenging questions and dilemmas that require thorough discussion, at least as a backup plan.

However, to claim that eight months of intense warfare have yielded no results at all, that Hamas will swiftly recover and strike again, especially likening it to another October 7, is either a gross manipulation or an admission of our total dysfunction as a state.

The Government appears to present its people with a highly exaggerated and distorted choice. On one side of the scale is a vague promise of total victory, while on the other is an equally unrealistic depiction of total defeat. Naturally, when framed in this manner, the choice becomes apparent. Despite claims in interviews with American media that the public supports continuing the war, the reality is that they have been offered a misleading and skewed choice instead of genuinely realistic options.

So why do we tolerate the Government feeding us superficial and empty narratives, evading tough questions, and leaving us entirely in the dark about where we are headed?

We must demand the opposite, especially at this pivotal moment in our history, where we stand at the crossroads of critical decisions, each potentially leading us astray. We find ourselves in an absurd situation where every subsequent move could shape the fate of the Arab-Israeli conflict for decades. Yet, there is a glaring lack of meaningful dialogue on the matter. Moreover, the Government has imposed a somewhat taboo on nearly any discussion concerning Palestinians, as if closing our eyes and pretending we are alone will make the problem vanish on its own.

We must equally, if not more so, ask ourselves tough questions about the potential for war in the North. It’s astonishing that considering the Government’s potential decision to engage in battle in the near future, there has been virtually no public discussion on the matter thus far.

We are not asking the basics: are we ready for it? This extends beyond Hezbollah’s missile arsenal and the potential scale of destruction on the home front. After eight months of a draining conflict in Gaza, with depleted reserves, societal divisions, strained alliances, and a growing fiscal deficit, are we ready to embark on a far more intricate war with unclear objectives? Can we sustain such a war with an open front in Gaza and an unresolved hostage issue? What are the true risks, and do we have a viable plan to mitigate them?

Silently Normalizing the Abnormal

Responsible parents teach their kids accountability. They teach that it is natural to be wrong sometimes. What matters is admitting wrongdoing in time, perhaps correcting it when it comes to actions, or at least taking words back and apologizing. Still, when we see children who find countless excuses and blame anything but themselves for failures, we may even find it cute and amusing. However, when it’s an adult who constantly shifts blame to nonexistent parties, it raises a significant red flag.

For eight months, the government has been blaming literally living and dead for the current situation but is absurdly unable to recognize its own share of responsibility. Numerous journalists and media outlets have only amplified this narrative. Oslo, Rabin, and Sharon are being ‘exhumed’ and held accountable once again; generals are blamed, Lapid with the Lebanon gas treaty, an unjust world, you name it. Anything goes, but the ruling party and government that has been in power almost uninterruptedly for the past fifteen years.

It took only eight months for government members to shift from embarrassed silence and chosen words to a bold denial of any guilt or responsibility for what happened, as Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich explained clearly in an interview with radio station Kan Reshet Bet this week:

“October 7 has nothing to do with me, it’s not my fault, it’s the result of a crazy intelligence failure. Whoever is responsible for this should have resigned a long time ago. It’s all a concept of the army.” 

Well, it’s been eight months — a pretty stormy ride indeed, but the government seemingly dodged a bullet, alive and kicking. Why dwell on the past, then? (Unless, of course, it’s about the mistakes of the left)

This is called normalization. It happens when statements, actions, or inactions, deserving a denouncement at least, go unchallenged without consequences. In the book of Bereishit, societies are not punished for their sins per se but for the social normalization of those sins. The flood is sent not merely because the earth is filled with looting but because such behavior has become a daily norm. It is as if the Torah teaches us to remain vigilant and practice active citizenship. Nonetheless, in recent years, the normalization of the abnormal has been occurring at an alarming pace throughout our society.

Two weeks ago, the scandalous investigation into Likud Transportation Minister Miri Regev was released. The first part presented compelling evidence of corruption schemes, but the second offered no less shocking revelations. Two moments were particularly memorable.

On the morning of October 7, when the country was literally bleeding and struggling to pull itself together, as people were being tortured in southern kibbutzim and thousands of reservists rushed to join the fight, Miri Regev’s staff — her advisers, press secretaries, and ministry employees — were busy looking for traitors among the protest movement and government opponents, clinging to the most absurd conspiracy theories.

And three weeks later, when the residents of Kibbutz Be’eri refused to receive the minister at a ceremony, her staff unleashed a wave of vicious hatred against ‘those radical leftists’ – the same residents who had survived the horrendous events.

The response to those publications was nothing but Minister Regev’s unsubstantiated accusation that journalist Drucker had lied. No apology, not a single dismissal at her office, let alone Regev’s own resignation. No one in the ruling coalition said a word, no one demanded a hearing, and no one condemned it.

Yes, the police investigation started. Still, Miri Regev continues her work as if nothing happened, gives interviews, and even boasts that the government is paying for hotels for evacuees from war zones despite this being a direct obligation of the state:

“The government has done so many amazing things this year. So many people are in hotels and all at the expense of the government. The government has given money to rebuild the north and the south. We are working.”

She makes these statements precisely when the evacuees’ patience is wearing thin, as staying away from home and their familiar lives for eight months is an obvious torture.

Not a single word of condemnation followed the brazen behavior of the head of the National Security Council, Tzachi Hanegbi, at the meeting with the families of the hostages. Not only did Hanegbi bluntly say that the government has no backup plan for the return of their loved ones, but he also brought one of the participants to tears and asked not to make a drama.

Three weeks ago, Reuma and Gadi Kedem, who lost six family members on October 7, were targeted by violent right-wing activists holding placards labeling them “leftist traitors” and stating, “It’s good that your children were killed.” Following a lawsuit for injuring Gadi Kedem, a fundraising campaign was initiated to support the activist. Prime Minister’s son, Yair Netanyahu, posted a call for support for this campaign on his social media accounts.

Previously, police officers also used excessive force against protesting hostage families. Needless to say, there were no condemnations from government coalition members.

Several months ago, there were initial reports of attacks by some individuals on hostage families. At that time, such incidents seemed shocking and delusional. Today, however, even coalition MKs and government members no longer shy away from blunt confrontations with people who have lost nearly everything at the state’s fault. Arguments and attacks against them in Knesset committee hearings have sadly become somewhat of a norm.

Once again, there is no unequivocal condemnation of the violence, rudeness, and humiliation that these people endure alongside their unimaginable tragedy. Silence prevails — a silence that criminally blurs the boundaries of what is acceptable in our society and what isn’t, normalizing hatred and violence at full speed.

5th Grade Diplomacy

Meanwhile, the same coalition MKs and government members are so amazingly quick and efficient to issue condemnations when they disagree with some statements or actions abroad. It’s challenging to find an MK who hasn’t voiced an opinion on recognizing a Palestinian state by Norway, Ireland and Spain.

Foreign Minister Israel Katz is leading the charts. It seemed to him a wise diplomatic move to insult the national cultures of Spain, Norway, and Ireland, releasing absurd videos where their national music and dances were accompanied by footage of Hamas atrocities on October 7.

The videos have not been removed, no one has apologized for them, the official Twitter account of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs even reposted them.

Our ministers indulge in populist tirades involving references to the Inquisition, Nazis, and other irrelevant historical allusions, along with labeling nearly everything as anti-Semitism. Our international policy and public statements now resemble trolling at a fifth-grade level.

We decry the Palestinian-Israeli debate in the world for its illiteracy and reliance on shallow slogans and outrageous populism, yet we often set the same tone ourselves.

We could clearly articulate our position, portraying reality as it is — complicated — while posing some genuinely challenging questions to the world. How is the ‘two-state solution’ put into practice? Who represents the Palestinian people? What are national ideals and values they are instilling in younger generations? And who is willing to ensure our security if we go two-state?

But instead of channeling the dialogue in the right direction and challenging our foes, we chose useless populism, apparently, so that in time, no one would listen to us even when we say something important. Eventually, our diplomacy has reduced October 7 to a mere business card that we cynically pull out and throw on the table whenever faced with criticism of our actions or discussion on the Palestinian issue. The chilling hostage-taking video of Nahal Oz’s female soldiers was enough to show it to the world but not sufficient enough to make every effort to free them.

What is there to say when our current foreign policy constitutes insulting and ridiculing other nations and scrutinizing the world’s faults while not acknowledging our own glaring shortcomings?

Dangerous populism; corruption, hatred, and violence being normalized; a lack of accountability; complete non-transparency; total failure in internal and external communication. This more or less summarizes the current state of our political culture — a state that endures because we permit it to endure.

Last night’s passage of a law effectively exempting the ultra-Orthodox sector from military service, especially at this critical time, occurred right under our noses. Yet, we merely groaned to ourselves and moved on.

But we must capture this picture and take a good look at it, not to succumb to apathy and despair but to act and make a clear record of where we have fallen and where we must never return.

It seems that the current government ministers do not pose particularly challenging questions to themselves. However, it is our duty to pose these questions and not just ask them but demand answers, not letting elected officials get away without them.