The open check has been torn: The price of Israeli hesitation in the Gaza Strip | Idan Marash
The Donald Trump administration granted Israel historic backing and unlimited credit to defeat Hamas, but Jerusalem chose once again to stall, pursue partial agreements, and engage in fruitless diplomacy. Now, the price is becoming clear: a return to the same dangerous conception.
In recent weeks, the Gaza arena has returned to being the central front in the Iron Swords war. The big question is what the future of the Strip will be - and who will decide it: Israel or the USA? Before looking for answers to these complex questions, one must go back a little, to the beginning of President Donald Trump's second term.
From the moment his term began, American policy regarding the war changed completely. Israel received, in effect, an "open check" to do what was required in the Strip, without the limitations and restraints we were familiar with previously. It was Donald Trump who said: "If by Saturday at 12:00 PM Hamas does not return all the hostages in its possession - the gates of hell will open upon them."
Israel, for its part, insisted on not "utilizing" this historic credit. It continued the policy of partial deals, which left Hamas with power and influence, until the signing of an agreement intended to bring an end to the war - at a heavy price of releasing terrorists, which eventually led to the release of all the hostages. It must be said honestly: I did not believe for a moment that Hamas would release all the hostages and give up the most precious "weapon" it had in its hands. Therefore, the very success of the agreement to release everyone is a historic and important achievement.
But alongside this achievement, most of the horror scenarios I feared back then are coming true these very days.
Israel is keeping the agreements, Hamas continues to play
The "15 Points" plan, which President Donald Trump and the Peace Council announced a few weeks ago, is extremely important. However, in practice, a very problematic situation has been created: Israel is fulfilling its obligations under the agreements, has stopped targeted killings and proactive attacks - while Hamas continues to place obstacles and play games.
Hamas demands an Israeli withdrawal from controlling territories before its disarmament, talks about "storing weapons" instead of full disarmament and demilitarization, and even raises the possibility of handing over weapons to a Palestinian entity within the Strip. If these demands are accepted, Hamas will remain, in effect, the sovereign in Gaza. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said last week that Israel rejects the 15-point document and that there will be no withdrawal before the full dismantling and demilitarization of Hamas and the Strip. But between the declarations and the reality on the ground, there is a worrying gap.
A few days ago, Hamas terrorists infiltrated the Yellow Line area and stole IDF weaponry. Our forces were not allowed to thwart them, and if that were not enough, the Southern Command chose to keep the senior command and the political echelon in the dark about the incident. Such conduct in the Strip is exactly the type of conduct that led to the October 7 massacre.
The price of indecisiveness
The whole "Peace Council" matter is, to a large extent, a result of Israeli indecisiveness on the question of the future of the Gaza front. Already in the first months of the fighting, the political echelon should have said clearly: we are imposing a temporary Israeli military government in the Strip, until Hamas is dismantled by force and it is ensured that Hamas will no longer pose a threat to Israel. Such a move could have prevented a large part of the international "circus" we are experiencing today - and the heavy price we are paying for it.
A country that goes to war must also know how to win it. It cannot entrust its future to an endless series of agreements, mediators, committees, and international councils, when the enemy facing it still holds military power and the ability to threaten it.
And what happened to the immigration plan?
Another issue that must be addressed is the absolute failure in promoting the voluntary immigration plan for Gazans. Donald Trump spoke a lot about voluntary immigration and building a "Riviera" in Gaza. Israel, on the other hand, did not do enough at that time to help the Americans carry out this ambitious plan.
The Prime Minister claims again and again that there is no country willing to accept the residents of Gaza. That may be true. But allow me to present another possibility. If the Prime Minister really wanted to promote the plan, he should have pressured countries that have good relations with Israel to open their doors to Gazans - and in return offer them political, economic, or other benefits.
Was it really impossible, for example, to demand from Somaliland, in return for Israel's historic recognition of it, to open its doors to a few thousand Gazans? When a Prime Minister wants to achieve something in the international arena, he usually knows how to do it. I am convinced that if the plan had been at the top of the priority list, it would have been possible to find ways to deal with a significant part of the hurdles.
Gaza is not a foregone conclusion
Gaza is not a foregone conclusion. It is enemy territory, and we must defeat the threat it poses. Such a victory will not be achieved through agreements, suit-and-tie diplomacy, and principle documents. It will be achieved only through force, determination, and decisiveness. Hamas must pay a heavy strategic price for October 7, and right now - it is simply not happening. It is time to come to our senses. We are fed up with the illusions of security and peace. We demand security. Fully.
