“The Day After”: The Development of the War Requires Brave Decisions

Key Findings:

The current path we are treading along leads to damage to Israel’s resilience and status, while presenting a set of serious risks: 

(1) Halting the operational momentum in the Gaza Strip and losing the initiative, while slipping into a long war of attrition in both the southern and northern arenas; (2) Damaging the resilience of Israeli society while delaying the rehabilitation of civilian life; (3) Diminishing the reputation of Israel’s military strength and the deterrence against Iran and its axis, in addition to facing a violent outbreak—worse than the current one in Judea and Samaria, while strengthening Hamas’s position there; (4) Transforming Israel into an isolated state in the international arena, losing American backing, and severely damaging relations with Arab states, particularly Jordan and Egypt, in addition to increasing antisemitism; (5) Missing out on the historic opportunity for normalization with Saudi Arabia. 

It is crucial to end the ambiguity and confusion resulting from the gap between a significant reduction in fighting and the pursuit of an undefined “total victory.” Realistic goals must be defined within a specified timeframe to end the war. Therefore, Israel should pursue an alternative path that achieves the war’s objectives and substantially improves Israel’s strategic balance. This includes: 

(1) Restoring security and a sense of security in the border regions; (2) Reducing damage in the international arena and working toward reinstating Israel’s standing worldwide; (3) Initiating the rehabilitation process of Israeli society and healing its wounds; (4) Designing a regional system to counterbalance the axis of resistance led by Iran and to serve as an infrastructure for Israel’s integration into the region; (5) Opening a political horizon in the Palestinian arena that could eventually lead to conflict mitigation. 

Choosing this path entails implementing strategic recommendations: 

(1) Pursuing a hostage deal that includes a (seemingly unlimited) ceasefire; (2) Acknowledging that an (“upgraded”) Palestinian Authority, with potential support from an inter-Arab and international coalition, is the preferred pragmatic solution for addressing civilian control in the Gaza Strip; (3) Taking advantage of the ceasefire accompanying the hostage deal to reach an arrangement on the Lebanese border and eliminate the threat of infiltration and direct fire; (4) Transferring massive humanitarian aid to the Gaza Strip, including from Israeli territory, to be distributed by the Palestinian Authority under the auspices of the Arab and international coalition; (5) Developing a plan for the hermetic closure of the Philadelphi Corridor, in close cooperation with Egypt and the United States. A military operation in Rafah will occur at a later date as part of the postwar stabilization efforts.