Three Problems to Think About Now Rather Than Later

Key Findings:

Israel is currently focused on the immediate task of eliminating Hamas in Gaza, but there are multiple short, medium, and long-term challenges that Israeli leaders must confront. These challenges will shape not only the outcome of the current conflict but also Israel’s security and its relations with both its neighbors and the international community in the years to come.

In the short term, one of Israel’s most pressing concerns is managing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The situation has become dire, with Israel facing mounting pressure to restore essential services such as water and allow humanitarian aid to enter Gaza. While security is a legitimate concern, with the potential for Hamas to seize any supplies intended for civilians, Israel must work quickly to ensure that it is seen as doing its part to prevent a humanitarian disaster. Millions of Palestinians in Gaza, many of whom are not affiliated with Hamas, are facing extreme hardship, and Israel’s failure to act decisively could damage its international standing. The public relations battle is shifting as the destruction in Gaza escalates, and Israel’s initial hardline stance on aid has already caused significant blowback. 

Additionally, there is the longer-term risk that the failure to alleviate the humanitarian situation could drive more Palestinians toward Hamas or its successors, making Israel’s task of countering terrorism even more difficult in the future. Israel must strike a balance between military objectives and moral responsibility, ensuring that it does not alienate the civilian population in Gaza, which could exacerbate the conflict in the long run.

In the medium term, Israel must consider what happens after Hamas is defeated in Gaza. While the immediate focus is on military operations, the question of governance in Gaza once the fighting ends is critical. Israel has two dangerous options it should avoid: direct control of Gaza, as it has in certain areas of the West Bank, and allowing Hamas to reassert power. Direct governance would be a security disaster, as it would only deepen Israel’s dilemma in Gaza and invite further conflict. Allowing Hamas to return after military defeat would essentially undo Israel’s military objectives and leave Gaza in a perpetual state of instability. Alternatives such as a coalition of Arab states, including Egypt and the Gulf countries, administering Gaza are also not realistic. Egypt has long resisted re-taking control of Gaza, and no other Arab country is likely to assume the burden of governing Gaza. 

This leaves the two more plausible options: the emergence of a new local leadership within Gaza or the return of the Palestinian Authority (PA). The idea of a new local government in Gaza is fraught with challenges, as Gaza has been under Hamas’s control for over 15 years, and much of the population is either aligned with or coerced into supporting the group. However, the return of the PA, despite its flaws, may be the most viable long-term solution. The challenge will be how to facilitate the PA’s return without it appearing as an extension of Israeli military action, as the PA was violently pushed out of Gaza by Hamas in 2007. The PA also lacks the resources and personnel to immediately reassert control, given that its forces are stretched thin in the West Bank. This makes the return of the PA a delicate, long-term challenge requiring careful management of both local and international stakeholders.

In the long-term, Israel will need to reevaluate its military posture in the West Bank. Over 70% of the IDF is currently stationed in the West Bank, which has left Israel vulnerable to threats from Hamas and Hezbollah in Gaza and Lebanon. This deployment strategy has left areas like the Gaza envelope underprepared, relying heavily on technological defenses such as smart fences and drones. The overemphasis on the West Bank has left Israel with insufficient forces to respond effectively to threats from its southern and northern borders. The recent attack on Israel has highlighted the dangers of this strategic imbalance. It is becoming increasingly clear that maintaining a heavy military presence in the West Bank while neglecting Israel’s borders with Gaza and Lebanon is unsustainable. 

Reassessing Israel’s military posture will require a shift in policy, potentially moving away from protecting isolated settlements deep within Palestinian territories and focusing on more defensible positions along Israel’s actual borders. Additionally, Israel needs to consider the larger issue of settlement policies in the West Bank, which have long been a point of contention. Continuing to build settlements in areas surrounded by Palestinian populations only increases the potential for conflict. Israel will need to rethink these policies to better balance security needs with the realities on the ground.