The Tragic Truth Behind Israel’s War Strategy
Israel can’t both rescue the hostages and defeat Hamas. It’s a devastating moral dilemma, but reality always beats wishful thinking.
Please consider supporting our mission to help everyone better understand and become smarter about the Jewish world. A gift of any amount helps keep our platform free of advertising and accessible to all.
You can also listen to the podcast version of this essay on Apple Podcasts, YouTube Music, YouTube, and Spotify.
As negotiations between Israel and Hamas sputter into nothingness, what we all knew was true the whole time (but never quite wanted to admit) is that Israel cannot accomplish both of its goals in this war: rescuing all the remaining hostages and defeating Hamas.
The emotional pull of the hostages — innocent men, women, children, and elderly brutally torn from their homes on October 7th — has dominated the national psyche. Their faces are etched into posters, prayer cards, graffiti, and the very soul of Israeli society. And rightly so. The idea of leaving even one Jew behind feels unthinkable, un-Jewish, unacceptable.
But the strategic reality is colder. Hamas does not release hostages without extracting a heavy price. Every deal so far has involved a pause in fighting, the release of convicted terrorists, a return to diplomatic limbo, and a strengthening of Hamas’ narrative that kidnapping Jews works.
To recover the remaining hostages, Israel would almost certainly have to stop short of total victory, allowing Hamas to retain its grip on Gaza, if not militarily, then politically and symbolically.
Hostage-taking is not just a war crime; it is a war strategy. Hamas understood that capturing Jews, especially children and grandmothers, would send Israel into a moral spiral.
Every democratic society faces this trap: The more you care about human life, the more hostage-takers can manipulate your conscience. The pain is not incidental to Hamas’ strategy; it is the strategy. It’s psychological warfare disguised as humanitarian tragedy.
And while Israel wrestles with this moral nightmare, the world watches with cold detachment — quick to condemn any military action that risks harming hostages or civilians, yet slow to hold Hamas accountable for making them human shields in the first place.
So let’s face the two bitter truths that lie on either side of this fork in the road.
Scenario One: The hostages return, but Hamas remains.
If Israel succeeds in bringing the hostages home but fails to defeat Hamas, the cost will echo far beyond Gaza. Hamas will declare victory. It will say: We survived the mighty IDF. We outlasted the siege. And we got Israel to negotiate. Again.
A battered but intact Hamas regime would mean that southern Israel remains under threat. Kibbutzim won’t be fully rebuilt. Young families won’t return to the border. Billions of shekels in reconstruction aid will flow into Gaza only to be siphoned into bunkers, rockets, and terror tunnels. Hamas will rearm, possibly even faster than before, now buoyed by renewed legitimacy in the eyes of its supporters.
In this outcome, Israel may save some lives now, but it would be condemning others later. It would be trading today’s tears for tomorrow’s funerals.
Worse, the more Israel trades hundreds of convicted terrorists for a handful of hostages, the more it incentivizes the next kidnapping. Each deal whispers to Israel’s enemies: If you want leverage, steal Jews.
And Hamas’ survival is not just a local problem; it sends a message to Iran, Hezbollah, and other terrorist establishments that Israel can be bled and stalled. It undermines the Abraham Accords, discourages moderate Arab partners, and gives momentum to radical Islamists who dream of Jerusalem under the banner of jihad.
Scenario Two: Hamas is defeated, but the hostages are not all rescued.
If Israel succeeds in destroying Hamas — removing it as the governing power in Gaza, disbanding its military infrastructure, and reclaiming control over the narrative of deterrence — it may do so at the cost of the remaining hostages’ lives.
This is a cost that feels unbearable. And yet, from a strategic standpoint, the defeat of Hamas is not just about this war; it’s about preventing the next one and weakening Iran’s “Axis of Resistance” that has poisoned the Middle East and North Africa. It’s about ending the cycle in which Palestinian terrorist factions attack Israel, hide behind civilians, and then bargain their way back into power through international sympathy and political manipulation.
The defeat of Hamas would send a message — not just to Gazans, but to Hezbollah, Iran, the Houthis, and every other group watching carefully: Israel will not allow terrorism to pay.
Even in the excruciating case that not all hostages return, Israel’s long-term security, regional stability, and deterrence would be strengthened. The lives of those lost would not be in vain. They would be memories not only of a massacre, but of a turning point.
And Jewish history reminds us that these are not new dilemmas. The mitzvah of pidyon shvuyim, redeeming captives, has always been sacred. But there have been times — during pogroms, during wars, even during modern Israeli operations — when impossible decisions had to be made. From Masada to Entebbe, we’ve chosen survival over sentiment. Not out of cruelty, but out of clarity. Not out of coldness, but out of the fire to ensure there is still a Jewish future to fight for.
Some have argued that Israel could increase pressure on Hamas through more aggressive territorial and political maneuvers — annexing parts of northern Gaza, for example, or permanently occupying strategic corridors like the Philadelphi Route to squeeze Hamas into submission. In theory, these steps could force Hamas to negotiate more urgently. But this theory rests on one fatal misunderstanding: that Hamas is a rational actor.
They are not. They are jihadists — messianic fundamentalists who thrive on death. The more death, the merrier. They worship destruction more than they value their own people. Hamas does not respond to pressure the way nation-states or even militant insurgencies do. Its leadership does not fear death, nor care about infrastructure, nor seek compromise. It seeks martyrdom. The more Gaza burns, the more they believe they are winning.
This week, one former high-ranking Israeli intelligence official even suggested that Israel try to bribe Gazans who may be holding hostages — to offer them money, protection, and a better life in exchange for freeing the captives. But that won’t work. Hamas will hunt them down and kill them. Humanitarianism is not rewarded in Gaza; it’s executed.
Their sponsors, too — from Iran to Qatar — do not bankroll Hamas for pragmatic outcomes. They fund Hamas to spread chaos, to disrupt Israeli normalization with the Arab world, to keep the Jewish state in a perpetual state of siege. You cannot out-leverage an enemy that wants to die if it means you die too.
Ultimately, there was never a version of this war in which both objectives — freeing the hostages and destroying Hamas — could be fully achieved. To get the hostages, Hamas must survive. To destroy Hamas, Israel must be willing to accept that not all hostages will make it out.
It is a cruel and unjust reality. But it is reality nonetheless.
And if Israel must choose, it must choose the path that ensures Jewish hostage-taking is not incentivized. That our enemies learn stealing humans is not a tool; it is a death sentence for your regime. That future generations do not inherit a Middle East where terrorism reigns, and murderers become martyrs.
To defeat Hamas is to reclaim the future. It is not the easier choice. It is the harder one. But it is the right one.
The families of the hostages deserve not just our sympathy, but our admiration. Their pain is immeasurable, and their voices are essential. Yet even many of them understand the unbearable trade-off: If Hamas wins, the cycle never ends. Their loved ones become pawns in a game that will be played again — and again.
Choosing to defeat Hamas is not abandoning the hostages; it’s refusing to let their captivity define our destiny. It is choosing a future where Jews are no longer hunted, no longer kidnapped, no longer bargaining chips in a game of genocidal terror.
It is not the easier path, but it is the one that ensures there will still be an Israel for their memory, and for all who come next.
And who would be responsible for cutting this Gordian knot? The writer lays out carefully what the consequences of not taking the tough action would be. The person or persons in Israel responsible for taking the tough action will have to recognize at the outset that they will feel the wrath of however many Israelis who think this was the utterly wrong and heartless thing to do.
Though not equivalent by any means, please understand, I have to say this reminds me of war clips of General Eisenhower, speaking to the US troops prior to D-day. Prior to the invasion, he met with some of the troops. He was smiling, the men in turn were seemingly light-hearted. I remember thinking how could General Eisenhower greet those men in that fashion, knowing that soon he would be ordering an invasion where many of them would die? It helped to read later accounts of the hours before he had to make the decision. It was said that he paced from one end to the other of the large room in his quarters , chain smoking, for hours. Clearly this decision weighed very heavily on him.
And thusly it would be terrible and heartwrenchingly difficult for the Israeli decision makers.
Joshua seems we’ve been here before. I remember in the early 1970’s constantly hearing “we don’t negotiate with terrorists”. Looking back I now believe we were lied to. At this point as tough as it may be we must annihilate Hamas we also must expose Qatar for the trouble makers that they are. They, Qatar are evil. It’s unfortunate that there are hostages but this should not ever dictate military strategy, as brutal as this sounds 50 or 15 million wtf. It doesn’t take an Einstein to do this math.
This just in:
Hamas says Palestinian resistance will not stop until 'occupation' ends https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/defense-news/article-862914?utm_source=jpost.app.apple&utm_medium=share