"Israel's" Ynet news website wrote on Sunday that since the beginning of the war, and especially in recent months, turmoil has emerged within the Israeli leadership. Senior officials who played a role in shaping failures in the war are holding their positions, while simultaneously attempting to distance themselves from responsibility. According to the report, such officials now claim they opposed the arrangements in Gaza. 

That said, the report highlights that this deflection touches on the broader issue of Israeli political failure, where decision-makers avoid self-examination and instead shift blame onto others, lacking genuine investigation and lessons learned, allowing outdated mindsets to persist among the leadership, which hampers their understanding of both the enemy and the complex reality on the ground.

Lack of strategic clarity in Israeli government policy

Ynet highlights a contradiction: While many believe the war cannot end as long as Hamas remains on the occupied territory's borders, the framework for ending the war presented by Netanyahu in May 2024 accounted for this scenario. However, similar principles are not applied to more severe threats, such as the Iranian nuclear program.

Related News

Zamir demands Gaza war strategy as rift with Israeli cabinet grows

Bosnian museum donates Haggadah proceeds to Palestine aid

According to Ynet, some leaders push for total victory, ignoring the complexities involved and reflecting a fanatical mindset that has fueled instability and war. Despite concerns about international backlash, "Israel" has repeatedly disregarded global opinion, as seen in military attacks in 1956, 1967, 1982, and strikes on nuclear reactors in Iraq and Syria.

Ynet further stresses that the occupation government’s actions are driven by ideological motivations disguised as "strategic necessities". Two key arguments are: "Arabs only understand when territory is taken from them" and "settlement prevents terrorism." These ideas, promoted by Smotrich and rooted in a vision of land integrity, lack solid historical backing.

This ideological push raises important questions about the Israeli government's accountability, with settlers needing clarity on whether these views represent the broader government's stance, especially as plans for new Gaza settlements could deepen societal divisions.

In parallel, Smotrich advocates for "quiet work" aimed at altering the fabric of the occupied West Bank, effectively merging it with "Israel" to prevent any separation. This aligns with his 2017 "decision plan," which seeks to establish a singular entity between the sea and the Jordan River.

'No clear strategy'

Amid the crisis in Israeli leadership, the occupation's lack of a clear strategy has revealed the occupation's true image, marking heavy losses and failures in Gaza. That highlights the high cost of relying on the same decision-makers responsible for past failures.

A key lesson from October 7, Ynet argues,  is the danger of trusting in leadership without scrutiny, as warnings over the past year and a half stressed that without a thorough investigation, the occupation risks repeating its mistakes, while the occupation seems to be entrenched in even deeper errors, driven by illusions. The ongoing influence of those behind past failures threatens not only the present but the future of "Israel" itself.

Read next: 'Israel's' 50 years of failed strategic thinking: FP