Author Reflects on Missed Points in October 7th Failures Analysis
Translated & summarized from Maariv by baba
Zalman Shoval, writing on October 10, 2023, advocated for a state commission of inquiry into the October 7th failures, highlighting intelligence and military shortcomings. His analysis, based on logic rather than official data, also pointed to leadership issues and over-reliance on technology. Shoval believes the inquiry must address the political echelon's role and the impact of internal Israeli divisions on Hamas's decision to attack. The author also suggested the existing inquiry law can provide a framework for a credible investigation.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Zalman Shoval wrote an analysis on October 10, 2023, calling for a state commission of inquiry into the October 7th failures.
- The initial analysis highlighted intelligence failures, technological defense collapse, and leadership shortcomings.
- Shoval criticized the over-reliance on technology and the perceived deterrence of Hamas.
- The article suggests internal Israeli divisions, including judicial reform protests, may have provoked the attack.
- A future inquiry must examine the role of the political echelon and divisive societal elements.
- The 1969 State Inquiry Law offers a framework for a non-partisan investigation.
Writing just 24 hours after the October 7th Hamas attack, Zalman Shoval penned an analysis that was published on October 10, 2023. Lacking official data, his assessment relied on experience and logic, advocating for a state commission of inquiry. Shoval's initial article questioned the severe intelligence failure, both strategic and tactical, and the collapse of technological defenses along the border. He also pointed to leadership and professional failures within the intelligence community, criticizing over-reliance on technology at the expense of human intelligence sources. Shoval recalled the former Defense Minister's confident statements about hermetic border security against Hamas infiltration.
A crucial point raised was the military's planning and execution failures, noting that even the strongest army needs effective command. He highlighted numerous intelligence warnings that seemingly went unheeded. Shoval admitted his initial article lacked sufficient focus on the political echelon's role and the prevailing "deterrence" conception of Hamas, a belief shared across the political spectrum and publicly stated by the Prime Minister.
Furthermore, the article touched upon the potential provocation of Hamas's attack due to internal Israeli divisions, specifically mentioning the protests against the judicial reform. Shoval suggested that any future inquiry must examine the calls for reservists to refuse duty, divisive slogans, road blockades, and provocative groups like "Brothers in Arms," alongside the government's forceful push for judicial changes.
Regarding the formation of a state commission of inquiry, Shoval noted that while the Supreme Court President appoints its members, the agenda is not set by them. He acknowledged public distrust in the current appointee and potential future commission, but stressed that the 1969 State Inquiry Law provides a robust framework for a non-politically biased investigation that could satisfy public concerns.
