Israel Must Seek Decisive Victory, Not Just Fences, Post-Oct 7
Translated & summarized from Arutz Sheva by baba
Following the October 7th attacks, Israel must abandon its reliance on fences and deterrence and pursue a decisive victory to ensure lasting security. The author criticizes the long-standing security doctrine symbolized by physical barriers as an illusion that failed. The piece argues that Israel's focus on defense, rather than defeating enemies, leads to cyclical conflicts and societal exhaustion. It calls for a moral shift and a clear objective of victory in military operations to create a lasting peace.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Israel must shift from relying on fences and deterrence to seeking decisive victory after the October 7th attacks.
- The current security doctrine, symbolized by physical barriers, is criticized as an illusion that failed to prevent the attacks.
- The article argues Israel's focus on defense, rather than defeating enemies, leads to cyclical conflicts and societal exhaustion.
- A decisive victory is defined as a state where the enemy loses the capacity to wage war and aggression is understood as counterproductive.
- The author calls for a moral shift and a return to concepts like sovereignty and decisive victory to achieve lasting peace.
Following the October 7th attacks, Israel must abandon its reliance on fences and deterrence and pursue a decisive victory to ensure lasting security, argues this opinion piece. The author criticizes the long-standing Israeli security doctrine, symbolized by physical barriers like the Gaza fence, as an illusion that failed on October 7th. This approach, described as a "villa in the jungle," aims to keep threats outside rather than eliminate them.
The core problem, according to the article, is a defensive mindset that asks how to protect against enemies, rather than how to defeat them. A nation aiming to truly live in its land must seek to dismantle the enemy's capacity and will to attack. This distinction is crucial, as a focus on defense leads to cyclical conflicts, repeated call-ups, and societal exhaustion, not from effort but from a perceived lack of purpose.
Despite Israel's significant military, technological, and economic strengths, the author contends that the nation has lost the internal legitimacy to use its power for decisive outcomes. While willing to fight to stop missiles or prevent attacks, the current approach only achieves temporary quiet, which is merely the interval between wars. Selling "quiet" without victory, the piece asserts, is selling the next round of conflict.
The article calls for a moral shift, emphasizing that a Jewish state's primary duty is to its soldiers, ensuring they are not burdened with the enemy's tactics of fighting within civilian populations. Military operations must have a clear objective: to win. Victory is defined not as a slogan but as a state where the enemy can no longer wage war, Israeli citizens are free from the constant threat of the next conflict, and the enemy understands that aggression leads away from their goals.
Ultimately, the author urges Israel to move beyond simply rebuilding fences. The real challenge is to create a reality where hostile forces do not regenerate beyond the border. This requires faith, a return to concepts like decisive victory, sovereignty, and settlement, and a shift from thinking like "guests" defending a villa to a people who have returned home. The nation has paid a heavy price and deserves a conclusive end to the cycle of violence, allowing future generations to grow up without anticipating the next war.
