I have no complaints against the sixth Netanyahu government in regard to the agreement signed on a ceasefire in Lebanon. This is the best Israel could achieve in the timeline leading up to January 20, when Donald Trump will re-enter the White House.
It would have been possible to negotiate for a further two months, but it is doubtful whether more could have been extracted. Why? Amos Hochstein threatened to stop the mediation because his boss, President Joe Biden, is not really involved in what is happening and mainly because the Lebanese side (the state of Lebanon) cannot give more than what it agreed to.
Netanyahu has tried to explain the achievement of the ceasefire; yet if he were not the prime minister but the chairman of the opposition, he would be the first to come out against the agreement he approved. Why? Because there is no buffer zone in sight, and Hezbollah operatives were already trying to reach the fence hours after the agreement came into effect.
And not only that: There is no promise of long-term peace in the agreement. It is true that Israel reserves the natural right to defend itself, but as Netanyahu stated, if Hezbollah does not attack, we will not attack. While Israel’s restraint is understandable, the lack of proactive measures raises questions about whether this is a sustainable strategy for securing the northern border.
This is how it is with friends you want to keep happy: Trump wanted to see an end to the war in the Middle East, and the Israeli government, led by Netanyahu, complied. It is better to be with Trump than against him since history has proven that those who did not carry out his orders or even expressed a position that was not acceptable to him, lost credit and became opponents.
While external pressures can shape policy, this decision further highlights the lack of internal planning, particularly regarding Gaza.
In southern Lebanon, residents are already returning to their villages. In Gaza, however, most residents have nowhere to return. Everything has been destroyed. Now is the time to establish policy facts on the ground and create a new reality.
We need a clear plan
Leadership requires a clear plan for Gaza: Who will rehabilitate the area? Who will manage the civil institutions? Who will ensure security for the residents of the Gaza border communities? Without answers to these questions, Israel risks repeating past failures.
It is necessary to map clear diplomatic and political interests in the South and realize them as soon as possible. The military achievements in Gaza do not fall short of those achieved by the IDF in Lebanon and may even surpass them. Hamas has been crushed militarily and administratively. There are cases of cat and mouse in various sections of Gaza, but most of the work has already been done.
If the IDF allowed Netanyahu (or was it just the spirit of Trump?) to go for a ceasefire in the North, why not the South? Netanyahu himself acknowledged in a recorded speech that Israel needs to refresh and renew its armaments. Isn’t this also true for the fighters in the South?
Netanyahu has made it clear that he does not want Hamas in control of Gaza, nor does he support Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas aka Abu Mazen. But he offers no clear vision for what comes next.
Visits by supporters of Jewish resettlement in Gaza under the auspices of the establishment of Israeli military facilities before the political echelon has come to a decision are an unhealthy phenomenon in a healthy society. Leadership cannot operate without a plan, and that is precisely what is lacking.
And finally, bring the hostages home. This act would demonstrate to the entire Israeli public that the term “mutual guarantee” exists in Israeli society. At the moment, such a mutual guarantee is absent, and on Netanyahu’s watch, the Zionist ethos is changing. A society without an ethos will find it difficult to sacrifice its sons and daughters for a leader without a vision and without clear goals for the future. Certainly not in a polarized society, where an entire community of people does not bear the burden of sacrifice in battle.
Israel must prioritize clarity, vision, and leadership. Without these, the current strategy will falter, leaving a nation divided and vulnerable in the face of future challenges.
The writer is the head of the Department of Middle Eastern Studies and the Middle East & Central Asia Research Center at Ariel University. An expert in nationality, ethnicity, protest and political violence, and majority-minority relationships, he specializes in Palestinian and Israeli-Arab issues. He has published three books on the Israeli-Arab minority and Palestinian politics.