Question

Hello Rabbi Michael,
Regarding the question of planning the war, my understanding is that you hold — and this is also what I gathered a bit from what you wrote and from Michi-bot — like the right-wing part of the coalition, that military pressure on Hamas should continue until its final defeat, even at the cost of risking the hostages.
This is of course not only your view but that of a large and significant public as well, but I’m asking whether it is even possible to say anything unequivocal when there still hasn’t been a state commission of inquiry that is supposed to investigate this failure in the first place. After all, I assume that most of the side that thinks we should go for a final decision thinks so in order to prevent another October 7 from happening again (I don’t know whether you agree with that statement) — but as long as there is no commission that has investigated how we got into this situation in the first place, you can’t really say what situation we need to reach in order for it not to happen again.
It could be that the commission’s conclusions will be that even when Hamas is not actually in control, there is still a real possibility that it will continue to operate as a movement capable of carrying out attacks into Israeli territory — and that basically means there is no such thing as truly defeating Hamas in order to prevent another October 7, and that we would have to continue an “eternal war” against it. Or alternatively, the conclusion could be that it was only because Hamas received centralized governing power in the Strip that October 7 happened, and it would be enough to have another body governing the Strip, one connected to the West and the countries of the world, in order to prevent another October 7 — and then it would be possible to go for a deal once Hamas is weak enough, together with governmental intervention by the Arab states that are aligned with the U.S. (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.). Another possible conclusion, of course, is that Hamas will never release all the hostages, and therefore we need one more partial deal to save whoever remains and then continue the ground maneuver.
 
I’m just giving examples, of course; in theory there could be a million possible conclusions. But my question is: as someone who does express a position, what weight do positions on either side really have if there still is no commission of inquiry? Who says there couldn’t be a deal that would not bring another October 7 in its wake? And who says there is even such a thing as defeating Hamas in the Strip at all?
It seems to me that for two years now, every time people say that something will be the final and decisive stage of the war (the entry into Khan Yunis, Rafah, evacuating the northern Strip, Gideon’s Chariots, and now the full occupation of Gaza City) — but no one has really bothered to define and examine where this is going, and everything comes from gut feelings and one kind of experience or another (and of course we don’t currently have time to drag out a maneuver for another year or two).
Don’t you think that instead of debates over for/against a deal or for/against decisive victory, all sides should say clearly and uniformly that they simply don’t know anything, and that discussions can only be held after a state commission of inquiry is established? (Even if in practice, by the time such a commission at this stage presents its recommendations, who knows how much time will have passed — maybe years — but I’m still asking in principle.)