What it is about
MK Gadi Eisenkot, a war cabinet observer and former Israel Defense Forces chief of staff, called for a brief ceasefire in Gaza to facilitate the release of hostages. He emphasized that Israeli military should not assume civil control over Gaza and expressed doubts about the possibilities of sustained regional calm.
Why it matters
Eisenkot’s stance highlights a strategic approach to achieving critical humanitarian goals while maintaining military objectives. His rejection of long-term military control of Gaza showcases a focus on diplomatic solutions and a commitment to regional stability.
Ceasefire Proposal
Eisenkot suggested that a short-term pause in military actions could present a unique opportunity for a hostage release deal. Emphasizing the critical window of opportunity, he noted, “Just as we stopped for a truce the first time, we can pause the war and return to fighting to achieve our war goals.”
Israel-Hamas Agreement
In November, Israel negotiated a temporary cease on hostilities with Hamas, facilitating the release of 105 civilian hostages in exchange for Palestinian security prisoners over a week. Eisenkot views similar diplomatic measures as beneficial for both immediate and long-term peace efforts.
The Stance Against Military Governance in Gaza
Eisenkot firmly dismissed the notion of placing Gaza under Israeli military governance. “There is not one person in the cabinet who wants Israeli military rule in the Strip,” he emphasized. This position aligns with broader cabinet consensus and extends Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant’s calls against long-term IDF control over Gaza.
Approach Toward Hezbollah in Lebanon
The persistent Hezbollah attacks since October have escalated the conflict along the Israel-Lebanon border. Eisenkot rejected calls for Israeli security control of southern Lebanon, advocating for diplomatic solutions anchored in UN Security Council Resolution 1701 instead.
Resolution 1701 and Security Needs
Despite noting the limitations of Resolution 1701, Eisenkot called for a “strong and skilled international security force” to replace Hezbollah forces in southern Lebanon. Emphasizing security through diplomatic and proactive military means if necessary, Eisenkot affirmed, “If the diplomatic effort fails — we must take into account the option of a proactive Israeli military action in the north.”
Concluding Remarks
Eisenkot, a seasoned and strategic thinker, underscored the need for diplomacy intertwined with military readiness. Balancing short-term successes with long-term peace efforts reflects Israel’s commitment to regional security and humanitarian objectives.
This story was first published on timesofisrael.com.