Wanted: Retrial for Amiram Ben-Uliel

based on an interview by Shimon Cohen of Arnon Itiel in Arutz Sheva, translated by Hillel Fendel.

The latest public figure to call out the injustice of the conviction of Amiram Ben-Uliel, author and columnist Arnon Itiel, says that his confession of murder would not serve as an acceptable confession in Western countries, given that it was extracted under torture.

At the very least, Itiel says, the public debate surrounding Ben-Uliel's conviction in the Dawabsheh family murder must be reawakened.

Ben-Uliel is a young Israeli husband and father serving three life sentences in jail, including years of solitary confinement, for a murder he confessed to only after being severely tortured. He has maintained his innocence for years, and many claim he was framed simply because of the political need to prove that "Jewish terrorism" was being dealt with.

It is also alleged that he was framed to cover up a feud between two families in the Arab village of Duma. No fewer than ten homes in the village were reportedly set ablaze in a similar manner over the course of several months prior to the Dawabshe deaths as part of the internal strife there.

Itiel concluded by saying, "When Joshua conquered the Land of Israel, he suffered a defeat when Achan acted unethically and took booty from the vanquished. Today, as well, our redemption will not happen if the truth behind the Ben-Uliel case is not uncovered and rectified."

"Every minute that Ben-Uliel remains in prison," Itiel said, "is a is a stain on the conscience of every believing Jew." Western countries do not accept confessions extracted under torture, Itiel said, even if they are accompanied by reenactment, and murder convictions require additional evidence.

"Let's imagine that his name was not Amiram Ben-Uliel, but rather Yossi Ulilevitz," said Uliel, "and he was actually imprisoned in China or what used to be the USSR after confessing under torture. Our entire nation would be up in arms demanding his release! But when he is locked up here at home in a Jewish prison, by Jews, then everything is OK?"

Other prominent Israelis who have spoken out against the injustice to Amiram Ben-Uliel include Law Prof. Boaz Sangero (author of Convicting Innocents in Israel and the World and similar books, who has called the Ben Uliel case the worst example of an unjust conviction in Israel), Professor Yoel Elitzur (member of the Academy of the Hebrew Language), Prof. Talia Einhorn, the late Rabbi Chaim Druckman, Nobel Prize winner Prof. Shlomo Aumann, journalist Arnon Segal, Jonathan Pollard, Moshe Feiglin, and defense lawyer Avigdor Feldman.

Working against Ben-Uliel are his confession and re-enactment of the crime – but Itiel notes many cases in which the accused confessed and re-enacted, and yet the conviction was later overturned. In Israel alone, he says, "there have been Roman Zodorov, Amos Barness, Izat Nafsu, Sliman El-Abid, and more."

Among the many difficulties in the case against Ben-Uliel is the fact that an Arab eyewitness testified that he had clearly seen two arsonists that night, yet the indictment against Ben-Uliel charged that he had acted alone. In addition, two different types of Hebrew graffiti were found at the site, yet expert testimony stated that neither of them were written by Ben-Uliel.

The Shabak's Jewish Division denied that there had been any torture leading up to the confession – though the District Court in the case ruled straight out that there had indeed been torture.

The Public Committee Against Torture in Israel (PCATI) said the decision to uphold a confession based on torture showed a “glaring oversight” in the legal system: “… it would have been appropriate for the court to have given decisive weight to the fact that before Ben Uliel confessed to the acts, interrogation methods involving severe and prolonged torture were applied to him."

See here for a detailed analysis of the what should have been the inadmissibility of Ben-Uliel's confession:

At the time, the Haaretz newspaper noted that the evidence against Ben Uliel included no objective evidence other than confessions obtained under duress and his own reenactment – which he later retracted, saying it was given based only on what the Shabak interrogators wanted to hear.

Itiel finds some reason for optimism in that "the new director of the Shabak, David Zini, is a man of integrity. The key is in his hands, because the real murderer is living in the Arab village of Duma. I call on Zini to do everything he can to find the real murderer. It shouldn't be hard; the Shabak is one of the most effective secret police entities in the world."

The Victim's Blood Cries out: Stop Stalling and Win!

by Michael Sparber, member of the Judea & Samaria forum, translated by Hillel Fendel.

"Bnayahu Melet, father of two and a member of his local military response team, was a man of truth, a fighter and a visionary. He was guided by truth, and was busy reclaiming for the Jewish People dunam after dunam of the Land of Israel. Bnayahu was a 'warrior of David' of our generation – a man forged of concrete [melet, in Hebrew], in whose merit, among others, we are all able to live here. Every conversation with him was a lesson that filled one with optimism and strength. For me, he always represented Trumpeldor and his comrades. How sorrowful is your passing, my beloved brother and teacher."

I wrote those words immediately upon learning that this great man, among the sons and builders (bane'ha ubone'ha, in Hebrew) of Eretz Yisrael, may G-d avenge his blood, had been murdered by ruthless Palestinians on his way to save lives. I did not write them by rote to console his family, or myself, but rather out of deep conviction of their utter truth. He was of that very rare type that combined vision and responsibility, faith and action, humbleness and strength. He was a walking lesson in love of the Land, in true comprehension of the security situation, and in deep faith that Israel will defeat its enemies if it simply believes in itself and stops seeking to merely "contain" them.

This is precisely why Bnayahu's death is not just a personal tragedy for his family and friends. It is of national proportions, and essentially presents a national test: Will we get stuck on trying to ascertain on how exactly he was murdered, or rather on whether the State of Israel will learn the lesson for which he lived and acted?

Bnayahu did not believe in "managing" the terrorism that engulfs us, but rather in vanquishing it. He did not accept the army's usual post-attack announcements that "we will pursue the murderers and bring them to justice," but insisted that the army must totally wipe out the ability of the entire terrorist mechanism to carry out further attacks.

Bnayahu's Blood Cries Out Not for Vengeance, but for Victory

Here precisely begins the responsibility of the Government of Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu's response to the two terrorist murders and other terrorist victims of that dark day was strong, but quite familiar: Destruction of the terrorists' houses, reinforcement of military forces, checkpoints, cancellation of work permits, collection of enemy weapons, and approvals for more Jewish farms. These are steps that are certainly important, operationally, but they still rely on that same old "conception" of responding to what is done to us. They do not initiate victory and the destruction of the enemy's infrastructure and ability to fight and kill us.

The recent chain of terrorist attacks demands a fundamental shift in perception. We can no longer rely on chasing each individual attacker. We must launch a continuous offensive against the entire terrorism-manufacturing system, until it breaks. Mr. Prime Minister, members of the Cabinet – you who are entrusted with the security of Israel's citizens - this is exactly the conception that we thought and hoped was shattered back on October 7th, nearly three years ago!

For years we told ourselves that we could contain Hamas, manage it, and control the "height of the flames" – and the price we ended up paying was the most terrible in the nation's history. How can we even consider repeating that same mistake in Judea and Samaria!?

As long as it is the terrorists who choose the time and place, manipulating Israel into responding according to the terms they have set, they retain the initiative. When we simply react, we are not striving for victory; at most, for attrition. The equation must be reversed. Israel must once again be the side that takes the lead and forces the other side to figure out how to respond. The terrorists must no longer be those who surprise the State of Israel, but those who wake up each morning with fear as to what Israel has in store for them today.

Mr. Prime Minister, the list of operations you announced following the recent murders is not a recipe for victory, but rather a routine inventory of actions that have been tried already thousands of times. If this is the response even after four terrorist attacks in just one day, it clearly means that nothing has changed - other than the amount of murdered Jews.

This is precisely the moment at which a country is tested. We know that we are good at responding, but now we have to see if we can free ourselves from the conception that has brought us to where we are.

Oct. 7^th was not just an intelligence failure. It was a collapse of an entire worldview that falsely held that we can manage a murderous enemy and keep it at bay according to our dictates. We learned that we cannot – and if this mistake continues to guide us today in Judea and Samaria, Heaven forbid, we will simply be reenacting the conditions that enabled the Gaza massacre. This would mean that we are not only desecrating the memory of those who fell, but also preparing the way for the next victims.

Bnayahu Melet's blood is crying out not for another checkpoint or house demolition, but rather to change the equation, regain the initiative, and win! 

From Hevron to Shomron: Quietly, Gradually, and Tediously, the Deed is Done

by Adi Mintz, former Director-General of the Yesha Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria, translated by Hillel Fendel.

A dream is coming true in the city of Hevron these days: Far from the spotlights, the roofing project in the Cave of the Patriarchs (Me'arat HaMachpelah) is advancing rapidly. The area often used for Jewish prayer services (weather permitting, which it generally does not, especially in boiling summer heat and cold rainy winter days) will be fitted, for the first time in history, with a roof being manufactured in a specialized factory, while tractors and heavy engineering vehicles prepare the access routes on the site for the cranes and trucks to complete the job.

For the more than 700,000 Jewish worshipers who visit the site annually (nearly 100,000 more than the amount of Muslims), this is the realization of a long-held dream: the ability to pray in the site's central courtyard, between the tombs of Avraham and Sarah on the right and Yaakov and Leah on the left, protected from the elements. New electrical infrastructure, air conditioning, drainage, and lighting will be installed as well.

The logic behind this secrecy is obvious. In today's complex international political context of Yesha (Judea and Samaria), every bombastic declaration or untimely publication is liable to mean the end of a project. To its credit, the Religious Zionism party, headed by Finance Minister Betzalel Smotrich, understands that the way to make the long-overdue vital strategic changes in the demographics of Yesha is precisely the opposite of a PR approach. It is rather found in the tedious maze of governmental apparatuses. 

The most recent move led by Smotrich and his party colleague, Settlement Affairs Minister Orit Strook, illustrates this perfectly: the passage of a dramatic cabinet decision that transfers all urban planning authorities in Area H2 (the part of Hevron that was allocated for Jewish settlement under by the 1997 Hebron Agreement) to Israeli planning authorities. With this quiet administrative step, a primary millstone of the Hebron Agreement was effectively removed, and the zoning barriers that had blocked Jewish settlement in Hebron for nearly three decades were eliminated. 

But, as significant as this project is, it is only an example – a major one, granted – of the consistent, systematic modus operandi that has led, during the nearly four years of the current Israeli government, to an unprecedented revolution in the entire Judea and Samaria settlement enterprise. This is a strategy based on acting quietly and discreetly, with painstaking, tiny-step by tiny-step work to dismantle bureaucratic and legal obstacles while trying to avoid headlines and flaunt achievements. This is of course not the usual manner in which projects like this are carried out… 

The process wondrously mimics how a sapling becomes a tree. In its first years, the sapling is lovingly and modestly irrigated and protected from dangerous elements; its fruits, if there are any, are orlah and may not be eaten. Only in the fourth year may they be consumed, with certain restrictions, and then in the fifth year, after years of quiet work, the fruits sprout forth in full bloom, to be heartily partaken of.

Similarly in the administrative/legal sphere in Yesha. Minister Smotrich and his colleagues stubbornly waged a long political struggle for the establishment of a new "Settlement Administration" in the Defense Ministry (which has overall responsibility for Judea and Samaria), with Yehuda Eliyahu at its helm. After it was put together, it was no simple matter to contend with then-Defense Minister Yoav Galant – who has since been replaced by the much more sympathetic Yisrael Katz – over the boundaries of its authorities. The structural changes that were made with the establishment of the new Administration included the appointment of a Deputy Administration head for Civilian Matters, and the transfer of broad authorities from the head of the IDF's Civil Administration and the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) to civilian hands. One of the most significant changes was the transfer of the authorities of the Legal Counsel's Office of Yesha to the Defense Ministry Legal Counsel, who reports directly to the new Administration. For years these authorities had been governed by the Chief IDF Prosecution, headed most recently by the now-disgraced Tomer Yerushalmi. This effectively neutralized one of the primary legal barriers that long blocked and delayed Jewish development in Yesha.

For many long months, the new Settlement Administration operated below the radar. It fundamentally changed the methods of supervision over and enforcement of laws against illegal Arab construction, and brought about a dramatic revolution in the workings of the Supreme Planning Council, the top planning and zoning body in the Civil Administration. It also led to the declaration of many thousands of dunams (1,000-square-meter tracts of land) as State Land, amidst very close cooperation with the IDF Central Command. 

At the same time, Finance Minister Smotrich allocated the necessary resources and budgetary sums for this civilian revolution; the faction's MKs led the way to pass the historic legislation nullifying the 2005 Disengagement Law from northern Shomron; and Settlement Minister Strook led the ongoing Agricultural Farms enterprise – hundreds of strategic points throughout Judea and Samaria that watch over and preserve our national lands. 

Speak Little, Do Much

This quiet, calculated activity began to ripen significantly only in the last year and a half. Suddenly, whoever travels in Judea and Samaria today immediately notices the changes in the landscape. The construction momentum, the paving of roads, the new, white light-construction houses dotting the hills, and the establishment of new outposts are all now "facts on the ground." We learned this lesson of speaking little and doing much from our Patriarch Avraham: When the angels arrived at his tent, he promised them, "I will fetch [you] a morsel of bread" - but in practice, he rushed to bring them flour cakes, cattle, and a variety of delicacies. 

The European Union, the American administration, and even the extreme left-wing organizations in Israel did not recognize the scale of the structural change in time, because it was done behind the scenes, in dry legal discussions and administrative orders. They panicked and began to exert political pressure only when they discovered the final result, when the revolution had already taken shape and became irreversible.

Editor's Note: Peace Now released a 65-page report this week summing up, very satisfactorily in nationalist eyes, the progress made in Judea and Samaria from 2023 to 2025. It states that 185 new Jewish outposts were established during this period; plans for 40,064 housing units were advanced (two-thirds of these during 2025 alone), and 102 new communities were approved. Nearly 26,000 dunams were declared state lands – almost 50% of the entire amount declared as state lands ever since the Oslo Agreements were signed. At least 223 kilometers of new roads were paved.

Israeli Hasbara is Dead, Long Live American Hasbara for Israel!

by Boaz Lieberman, Strategic Crisis Management Advisor, translated by Hillel Fendel.

Over the past years we have grown accustomed to analyze American politics via "sides:" Trump or Biden? Republicans or Democrats? Israel supporters or opponents?

But behind the daily headlines hides a much more complex reality than that, and whoever doesn't understand this is liable to wake up in a few years and find that Israeli-American relations stand upon weaker foundations than they thought – and dangerously so.

The biggest mistake that Israel can make today is to believe that our strategic relationship with the U.S. is guaranteed forever, simply because of inertia. This is not at all certain; the relationship requires maintenance, investment, and deep understanding of the changes that American politics is undergoing.

For years, the Democratic party has been in a clear process of distancing itself from some of its traditional policies towards Israel. A new generation of activists, Congressmen, and media personalities is now adopting positions that view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through the glasses of balance of power, colonialism, and ethnic identities. For them, Israel is no longer a small country fighting for its survival, but a strong state that they see as part of the network of Western powers.

On the other hand, there is certainly no need to eulogize Democratic support for Israel. Many parts of the Democratic establishment still see Israel as a vital American ally. They may be using different terminology and even tones, but they are not all enemies of Israel.

At the same time, within the Republican Party too, a deep change is taking place. The conservative right of Ronald Reagan was an international, activist right that was very willing to activate American force around the world when necessary. The movement that Donald Trump is leading is not the same thing; though not necessarily isolationist, it does make sure to constantly ask before every decision: Does this directly serve American interests?

This is where two names come into the picture – the two most significant figures in the post-Trump era: Marco Rubio and JD Vance.

Secretary of State Rubio represents the more traditional conservative viewpoint. He sees Israel as a strategic asset of the first degree in the struggle against Iran, China, Islamic terrorism, and anti-Western axes.

Vice President Vance, on the other hand – 13 years younger than Rubio – is a man of the new generation of Republicans. He is not anti-Israel, but views the world from the vantage point of the typical middle-class American, and primarily wants to know what he or she would like.

Israel cannot afford to take sides in this succession struggle.

With Rubio, we must speak the language of national security, technology, intelligence, and the struggle against Iran. With Vance, we must speak an entirely different language, and present the position that Israel is not a burden on the United States, but rather an asset that saves it from fighting wars, losing soldiers, and spending money. Israel does not ask for American troops, but rather fights on its own against forces that threaten, inter alia, American interests.

Yet alongside the political challenge, Israel also faces an even greater trial: the loss of influence in the arena of public opinion. And this brings us to the part that Israel still refuses to understand: The old-style Israeli Hasbara (PR and image-building) is dead.

For years, we thought the way to convince the world was to send a spokesperson to a studio, present a map, show a video, and explain why we are right. This method worked in the era of institutionalized media, when the public received information through a limited number of television channels and newspapers. The world of 2026 looks completely different. America's Gen Z does not learn about Israel via CNN or Fox news, but rather through TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, and podcasts. They don't listen to official spokesmen, but rather to people they trust from social media.

Israel must therefore shift away from traditional Hasbara, to "diplomacy of influence."

Instead of sending Israelis with perfect English to talk on TV, we must invest in forming a broad coalition of Americans who will speak for Israel, in American. No longer must there be Israeli hasbarah; there must be American hasbarah for Israel!

The voices that should lead this campaign need not necessarily be Israeli ambassadors or politicians. They must rather be former American combat soldiers or officers, influential conservatives, Evangelical leaders, hi-tech personalities, parents who are concerned about campus anti-Semitism, professors, conservative Hispanics, and moderate Democrats.

When an American explains to another American why Israel is important for U.S. security, the message is heard ten times louder than when an Israeli explains this.

And our second mistake is this: focusing on Washington, D.C. exclusively.

The real battle for the future of Israeli-U.S. relations is taking place today on university campuses: at Harvard, Columbia, Berkeley, the University of Pennsylvania, and the like. It is there, and not in "traditional American support for Israel," that the consciousness of the coming decade's journalists, judges, members of Congress, and governors is being shaped.

If Israel does not invest its efforts there now, this year, it will discover in ten years that the problem is not who sits in the White House, but what the American public itself thinks.

For this reason, a new pro-Israel strategy is required, based on three principles: strengthening bipartisan support for Israel, among both Democrats and Republicans; building a deep "network of influence" within American society in its entirety and not just in the political system; and replacing traditional Hasbara sources with authentic American voices.

Israel need not choose between Vance and Rubio, or between Republicans and Democrats. It must simply choose America – all of it. Maintaining that broad alliance with America in general was historically one of Israel’s greatest strategic successes ever since its establishment. In the current polarized, raucous, and rapidly changing world, our strategy for the decades to come must be the return to that comprehensive approach.

Israel's Northern Border Must Remain Israeli!

All eyes are on the Israel-Lebanon border because of Israel's defensive war against Hizbullah. Under no scenario can Israel afford to leave it.

by Orit Strook, Israeli Cabinet Minister, translated by Hillel Fendel.

Throughout the last weeks (with a small hiatus ever since the US and Iran signed their controversial "memo of understanding"), wherever I have been in Israel, and whatever I may be engaged in doing, my heart finds itself drawn to the north. Occupying my thoughts are the northern towns of Metulah, Zar'it, Admit and Avivit, Misgav Am and Manara, and all those places situated on and protecting our northern border, yet forced to live with daily bomb sirens. The residents are impelled to look heavenward umpteen times a day to check if bomb-laden drones are on their way over. And each time they do, they also have to ask themselves (and me, via text messages or phone calls): Is the IDF staying in place to do the work, or Heaven forbid, clearing out?

Our northern compatriots know quite well what the IDF is doing in Lebanon, and what existential threat they are busy saving us from, day in and day out. For many years it was they who cried and warned about what was happening on the other side of the border: the digging of tunnels, lookouts on Israeli civilian and military positions, Iranian money flowing uninterruptedly to Lebanese villages, and the tremendous extent to which Hizbullah positions were being built up amidst the villagers. For 17 years they tried to wake up the security and government echelons – but these were 17 years of relative quiet, and who wanted to hear about war and tunnels and stark reality when they could so easily be ignored? It was truly a case of, "Quiet – we're arming."

And now, this terrible truth is being revealed in its full frightening danger: kilometer after kilometer of tunnels dozens of meters underground, with thousands of weapons, innocent-looking houses that are actually military outposts, and invasion plans that wouldn't shame the 7^th of October. And now our dedicated soldiers are combing the area, kilometer after kilometer, destroying the destruction machine the terrorists were building for us under the guise of the 17-year quiet – under the unsuspecting noses and closed eyes of those who were supposed to be in charge of preventing terrorism from within Lebanon: UNIFIL and the Lebanese Army.

UN Security Council Resolution 1701, adopted at the end of the Second Lebanon War, entrusted – abandoned, more correctly – our security to the flimsy UN force called UNIFIL, and to the Lebanese army, a third of whose soldiers belong to the Shia community. Bound by that wretched resolution, we did not act to remove the threat growing on our border under the apathetic eyes of these two "forces."

Thanks to G-d's mercies, our northern border did not see an Oct. 7^th-like infiltration and massacre. This is truly a tremendous miracle, which we cannot take for granted. But the threat still exists, in the form of the infrastructures that were built there, ready and waiting for Hizbullah orders to "Start the attack!" A fair proportion of the tunnels and outposts have been destroyed, and many terrorists have been killed - but under American pressure, the job is far from over.

The ceasefire outline agreed upon in the past included a clause that the IDF is permitted to continue destroying any emerging threat across the border - and indeed the IDF and our other security agencies invested immense efforts in these counter-activities. But as time passed, the picture became increasingly clear: It is impossible to thwart terrorism solely from the outside, from the other side of the border – especially when we are supposed to count on help from other bodies, which never comes. Everyone now knows that the past plans for Lebanon have failed, and we may and must not return to them.

This is why what we have been doing for the past few weeks is so important – and why we must continue to do so, no matter what agreement President Trump and the Iranians come to regarding our future. We must continue operating within southern Lebanon, by ourselves, to destroy the terrorist monster growing there against us. The IDF now controls over 600 square kilometers (some 230 square miles) of southern Lebanon - Hizbullah territory, where no Muslim civilians now live - and it is being cleaned out of terrorist infrastructures such as tunnels, bunkers, and weapon stockpiles. It must be done, for the future of Israel's security.

We may not allow ourselves to stop this work, or to be forced into withdrawing and trying to secure ourselves only from within Israel; this has failed, cannot succeed, and may not be tried again.

I paid a shiva (consolation) visit to the family of fallen soldier Ohad Yaari last week; he was one of six IDF soldiers killed in southern Lebanon in the first half of this month (six more have been killed since then). His father Dudu pleaded with me: "Don't stop, don't give in, we're counting on you." I promised that we would not.

Ohad's family also asked me one more thing: to publicize on the eve of the Sabbath their call to "strengthen the light and kindness" in memory of their son: to light an extra Sabbath candle in each home and to commit to doing one extra good deed, so as to enter the holy Sabbath with an uplifted spirit and having added light and loving-kindness to the world in loving memory of Ohad, may G-d avenge his blood.

Confusing the Ally for the Enemy

by Michael Puah, Director-General of the Jewish Leadership movement, translated by Hillel Fendel.

The massacre of Oct. 7^th should have taught us a basic lesson: Our enemy is not the settlers, those who work the land, or those building small new Jewish farms in Judea and Samaria (Yesha). The actual enemy is Palestinian terrorism, the goal of which is to banish Jews from their land – not just parts of it, but all of it, including Tel Aviv and elsewhere – and to destabilize the very existence of the State of Israel.

But it seems that despite the so-heavy price that we paid then, some members of our security apparatus are still caught in the old and dangerous conceptions. Instead of seeing those who build the farms as a pioneering force that buttresses the Israeli hold on our only homeland and strengthens our security, they all too frequently treat them as if they were the enemy. Large IDF and police forces are deployed to evacuate the outposts, clash with young Jewish pioneers, and destroy their structures, while not far away our real enemies are engaged in terrorist activity, agricultural theft, illegal takeovers of lands, and violent riots.

The message that this gives over to the Palestinians is destructive. When they see the IDF investing such efforts against the Jewish settlement enterprise, it fills them with motivation. They feel that the State of Israel itself is unsure about Jewish rights to live in and settle their land. Instead of deterring their terrorism, this policy encourages the Arabs to believe that their pressure and violence and hatred are working!

It's not only unfair to the settlers, it is also a very grave security miscalculation. The farms and outposts in Yesha have proven time and again their importance in the campaign to safeguard state lands, to prevent hostile take-overs, and to create an Israeli presence in strategic areas. Many of those involved in building the outposts and farms serve in the IDF reserves, in stints of weeks and months at a time. When they are treated as if they don't have basic human rights, let alone civilian rights, this impairs not only their dignity, but also the basic trust between the public they represent and the state institutions.

Whoever reads the news know that this also brings to the fore a basic contradiction: For long months we have been hearing from the IDF and the media of the grave shortage of IDF manpower, and that all the hareidim must be drafted in order to ease the load on the reservists – yet behold, when there is a "need" to destroy a farm or settlers' hilltop shacks, we suddenly see that dozens and sometimes even hundreds of fighters and Border Guardsmen and women are recruited for the mission.

If there really is a manpower shortage in the army, these forces should be deployed not to destroy Jewish settlement points, but to protect the roads from rock-throwers and worse, thwart terrorism, confiscate arms, and arrest hostile elements busy building more and more illegal Arab houses. The answer must be demanded: Is there a manpower shortage, or not?

The problem is not only operational, but also conceptual. For years, the settlers and Yesha residents have warned of the erosion of anti-terrorism deterrence. But instead of listening to them, the opposite was done: extensive efforts were invested in monitoring, restricting, and arresting them. The Simchat Torah slaughter showed in the most brutal way what happens when those who identify dangers and warn against them are treated as the enemies themselves.

The responsibility is not only upon the commanders in the field, for they are instruments of the policies and instructions they receive from above. The responsibility lies, first and foremost, with the top IDF echelons, which determine the order of priorities. They have clearly decided that the pioneer settlers are not acting in consonance with the conceptions in which many of our civil and military leadership is trapped.

The destruction of settlement points is very reminiscent of what happened prior to Oct. 7^th, when the radio equipment that was used to learn of and transmit reports of Hamas movements was confiscated. It can also be likened to when civilian patrol and defense units in the Gaza envelope were dismantled.

But even above this level of command stands our government. Defense Minister Yisrael Katz may not simply suffice with receiving reports retroactively. He must constantly examine whether the policies applied "on the ground" serve Israel's security needs – or harm them. When IDF troops are allocated to face off against Jewish pioneers instead of to fight terrorism, it is his duty to intervene and demand a change.

This is the clear responsibility of the Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. The nationalist public voted for a government that pledged to strengthen and secure the 550,000-strong Jewish population in Yesha, and change failed military policies – and not to target those who work tirelessly to support them and enhance their growth.

The State of Israel has to wake up and clearly distinguish between its enemies and those who love and support it. The IDF must concentrate its efforts on fighting terrorism, protecting Israeli citizens, and supporting our grasp on the Land. The Prime Minister and Defense Minister must make absolutely sure that the policies being carried out match the lessons learned so dearly since October '23.

We call for an end to confusion: Targeting and destroying the new farms and farmers encourages the hopes of those who wish to throw us out of our Land!

The Ceasefires Are Too Dangerous!

by Omer ben-Hamu, Deputy Director of the "Victory Generation Reservists Movement", translated by Hillel Fendel.

The situation in southern Lebanon cannot be allowed to continue. The last several weeks of explosive drones killing a soldier or two every week are intolerable. Ceasefires are agreed upon between Tehran and Washington, instead of in Jerusalem, and northern Israel is paralyzed and bleeding.

How did we reach this situation, and what can be done now?

Over a year ago, the IDF initiated an offensive, in the wake of the successful beeper operation against Hizbullah in September 2024. The offensive saw the practically-crippled terrorist organization running for its life, leaving behind equipment and installations worth tens of millions of dollars; IDF troops uncovered valuable military stockpiles in every abandoned village they reached.

This should have marked an unquestionable Israeli victory. We eliminated Hizbullah's charismatic leader Nasrallah and nearly all of its entire leadership, the large majority of its field military commanders were wounded from the beeper operation, and the entire population of southern Lebanon – strong Hizbullah supporters, based on what our soldiers found in their homes – had left on its own for the north.

But instead, as has happened so often in the past, we did not take advantage of the military momentum, and our government decided on a "stalemate" devoid of both logic and self-respect.

Israel signed an agreement that everyone knew in real-time was worthless. Our forces were to withdraw from all the territory (except for a small area with five military bases) we had captured, at a great cost in lives; the Lebanese citizens were to be allowed to return; and the Lebanese government committed to disarm Hizbullah – even though there was no dispute that it had neither the will nor the capability of doing so.

The breathing-room that this fake agreement gave Hizbullah enabled the terrorists not only to avoid being disarmed, but also to renew its stockpiles and armaments, rehabilitate its chain of command, and acquire hundreds of fiber-optic-guided FPV's (First-Person View, i.e., an operator can see a video of exactly what the drone "sees"). Because these can carry several kilometers of extremely thin optical fiber that connect them back to their base, they are not easily jammed or stopped, as in the past.

When Hizbullah later attacked us following the campaign against Iran, we responded again with many of the same mistakes: Instead of setting up for a short but powerful offensive, with full-scale recruitment and utilization of the element of surprise to capture southern Lebanon, the IDF – which admittedly was focused mainly on Iran – crawled around from village to village. And when the ceasefires in Iran and Lebanon were forced upon us, we found ourselves far from the Litani River (except in the east), not protected naturally by the river but rather by an imaginary "yellow" line that was easily infiltrated by terrorists.

In addition, our "consent" to the ceasefire meant that our forces were stuck mostly inside buildings, tracked and observed by Hizbullah. The terrorists had time to recover, stopped retreating, and began attacking our vulnerable soldiers with their new drones.

Contrary to what many talking-heads say, the great failure was not that we weren't prepared for the drone threat. The Russians, Ukrainians, and even the Americans were also not ready for it, even though their bases were attacked dozens of times. Rather, the problem was that we didn't finish the job when we had the chance; we weakly accepted these ceasefires that enabled the enemy time and again to regroup and start over.

The situation is creating considerable frustration among our forces. Not only are the campaigns prolonged, thereby creating manpower crises, but the ground forces are not clear on what their missions are. Are they supposed to advance and occupy territory up to the Litani? Are they supposed to destroy Hizbullah? Are they supposed to defend the Yellow Line? Are they supposed to wait and see what Trump decides?

Soldiers must know what their mission is, and reservists' families need to understand the goals of the fighting for which their loved ones are once again leaving home for the unknown.

Of course, not all is lost.
Israel is still the strongest and most dominant player in the Middle East. But what has to be done now is, firstly, to make sure not to repeat past mistakes. We relied too heavily on the Iron Dome anti-rocket system and underground tunnel-blocking methods; we cannot now rely once again just on our technological genius to come up with an anti-drone system. The drones are not our enemy, and neither were the tunnels in Gaza; the enemy is Hamas and Hizbullah. We didn't seem to realize this in Gaza, and at this rate, neither have we grasped this in Lebanon.

Secondly, the IDF must mobilize large-scale reserves for a short, decisive campaign. It has to occupy territory in Lebanon equivalent to the length of the optical fiber that guides the drones, whether it be 30 kilometers or even twice that, well beyond the Litani River.

Next, we must make it clear to the Lebanese public that Hizbullah is destroying Lebanon and causing it to lose its land. It must be distinctly established – despite Trump's temper tantrum this week – that every Hizbullah rocket or drone launch will be met with destroyed buildings in Hizbullah headquarters in Beirut and deep damage to infrastructure.

If children in Kiryat Shmona cannot take a bus to school safely, then no one in the Dahiya district and throughout southern Lebanon will find a single functioning gas station. Infrastructure that serves both Hizbullah and the Shiite population must be struck, including electricity and water, thus that Hizbullah will be blamed and pressured to disarm.

And finally, we must declare unequivocally that what has been will no longer be. For years, our enemies have grown accustomed to the cycle wherein they attack, we respond, and then a ceasefire kicks in, leaving the map more or less as it was. It must be made clear that from now on, an attack upon us will cost them a lack of sovereignty, permanently. Israel must announce formally that it will adopt the Golan Heights approach: Just as we never withdrew from the Golan, we will never retreat from Lebanon south of the Litani. Our enemies must be made to realize that attacking Israel will cost them in territory, for generations. And just to fill out the picture, Israel must add that we will retain the area north of the Litani as well if Lebanon does not disarm Hizbullah, as it promised.

This decisive, brisk approach will not only push back the threat of fiber-optic drones, but will also finally end the "cycle of violence:" Whoever starts a war against Israel will pay, on their own land, a price they simply cannot afford.

To-Do List About Gaza

by Adi Mintz, former Director-General of the Yesha Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria, translated by Hillel Fendel.

“You cannot build a future with armed groups running the streets, hiding in tunnels and stockpiling weapons." So declared last week Nikolay Mladenov, chairman of the “Peace Council” appointed last year by U.S. President Donald Trump. Mladenov, who repeated these remarks at the Munich Security Conference and in his meetings in Jerusalem, effectively stated unequivocally: The disarmament of Hamas is not open to negotiation.

That is, even senior figures in the American “Peace Council” understand what some among us still refuse to accept: There is no chance of dismantling the Hamas terror monster peacefully. Victory will be achieved only through force of arms.

This is not to say that Mladenov has become a Zionist. He still believes that Hamas can compete in national Palestinian elections if it disavows armed activity. But he insisted that it is "not negotiable [to have] armed factions or militias with their own military command and control systems, with their own arsenals or tunnel networks, existing alongside a transitional Palestinian authority.”

Sadly, the Knesset opposition in Israel, together with some of our popular media, engage in systematically minimizing the IDF’s achievements. The situation on the ground, however, tells a completely different story: In recent months the State of Israel carried out a series of strategic operations that has changed the face of the Gaza Strip.

First of all, a thorough and unprecedented cleansing of terrorist infrastructure was carried out in the Gaza areas under our control - from drilling and locating deep tunnels, to the systematic destruction of command compounds. 

Secondly, and most importantly, the IDF gradually and consistently expanded its territorial zone of control. The “yellow line” dividing Hamas and Israeli forces moved westward, towards the Mediterranean – and Israel now fully controls roughly 60% of the Gaza Strip. Combine this with our intelligence capability to carry out precise, surgical targeted killings - such as last week's elimination of the Sinwar brothers' successor as Hamas chieftain arch-terrorist Izz a-Din al-Haddad – and the result is a bottom line of tremendous achievements.

Despite this, opposition leaders in Israel, motivated by narrow political considerations, insist on proclaiming time and again how poorly we have fared and are faring in Gaza. They ignore our achievements there, choosing rather to create headlines about supposed "Hamas empowerment." They don't seem to mind that along the way, the combat morale of our soldiers in the field suffers. 

In the past, Yichye Sinwar – Hamas leader and architect of the Simchat Torah/Oct. 7th massacre – would emerge from the tunnels after an Israeli strike, sit among the ruins, and announce: "We won!" But today, most shamefully, some of our own politicians and "experts" do Sinwar's work for him, by sitting in the TV studios and declaring, "We lost!" 

I'm not suggesting that Hamas is not dangerous; the recent bitter past has taught us that all too well. But the facts are clear: During the recent Israeli-U.S. military operation "The Lion's Roar," Hamas sat paralyzed on the side. Nor did it dare to try anything, even if only to distract Israel, when the IDF was engaged (and still is) in attacking and wiping out Hizbullah capabilities. Hamas was simply too weak to do so, and Israeli deterrence is too strong. 

The Five Steps Needed for Total Victory

Now is precisely the opportunity that Israel cannot allow itself to miss. In light of the international recognition that Hamas has sorely violated the ceasefire agreements of seven months ago, the Israeli government must take the following five strategic steps in order to completely dismantle Hamas. 

• The logistics faucet must be closed immediately: The number of trucks with "humanitarian aid" entering Gaza must be reduced to the absolute minimum. Currently, 650 (!) trucks enter each day, and many of them are stocked with luxury items or dual-use products. Reducing the daily number of trucks to 150 would ensure that there is no famine in Gaza, while also preventing Hamas from ruthlessly controlling the resources arriving there. 

• Not a trace of Hamas sovereignty may remain. Air strikes must destroy every sign of the Hamas regime in areas that have not yet been conquered. Anyone bearing arms, every local policeman, and any semi-governmental building must be legitimate targets, in order to shake and weaken the Hamas foothold among the populace.

• Hamas territory must be constantly eroded. The "yellow line" must keep on shifting westward, so that Israeli control will be expanded and terrorist expanses will be narrowed.

• Intelligence capabilities must be increased: The Shabak and IDF Intelligence Wing must be more firmly and deeply emplaced in Gaza, in order to more precisely prepare for a future IDF ground-forces entry to completely dismantle the terrorist infrastructures.

• Willful emigration from Hamas must be encouraged. Efforts to do so have been underway to one extent or another, but an official body totally dedicated to this end has not yet been formed. 

We must emphasize that there are no shortcuts to dismantling Hamas. The IDF’s attempts to cultivate “local militias” or armed clans as an alternative governing authority are a form of playing with fire. Predictably, in the long term, these weapons will inevitably be turned against us.

Defeating Hamas will not be achieved by transferring control to other gangs - but rather through decisive Israeli security control, territorial firmness, and stripping the Gaza Strip of any governing capacity and terrorist capabilities.

Editor’s Note: It is important to note the all-but-forgotten promises by President Trump to disarm Hamas. As Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA has noted repeatedly, President Trump told reporters last October that Hamas "said they were going to disarm - and if they don't disarm, we will disarm them. It will happen quickly and perhaps violently. But they will disarm, do you understand me?" 

Earlier this year, Trump wrote on Truth Social, "Hamas must IMMEDIATELY honor its commitments… and proceed without delay to full Demilitarization. As I have said before, they can do this the easy way, or the hard way." 

Meanwhile, BBC reported last month that Hamas rejected the latest Trump-administration disarmament proposals. Lerner notes that Trump and his team are "stone-silent regarding this development… Iran and Hezbollah, not to mention China and others, are taking notes. If President Trump willingly ignores an inconvenient reality regarding Hamas, why should they take him seriously in substantially more challenging situations?"

The Massive Egyptian Threat in Sinai: A Scary Reminder of the Six Day War Exactly 59 Years Ago

by Haggai Huberman, Israeli journalist and author, translated by Hillel Fendel.

We are commemorating this very week 59 years since the Six Day War of 1967 – a miraculous and decisive victory in which we thankfully liberated the areas of Judea, Samaria and Binyamin; the Jordan Valley; the Golan Heights; the Sinai and Gaza Strip – and of course, most historically, the Old City of Jerusalem and the site of the two Holy Temples, the Temple Mount (Har HaBayit).

Six decades is a long time, and we might have forgotten how it all started. It began when Egypt violated the terms of the agreements reached with Israel and the United Nations following the Sinai Campaign of 1956. The Sinai, a part of Egypt, became largely demilitarized, with the UN's Emergency Force (UNEF) stationed there to keep the peace. However, after just ten years, on Israel Independence Day in 1967 (the 5th of Iyar, May 15), Egypt's President Gamal Abdul Nasser streamed his country's army into the Sinai Peninsula. 

The front page of Israel's daily Maariv newspaper blared the alarming development the next day, but added this sub-headline: "Washington is advising Israel not to take the Egyptian show of force seriously.” Three weeks later, it became quite clear how strongly advisable it would have been to take that show of force quite seriously.

Our sweeping victory in the Six Day War obscured the fact that there had actually been an intelligence failure here no less significant than that of the Yom Kippur War. That is, our intelligence leaders evaluated in the months preceding the war that, in the words of one of them, "1967 will not be a year of war." The difference is that then, Egypt's activities were so above-board, and the calls across the entire Arab world for Israel's destruction were so loud, that Israel had no choice but to launch a preemptive counterattack to save the state – but on Yom Kippur we all but ignored the abundance of evidence showing that Egypt and Syria were planning a surprise attack against us, and we did nothing. 

I recall this in light of the reports of the very significant Egyptian violations of our agreements with them going on right now. As reported on Channel 14 a few days ago, the Egyptians have no fewer than 60,000 troops (possibly now up to 70,000), as well as nearly 1,000 tanks and hundreds of artillery units in the Sinai. Very close to our border in the Negev, just 100 meters from Israel, the Egyptians are carrying out training exercises, and have also deployed air defenses.

Not much is left of the Begin-Sadat (Camp David) peace agreement of 1979, but it did have one clear advantage: the demilitarizing of the Sinai Peninsula of all Egyptian forces, except for small forces enumerated in the agreement. Even this advantage, however, has been nearly totally erased in recent years.

The "Netziv" internet site, based on open-source intelligence, reports that elite Egyptian units, advanced weapon stores, infantry and tanks have been detected between El-Arish and the Israeli border 45 kilometers (28 miles) away. Only light-weapons are allowed there, according to the agreements. Underground bunkers have been built in mountain sides, for control and missile storage, Netziv reports, and even the Sinai's airport runways in Rafid and Um-Hashiba have been widened, enabling combat aircraft activity.

The Biggest Threat: Apathy 

Israel appears to be relating to these threatening violations with apathy. The main lesson of the Six Day War, and even more so, of the Yom Kippur War and the Simchat Torah massacre (Oct. 7th), is that the enemy must be evaluated not according to his intentions, but according to his capacities and abilities. And the Egyptian abilities are quite worrisome.

Even assuming that Israel does not wish to enter into war with Egypt at present, Israel must deal with these threats and violations publicly, noisily, and internationally.

First of all, Israel must advance its own armored forces very openly to its border with Egypt. It must also insist publicly that the United States, which is a guarantor to the Camp David Agreements, demand that Egypt remove the forces that violate the accords. Israel must even threaten, in a headlines-grabbing manner, a military response to the violations. 

At present, even more worrisome than the strong Egyptian military presence in the Sinai is Israel's current passive approach.

Northern Shomron – Finally, After 60 Years!

by Haggai Huberman, Israeli journalist and author, translated by Hillel Fendel.

There has been much excitement around the rebuilding and resettling of the communities Sa-Nur and Homesh in recent weeks – two of the four Shomron sites that were evacuated and destroyed during the Disengagement withdrawal/expulsion from Gush Katif in 1995. But in truth, the governmental decision to renew the other two communities as well – Ganim and Kadim – is actually even more meaningful in many ways.

This is because their rebuilding is not only an erasure of the disgrace of the expulsion and destruction, but also marks a genuine and unprecedented revolution in the Yesha settlement enterprise.

The reason is that over Ganim and Kadim always hovered a large question mark regarding their viability as full-fledged communities. This was mainly because of the relative isolation from other Jewish areas. This is in stark contrast to Homesh and Sa-Nur, which were located on a route connecting Shavei Shomron and Kedumim to Mevo Dotan and other Jewish towns. The nearest city to Ganim and Kadim was Afula - not a quality municipality on which to base peripheral settlement. Compare this to the settlements in Binyamin and Gush Etzion, whose base city is Jerusalem, and those in western Shomron, which relied on cities such as Petah Tikva and Kfar Saba.

Overall, the assumption even before the Disengagement, given the above as well as their weak social fabric, was that there was little or no chance that Ganim and Kadim could survive.

Lost History?
In general, until just recently, the relatively sparse Jewish presence in northern Shomron belied its glorious history as the launching point for significant Jewish settlement in modern-day Yesha. For instance, the entire liberation of Judea and Samaria in the Six Day War began precisely in the Jenin area, near the Dotan Valley battle, and then moved southward. In addition, the historic agreement between the Israeli government and the Gush Emunim movement for the establishment of Elon Moreh took place in Sebastia, near today's Shavei Shomron.

Yet, throughout recent decades, the Shomron has proven to be a particularly “hard nut to crack” in terms of Jewish presence and control. Barely ten settlements were established there, and they were widely spaced from one another, and struggled to establish themselves.

In 1979, when Ariel Sharon, serving as chairman of the Ministerial Committee for Settlement Affairs, prepared his “Annual Plan for Settlement in Yesha and the Golan Heights” (the first, and last, time a government body prepared a comprehensive settlement plan for the liberated areas), he planned two small settlement blocs in northern Samaria: the Shavei Shomron bloc, which ended up with three communities, and the Shaked bloc, including some six settlements, as well as the city of Harish in recent years.

Ganim and Kadim were planned much later, in the framework of another Sharon plan, this time when he was Defense Minister. (This was all before he instigated the Disengagement, of course.) Still, while the Menachem Begin governments did good work in building massively in Binyamin, southern and central Shomron, and the Har Hevron area, the northern Shomron still waited in the shadows.

Prime Minister Yitzchak Shamir, even more unabashedly nationalistic in the top job than his former mentor and predecessor Begin, committed to establish more Yesha settlements and expand the existing ones. However, he did only the latter, because of American intervention and other political pressures following the Madrid Conference in late 1991 – and the northern Shomron once again remained desolate of major Jewish presence.

The Prophetic Warning of Avraham Shvut

Years before the Disengagement, in October 1991, Mr. Avraham Shvut, serving as head of the Planning and Construction Department in the Shomron Regional Council, prepared a comprehensive settlement plan for the northern Shomron. In his accompanying letter to the plan, Shvut wrote words that were truly prophetic:

"Northern Shomron takes up approximately a quarter of all of Judea and Samaria. Its topography is very advantageous, and it is a connecting link both between the Galilee and southern Israel and between the Coastal Plane and the Jordan Valley. Yet, despite its great settlement potential, its Jewish presence, especially in north-eastern Shomron, is most sparse. If there is any place left where an Arab political entity could possibly arise without Jewish presence, it is the northern Shomron, centered around Sh'chem [Nablus]."

"It is clear," concluded Shvut, "that this situation cannot be allowed to continue, and we must rectify it immediately."

This warning was ultimately very much realized, in that the Oslo Agreements of the early 1990's placed most of northern Shomron - the triangle between the cities of Tulkarm, Nablus, and Jenin - under Palestinian Authority control, except for thin transportation corridors between the isolated settlements.

Over a decade later, when Sharon decided to include four Jewish communities from the Shomron in his Disengagement/destruction plan, he chose the most isolated settlements he could find, in order to enable exactly the PA continuity that Shvut had warned about.

In fact, Shvut’s warning about enabling the formation of the “core of a Palestinian state” in northern Shomron was fulfilled almost entirely.

Better Late Than Never

Now, however, the government of Israel is working to rectify this critical mistake. This month, a day after the official ceremony marking the rebuilding of Sa-Nur, a high-level meeting took place not far from there, in the Shavei Shomron home of Shomron head Yossi Dagan.

In attendance were Defense Minister Yisrael Katz, Minister Betzalel Smotrich, Housing Minister Chaim Katz, and Amanah Settlement Organization head Ze'ev Hever. We can sum up the meeting by saying that if everything they discussed comes to fruition, much of the northern Shomron will come to life, with new communities, infrastructures, roads and more.

The historic northern Shomron news we heard this week - that 21 years after they were uprooted in the Disengagement, Ganim and Kadim are expected to be rebuilt this coming summer - is an important stage in the overall plan. When it happens, it will thwart the danger of the establishment of a Palestinian state in its largest potential area: northern Samaria. This will happen because of the creation, for the first time in history, a substantial Jewish presence there – beginning in and around the nearly-forsaken communities of Kadim and Ganim.