Introduction

Despite its significant achievements and the heavy toll it has inflicted on Hamas and Gaza as a whole, the ongoing conflict has yet to meet its core strategic objectives: dismantling Hamas’s military and governing structures and securing the release of hostages. Backed by Iran, Hamas continues to maintain its underground infrastructure, retains a limited rocket arsenal, and preserves an active command structure—even after more than a year and a half of relentless fighting.

Meanwhile, Israel faces persistent security challenges across multiple fronts—Iran, the West Bank, Yemen, Syria, and Lebanon—all demanding significant military resources, especially during periods of escalation.

At the heart of the debate over how to proceed lies the “hourglass dilemma”—a metaphor for the dwindling time available to make critical decisions. However, there is not just one hourglass but several, each representing a different form of pressure: military, social, political, and regional. Failing to achieve a decisive victory not only prolongs the conflict but also drains national resources and threatens Israel’s ability to obtain its strategic goals. A close examination of these various hourglasses highlights the immediate need for a decisive military campaign.

The Military Hourglass: Resources Must Be Cleared for Other Arenas

The Gaza front, though critical, is not the only theater demanding the IDF’s attention. The West Bank remains in a state of constant unrest, with an increasing number of attacks and organized terror activities. In Syria, the collapse of the regime and the rise of hostile actors require vigilant military monitoring. In Lebanon, Hezbollah—despite the blows it has suffered—continues to pose a serious threat. Then there is Iran: Even though this threat does not require Israel to allocate ground forces, it constantly vies for national and strategic focus. Ongoing fighting in Gaza consumes valuable resources—troops, ammunition, budgets, and the focus of senior military leadership—resources that need to be directed to other arenas. Even after achieving a decisive outcome, maintaining security in the Gaza Strip will still require a considerable military presence—but far fewer troops than those needed to secure that outcome in the first place.

Ending the Gaza campaign is not just about achieving victory over Hamas; it is also about freeing up capacity for critical reforms. A decisive military strike that cripples Hamas’s military and governing capabilities would allow the IDF to shift from constant “firefighting” to a state of long-term, strategic readiness. If the IDF shies away from conducting such a campaign, it will continue to be stretched thin across multiple fronts, eroding its effectiveness.

For example, regular brigades and special forces currently stationed in Gaza may be needed in the West Bank to prevent escalation or in Lebanon if a new conflict erupts. Moreover, the ongoing fighting in Gaza places a heavy burden on the IDF’s logistics, especially given the growing reliance on importing precision munitions from the United States.

It is important to remember that a core principle of Israel’s security doctrine has always been to shorten the duration of conflicts and aim for a swift resolution. Since the beginning of the war, the IDF’s actions have eroded this principle to the point of exhaustion. It now seems essential to restore the principle of rapid decision-making and instill a sense of urgency among IDF commanders.

The Internal Hourglass: Public Pressure and the Hostage Crisis

Israeli society is facing a fracture: the issue of hostages has become a symbol of national solidarity but also a source of bitter division. Some advocate negotiating with Hamas to secure the hostages’ release, even at the cost of political or military concessions. Others insist that only overwhelming military pressure can force Hamas to free them. We argue that an intense military operation is the only way to ensure the release of the hostages, as abandoning the fight could leave them in Hamas’s brutal hands for many years.

This is not just a tactical debate—it is a moral one. Israeli society, which places a supreme value on rescuing hostages, struggles with the possibility that some may not return. At the same time, abandoning the war’s core objective—destroying Hamas—could undermine national security and embolden terrorist organizations to make kidnapping a regular instrument of war. The internal hourglass is running down and demands swift decision-making, as social divisions are deepening, and trust in the political and military leadership is steadily eroding.

The living hostages still held in Gaza are suffering severe humanitarian conditions, facing horrific circumstances that include shortages of food, absence of medical care, and horrendous living conditions. With each passing day, their physical and mental state worsens, and the risk to their lives increases. In our view, immediate and focused military pressure is essential to force Hamas to release them, as this organization has repeatedly shown that it responds primarily to force. Hesitation or delay could lead to the loss of critical opportunities, as we have seen in past cases. An early military action, combined with diplomatic efforts, is the most effective way to ensure the swift release of the hostages and to prevent further suffering.

The Reserve Hourglass: Exhaustion Versus Effectiveness

The reserves are the backbone of the IDF, but they are under immense pressure. Repeated call-ups of reservists for routine tasks or missions without a clear purpose lead to significant fatigue. Reservists are willing to mobilize for a clear, meaningful mission—one that promises a decisive outcome against Hamas. But when the conflict is marked by pauses, hesitation, and indecision, their motivation and effectiveness suffer.

The reserve hourglass serves as a reminder that the time to rally this force for a decisive mission is running out. Without swift action, Israel risks ending up with an exhausted reserve army that may struggle to meet future challenges. Moreover, avoiding a decisive military operation doesn’t just wear down the reserves—it also takes a toll on regular forces. Regular soldiers find themselves stuck in a cycle of tactical operations with no clear strategic direction.

The Regional Hourglass: Navigating International Dynamics

The regional situation adds another layer of complexity. Donald Trump’s presidency has brought both opportunities and challenges. While Trump is known for his strong support of Israel, such support is never guaranteed. He is expected to promote new regional alliances, including the expansion of the Abraham Accords. However, an intense military campaign in Gaza could disrupt these plans, as Arab states may respond with diplomatic pressure or express reservations about agreements with Israel.

If Israel fails to take decisive action, it risks squandering the diplomatic credit extended by the U.S. president. Reports have already indicated that President Trump has called for the introduction of humanitarian aid to Gaza’s population, showing that international pressure affects him as well. Given Trump’s upcoming visit to the Arabian Peninsula and the ongoing negotiations with Iran for a new nuclear agreement, it is crucial to accelerate a decisive outcome in Gaza. This would create a new reality on the ground, allowing for discussions on the future of the Strip while further weakening Iran’s negotiating position.

The regional-political dynamic requires swift but careful action. A decisive military campaign could strengthen the government’s standing and boost national morale, but it demands close coordination with the United States and relevant Arab states. Additionally, diplomatic efforts must focus on reducing international pressure, such as cooperating with humanitarian organizations to minimize harm to the civilian population.

The Political Hourglass

In Israeli politics, two competing worldviews are at odds. One argues that defeating terrorism and guerrilla warfare is impossible—particularly against Hamas in Gaza—advocating instead for a strategy of separation and defensive measures to prevent attacks. The other insists that victory over terrorism is achievable and that Hamas in Gaza can be defeated through decisive action, creating a new security reality. We align with the latter view.

We have seen this approach succeed before—most notably in the fight against terrorism in the West Bank two decades ago, when the authors of this article were directly involved. Back then, a determined counterterrorism campaign—beginning with Operation Defensive Shield in 2002 and continuing for about three years—led to a significant drop in terrorist attacks and casualties.

Given that decisive victory is an inherently tactical concept, dependent on timing and context, Israel will have to constantly maintain its achievements in Gaza, as has been the case in the West Bank. In the Gaza instance, President Trump’s emigration plan could serve as a decisive factor, ensuring that these gains are preserved over time.

Failing to achieve a clear, swift military decision will leave Israel facing the threat from Gaza indefinitely. The political hourglass also underscores that the time for action is now—especially since Israel cannot afford to be caught in a prolonged conflict during an election campaign.

Conclusion: Act Now, or Face Prolonged Erosion

The various hourglasses—military, internal, reserve, regional, and political—all point to the same conclusion: the time for decisive action in Gaza is running out. Only a swift, forceful military campaign can achieve the war’s objectives: securing the hostages’ release, ensuring Israeli citizens’ safety, and preventing future kidnappings. Avoiding such action won’t just prolong the suffering of the hostages and deepen public uncertainty—it will also drain national resources and weaken Israel’s standing in the region and beyond.

We recommend launching an intense military operation in Gaza without delay, with clear, measurable objectives—crippling Hamas’s military and governance capabilities and securing the release of hostages. Such a campaign should combine military pressure with indirect negotiations, maximizing the chances of a successful outcome while minimizing risks.

At the same time, Israel must strengthen its national resilience through public information campaigns and dialogue, ensuring the readiness of its reserve forces with clear incentives and defined missions. Crucially, the operation must be closely coordinated with the United States and moderate Arab states to reduce international pressure and preserve the gains of regional alliances. This coordination is essential in any case, but it becomes even more critical ahead of Trump’s upcoming visit to the Arabian Peninsula.

Israel must act now, with determination and courage, balancing decisive military action with strategic restraint, both at home and on the international stage. Only through such a combined approach can Israel emerge from this conflict with the upper hand, retaining its status as a leading regional power.

History has shown that moments of crisis are also moments of opportunity—and this opportunity will not last.

JISS Policy Papers are published through the generosity of the Greg Rosshandler Family.