Bitter Irony of New Policy of Daily Ceasefires as IDF Casualties in Gaza Escalate

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has dissolved the war cabinet following the departure of former Defense Minister Benny Gantz and increasing pressure from far-right leader Itamar Ben-Gvir to join it. This move comes at a critical time as Israel navigates ongoing military operations in Gaza and internal political tensions.

Ben-Gvir’s Push for Influence

Ben-Gvir, leader of the Otzma Yehudit party, has been vocal about his desire to join the war cabinet. Known for his far-right views and opposition to ceasefire agreements, Ben-Gvir’s potential inclusion has been a contentious issue. His pressure on Netanyahu to adopt a more hardline approach has contributed to the dissolution of the war cabinet. This shift is seen by many as a move to consolidate support from ultranationalist factions within the government​.

Gantz, who resigned on June 9, cited Netanyahu’s failure to present a clear plan for post-war Gaza governance and accused him of prioritizing political survival over national interests. Gantz’s departure has left a vacuum in the decision-making process, exacerbated by the push from Ben-Gvir and his supporters​.

Irony of Daily Ceasefires

Concurrently, the Israeli government has implemented a controversial policy to halt military operations for 11 hours each day to facilitate the delivery of humanitarian aid to Gaza. While intended to alleviate civilian suffering, the daily ceasefire has ironically coincided with an increase in IDF casualties.

Recent days have seen significant losses for Israeli soldiers during these pauses. On Monday, nine IDF soldiers were killed in Gaza, including six in a single incident where Israeli explosives detonated unintentionally during a demolition operation against a Hamas installation​​. Other incidents include the deaths of soldiers in battles across Gaza, highlighting the risks posed by the ceasefire policy.

Critics argue that the policy disrupts military momentum and puts soldiers at higher risk. Brigadier General (Res.) Yossi Kuperwasser expressed concerns, stating, “While the humanitarian intentions are commendable, we must consider the heightened risk to our soldiers. The enemy does not adhere to our pauses, and this period can be exploited to launch surprise attacks.”

The Cost of Standing Still

The costs of standing still have been high. The IDF has faced severe attacks during these ceasefire periods, with troops becoming vulnerable targets. The recent surge in casualties has highlighted the dangers of pausing operations in a volatile and hostile environment. The need for decisive action is paramount, with many hoping that without Gantz, Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant can act more decisively to mitigate these risks​.

International Reactions and Strategic Implications

Internationally, the humanitarian pause has garnered support from various UN agencies and NGOs, which have praised Israel’s efforts to mitigate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. However, some allies have expressed concerns about the potential impact on Israel’s long-term security. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken emphasized the need to balance humanitarian aid with robust defensive measures, stating, “Humanitarian aid is crucial, but it should not come at the expense of national security. We support Israel’s right to defend itself and its citizens.”

Netanyahu’s administration now faces the challenge of balancing these complex issues. The prime minister has promised to review the ceasefire policy in light of recent attacks and to ensure that any humanitarian measures do not compromise the safety of IDF personnel​.

As Israel moves forward without the war cabinet and under the shadow of internal political strife, the need for a coherent and unified strategy is more pressing than ever. The coming days will likely see intense deliberations within the government and the military as they strive to balance humanitarian obligations with the imperative of national security on multiple fronts. It is hoped that Netanyahu and Gallant can now act more decisively to protect Israeli soldiers and achieve their strategic goals, even while constrained by an increasingly restive security cabinet.