Israel has become a house so used to dividing against itself that it seems to constantly find new lines along which to fracture.
When I landed at Ben Gurion on Sunday, I was greeted by a country riven once again after the tragic and depraved executions of six hostages by Hamas. The killings had sapped previous reserves of hope from desperate Israelis and left tens of thousands enraged with the prime minister.
These latest deaths hit people especially hard. Hersh Goldberg-Polin, 23, who was also an American citizen, had become a household name on account of the campaigning by his remarkable parents, Rachel and Jon, who made a moving appearance at the Democratic National Convention last month.
The other five hostages – Carmel Gat, 40, Eden Yerushalmi, 24, Ori Danino, 25, Almog Sarusi, 27, and 32-year-old Alexander Lobanov – were no less loved, no less familiar to many and will be equally missed.
Part of the febrility came because with the scent of a deal in the air, Israel had allowed itself to hope. When the funerals began, the country felt gripped by a fresh wave of anguish. At Hersh’s funeral, which was attended by thousands of mourners, his mother addressed him directly in her eulogy. Dressed in dark glasses and a ripped white T-shirt on which there was the number 332 – the number of days her son had spent in captivity before his murder – she said: “If there was something we could have done to save you, and we didn’t think of it, I beg your forgiveness. We tried so very hard, so deeply and desperately. I’m sorry.” How much sorrow can one people take?
Rachel Goldberg-Polin speaks during her son's funeral in Jerusalem (Photo: Getty Images)POOL/AFP via Getty Images
For the crowds who subsequently came out onto the streets as part of a general strike to protest against Benjamin Netanyahu, the limit had already been reached. They wanted a deal. No matter that this may involve accepting the continued existence of Hamas, which would threaten a repeat of the October pogroms in the future. No matter that it may involve compromises that would have profound implications for Israel’s security, like leaving the Philadelphi corridor along the Egyptian border, under which most of the smuggled weapons, cash and personnel have travelled. They wanted an end to this foul war. And who could blame them?
The latest fault-line has opened as a result of leaked news that last Thursday the prime minister demanded that the security cabinet vote on which parts of the Philadelphi corridor should remain occupied by the IDF in any hostage deal. This came as a surprise not just to the intelligence chiefs but to other members of the security cabinet, including Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.
When Netanyahu had some prepared maps brought in, there was reportedly a heated exchange, as they did not match those endorsed by the Army. Nonetheless, the vote was cast, and the decision was taken to endorse the proposal in the map. This amounted to support for a continued Israeli presence in the Philadelphi corridor, which would likely scupper the negotiations. Gallant reportedly remarked that the prime minister could make any deal he wants, including one to kill the hostages; he came under immediate attack from other ministers.
According to the reports in the Israeli press, Gallant insisted that he had been taught all his life that the IDF did not leave the wounded on the battlefield, and that a six-week pause in the fighting would not preclude an Israeli return to the fray thereafter. This felt like a vote that would condemn the hostages to death. Nonetheless, it apparently stood.
Since the Philadelphi issue was not being negotiated at the time, many interpreted this episode as an attempt by Netanyahu to place an obstacle in the way of the talks. The prime minister was reportedly adamant: the IDF would remain in Philadelphi, even at the expense of a deal. Then came the execution of six innocents and the people took to the streets.
As I visited the sites of the massacres in the south, great crowds of protesters occupied intersections in Haifa, Be’er Sheva, Ra’anana, Rehovot, Eilat, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, where alone there were more than 100,000 people. The demonstrations were as well-organised and peaceful as ever; but etched into the faces and placards, and pervading the chants and the songs, there was a new level of despair. It didn’t have to be like this, they insisted. Under a different leader, these hostages could be at home.
Israelis protest and clash with police during a protest for the release of Israeli hostages held in the Gaza Strip and against the current Israeli government, outside the Prime Minister's official residence in Jerusalem, September 2, 2024. Photo by Noam Revkin Fenton/Flash90 *** Local Caption *** מלחמה חטופים משפחות ירושלים בית ראש הממשלה חרבות ברזל מלחמה בלפור תרפוד עסקה הפגנהFlash90
At a dinner I attended in Tel Aviv that night, the prominent Likud MK Yuli Edelstein, chair of the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee, who has spent much time meeting the hostage families, gave a speech in which he touched on the negotiations. “Hamas wants not just a ceasefire but the IDF to get out of the Gaza Strip,” he said.
“People say, let’s get the hostages released, then go back. I’m not sure it’s that simple… We need to make sure the basic security requirements of the state of Israel are not compromised.
“People say, why couldn’t we just have agreed to the Hamas demands from the beginning? Then, probably, more hostages would be alive?
“This is a legitimate question. But I’m not sure Hamas plays a decent game. They would definitely have found additional demands. It is never an easy experience, but many of the families are decent people and trust what I say to them. It is a huge responsibility and a huge dilemma.”
