But the central point is clear: a war cannot end in a temporary pause that leaves the same threat ready to rise again. A real victory needs military pressure, a clear political goal, and a serious plan for the day after Hamas.
Israel was hit with a devastating surprise attack on October 7. From there, the conflict spread far beyond Gaza. Hezbollah joined from Lebanon. Fire came from Syria, Iraq, and Yemen, and eventually Iran entered the picture directly. Israel was suddenly managing a regional war while dealing with limited munitions, stretched reserve forces, and more than 100,000 Israelis displaced from northern communities.
“A decisive victory is not only about defeating an enemy today. It is about making sure that enemy cannot rebuild tomorrow.”
Why Gaza Is Different
To understand how to win the war in Gaza, it helps to understand why Gaza is so much harder than Iran, Syria, or Hezbollah in Lebanon.
In Iran and Lebanon, Israel could identify major centers of gravity. There were strategic missile systems, command structures, senior leaders, air defenses, and military infrastructure. Striking those targets could quickly change the balance of power.
Hamas built Gaza differently. Its battalions, companies, weapons caches, commanders, and tunnel networks are spread through local neighborhoods. Many units can function independently. They do not need one big logistics chain that can easily be cut off.
That creates a brutal kind of battlefield. Hamas fighters can disappear, return, plant explosives, and rebuild small pockets of control after Israeli forces leave an area.
“Gaza does not have one obvious switch that can be turned off. Hamas made sure every neighborhood could keep fighting.”
There are two more painful complications. First, the hostages. Israel has tried to avoid actions that could endanger Israelis being held in Gaza. Second, there is the question of Gaza’s civilian population. Taking territory is one thing. Governing millions of people afterward is another.
That is why how to win the war cannot be reduced to military strength alone. Israel has the ability to conquer territory. The bigger issue is deciding what comes next.
The Strategic Sequence of the War
The war began with a powerful Israeli maneuver in northern Gaza. But Israel also had to prepare for Hezbollah, which possessed a far larger arsenal of rockets and missiles. Forces were needed in the north to prevent a ground attack across the Lebanese border.
As the war developed, the pace in Gaza slowed. Israel relied more heavily on raids and targeted operations while preserving strength for a possible larger northern war.
Later, Israel surrounded Hamas, took control of Rafah and the Philadelphi Corridor, and reduced Hamas’s ability to bring weapons and supplies in through Sinai. Then the strategic focus moved north.
The operation against Hezbollah was presented as a major turning point. Israel struck Hezbollah communications, commanders, long-range missile capabilities, and senior leadership. The goal was not merely to trade fire across the border. It was to push Hezbollah back and allow displaced Israelis to return home safely.
“Israel cannot keep entire communities out of their homes forever. Security has to mean normal life can return.”
From there, the focus shifted toward Iran. The wider idea was straightforward: Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iranian power are connected. Israel could not fully solve the Gaza problem while ignoring the regional structure supporting it.
How to win the war, in this view, means dealing with the whole system of threats rather than treating every front as a separate event.
Three Choices For Gaza
Once Israel controlled roughly 75 percent of Gaza, the next question became what to do with the remaining Hamas-controlled areas.
Three broad options emerged:
- Containment: Hold the territory already cleared, surround the remaining Hamas areas, and conduct continuing raids and targeted strikes.
- Full conquest: Bring in additional forces, take the remaining territory, and establish direct Israeli military control over all of Gaza.
- Target Gaza City: Focus on Hamas’s last major stronghold, weaken its governing structure, and preserve flexibility for what comes after.
The third option was presented as the most practical immediate path. Gaza City remains deeply symbolic and strategically important for Hamas. It contains major command elements, fighters, and the remaining image of Hamas rule.
Taking Gaza City would expand Israeli control while avoiding an immediate full takeover of every remaining civilian area. It could also increase pressure on Hamas without placing hostages at even greater risk.
“The question is not whether Israel can take the territory. The question is what political reality Israel wants to create after taking it.”
That is the heart of how to win the war. Military operations must serve a lasting outcome, not just produce another round of fighting a few years later.
Hostages Cannot Be An Afterthought
The hostage issue remains one of the most difficult parts of the conflict. Hamas has used hostages as leverage, while its external leadership has operated through negotiations from abroad.
One argument is that pressure should not focus only on tunnel-level captors in Gaza. It should also focus on Hamas leaders outside Gaza who influence negotiations and reject agreements.
At the same time, Israel needs to prepare for the possibility that military pressure and outside mediation may not bring every hostage home. If that happens, the remaining areas may need to be surrounded and negotiations conducted directly with the armed groups holding them.
“The hostages must come home, but Hamas cannot be allowed to use them to guarantee its own survival.”
There is no easy formula here. Anyone claiming there is one is selling a fantasy. But how to win the war must include a strategy that combines pressure, intelligence, military control, and an unwavering commitment to bringing hostages back.
A Day After Hamas
A military victory without a political framework creates a vacuum. And in the Middle East, vacuums do not stay empty for long.
The proposed alternative is not to hand Gaza back to Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, or the Palestinian Authority. Instead, local clans and city-level leadership structures could manage separate areas such as Rafah, Khan Younis, and Gaza City.
This model is often described as cantonization. Local leaders would handle municipal and economic affairs. Israel would retain overriding security responsibility. Gaza would have to be fully demilitarized.
The plan rests on two non-negotiable conditions:
- All hostages must be returned.
- Gaza must not retain weapons or military capabilities that threaten Israel.
Only after those conditions are met could serious reconstruction, investment, and educational reform begin. The hope is that moderate Arab states, including the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, could play a role in rebuilding civil life and reducing radicalization.
“A better future for Gaza requires demilitarization first. Without security, every reconstruction project becomes another resource for terror.”
Building the Moderate Regional Alliance
How to win the war also means recognizing the wider struggle in the region. There are radical Sunni movements, radical Shiite forces led by Iran, and moderate states that want stability, trade, growth, and normal life.
Israel’s long-term opportunity is to deepen its alliance with the United States and moderate Sunni states. That includes countries already connected through the Abraham Accords, along with other nations that see jihadist extremism as a direct threat to their own future.
This kind of alliance is about more than defense. It is about building an alternative to the death cult mentality that has damaged so much of the region.
Israel’s support for vulnerable minorities, including Druze communities facing danger in Syria, is part of that wider picture. Stronger local allies and safer borders can serve both humanitarian and strategic goals.
“When Israel is strong, its allies are stronger too. Stability creates room for ordinary people to build, work, travel, and live.”
Victory Must Create a Better Future
How to win the war is ultimately about what comes after the fighting. A decisive victory can create deterrence, reduce future attacks, strengthen regional partnerships, and open the door to economic growth and new peace agreements.
But it requires clarity. Hamas cannot remain armed. Gaza cannot return to being a launchpad for another massacre. Israel cannot accept a cycle where terrorists rebuild while the world calls for another temporary ceasefire.
The road is difficult. Gaza remains a serious challenge. Yet the strategic goal should stay simple: defeat the forces that built this war, bring the hostages home, secure Israel’s borders, and build a regional future where extremism loses its grip.
That is how to win the war: not with slogans, but with strength, patience, strategy, and a clear vision for the day after.
RESOURCES
This article was created from the video How to Win the War? – Interview with Amir Avivi | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFb3jwmxf-Y with the help of AI.
