One year after Hamas’s deadly attack on Israel, the war shows no signs of stopping. More than 1,200 Israelis died on 7 October, while Israeli strikes have since killed more than 40,000 Palestinians. Despite ceasefires and hostage exchanges, the conflict remains unresolved. This is part one of a double interview that reflects both Israeli and Palestinian perspectives on the crisis.
Gerald Steinberg, founder and president of NGO Monitor, shared his thoughts on how the conflict has deeply changed Israeli society.
NGO Monitor is a think tank that scrutinizes critical reports on Israel from groups like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and France’s FIDH.
Steinberg is also an emeritus professor at Bar Ilan University.
Hamas attack, one year on - a view from Gaza
RFI: How did the 7 October attacks change Israel?
Gerald Steinberg: Most Israelis will agree that this was the most significant event since the 1973 war and even since the founding of the state in 1948.
The number of people that were killed, the failure of the entire security system to prevent or limit these attacks were very much of a shock to almost every Israeli. The results of that continue to echo. Once the war is over there will be many investigations and attempts to understand and prevent this from happening again.
"This was the most significant event since at least the 1973 war, but in many ways since the founding of the state in 1948."
Gerald Steinberg, emeritus professor at Bar Ilan University in Tel Aviv
RFI: What impact did the hostage crisis have on public opinion?
Gerald Steinberg: Over 300 hostages were taken by Hamas – many of them children, women, and elderly people, including Holocaust survivors.
Every Israeli identifies with them. The hostages were used by Hamas to protect their fighters and leadership. They wanted to use these hostages to force Israel to end its response against the Hamas terrorist structure in Gaza. So that led to strong divisions.
There are two main perspectives in Israel. Some, including most of the hostage families, believe Israel should do whatever it takes to get the hostages back, even if it means agreeing to a ceasefire and allowing Hamas to survive. Others argue the government must keep fighting, saying if we give in, it makes us vulnerable to another 7 October.
World reacts to surprise attack by Hamas on Israel
RFI: There have been lots of protests inside Israel over the way the government has handled things. How has the war affected Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s political future?
Gerald Steinberg: Everything depends on the results of this war, and that includes the survival of the hostages and the ability to return them.
Netanyahu was initially widely blamed for a lack of preparation, for a failure to deploy troops. His Gaza policies were thought to have been the reason why Israel was so badly surprised. But since then, Netanyahu has emerged as a strong leader.
Many people, including myself, did not expect Netanyahu to be prime minister a year later. Many of the military officials at lower or mid-levels have resigned, and accepted responsibility. Others have said they're going to leave soon.
But Netanyahu has continued to run the government be responsible for setting strategy on all these issues. And as long as the Israeli military appears successful against Hamas and now Hezbollah, Netanyahu is seen to be an important leader.
RFI: Israel’s military operations have led to civilian casualties in Gaza, raising accusations of war crimes, genocide, and ethnic cleansing by international institutions like the International Criminal Court (ICC,) the International Court of Justice (ICJ,) and the United Nations. How is Israel responding to international criticism?
Gerald Steinberg: Most Israelis reject the criticism as part of a political war. The Israelis are very aware of the actions of the United Nations, of the NGO industry like Amnesty International, the FIDH, Human Rights Watch, the ICC and other frameworks.
Israelis dismiss this as a form of hatred, propaganda and anti-Semitism.
At some point, Israelis will have to deal with the responses, with the cost, arms embargoes and arrest warrants of leaders. But as long as the war is going on, those are secondary issues. They have really no impact.
Israel vows 'mighty vengeance' after Hamas surprise attack
What matters most is the support from our allies, especially the United States. Israelis heard President Biden's speech in the United Nations and very much saw full support for Israel's right to defend its citizens and to oppose the kind of vicious and brutal terror atrocities we saw on 7 October.
Statements from European leaders that emphasize primarily Palestinian victimhood are rejected by Israelis as entirely unacceptable and based on very cynical domestic politics because of the Muslim populations of those countries.
Europe is discounted as completely irrelevant.
RFI: How do you see Gaza after the war?
Gerald Steinberg: It's very difficult for most Israelis to imagine what might happen after the war. It's been a year and we have not yet come up with any kind of pragmatic political framework for post-war control of Gaza, for the society, for rebuilding in Gaza.
What we do talk about a lot is deradicalisation, and ending what has for 76 years been the dominant Palestinian view that Israel can be erased, that they can return to the pre-1948 image of Palestine as being an Arab and Muslim-dominated society.
That's an important part of any kind of rebuilding. How do you prevent Hamas from, or other groups – the PLO, ISIS – from rebuilding a terror infrastructure even further than what Hamas was able to do?
Israel doesn't want to occupy Gaza. But there is no international force that is considered to be credible. So this is all going to have to be worked out piece by piece, slowly. There is no one accepted formula for how Gaza will be governed after the war ends.
Some of the Hamas leadership may survive. Some of the terror groups may continue. There's been talk of guerrilla fighting, which could emerge after the main forces of Hamas are defeated.
There are too many points of uncertainty to be able to predict what thing will look like six months or a year from now.
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity
