With Israel's wars winding down, it needs to beware of a hasty peace

PHOTO: SHUTTERSTOCK/ NOAMGALAI

W

hen I interviewed a successful businessman for a profile many years ago, he shared two keys to his success that his father taught him: Do everything with a sense of urgency, and believe you are the only person in the world capable of doing it.

He might have been describing Donald Trump, whose impulsive and gut-driven decisions showcase a bold and instinctive leadership style that frequently results in unpredictable outcomes.

In Washington, D.C., Trump’s approach works, given the need to secure a majority from 538 members of Congress, a cumbersome legislative body that historically fails to pass more than 90% of the bills it introduces each session.

The Middle East faces challenges in making deals due to its 4,000-year history of conflict intertwined with religious, cultural, tribal, and territorial divides. These factors create a tense environment that slows negotiations and necessitates careful discussion.

That’s the background for this week’s summit between President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu, intended to end nearly two years of conflict, free the remaining hostages, keep Iran in check, and normalize relations between Israel, Lebanon, Syria, and Saudi Arabia.

Achieving even part of this, especially in a single White House visit, requires more than just urgency and American influence. No matter what Trump and Bibi have cooked up in meetings that all took place after press time, making deals is one thing; implementing them is another, and enforcing and monitoring them demands constant vigilance.

From America’s perspective, brokering Middle East agreements calls for humility that respects history — especially recent history, which has seen every Israeli concession for peace ending at best in a cold peace, or in broken deals or false hopes, fueling unnecessary bloodshed and divisions in Israel’s fragile society .

From Israel’s perspective, with Jewish lives at risk, Netanyahu’s job is to work with Trump’s best instincts while steering them toward achieving his war goals of making Israel safe again. For Gaza, that means permanently removing Hamas, relocating most of the population to safer areas, and maintaining a permanent Israeli military presence to both protect our border and monitor any regional or international forces that might join in.

Any deal with Lebanon must include the verified disarmament of Hezbollah, modeled after Northern Ireland’s “Good Friday Agreement,” under which trustworthy and impartial observers oversaw the disarmament of the Irish Republican Army.

Regarding Syria, recent reports indicate that the country’s new leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, demands that Israel recognize Syrian sovereignty over the Golan Heights. In return, he would graciously permit Israel to lease the Golan from Syria for a specified period. Israel should outright reject this proposal, and Trump — who signed the March 2019 proclamation recognizing Israel’s sovereignty over the Golan — should reiterate that his proclamation stands.

Anything less than this would be a setback for Israel and the sacrifices of its soldiers, hostages, and people over the past two years.

Sheikhs for Peace

Both sides need to remain open to innovative ideas. The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported over last weekend that five sheikhs who lead clans in Chevron sent a letter to Nir Barkat, Israel’s
minister of the economy, proposing to “secede” from the Palestinian Authority and sign an Abraham Accords–style agreement with Israel. The proposed accord would allow the clans to operate independently in Chevron and recognize the State of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish People. The Israeli media widely recirculated this story on Sunday morning.

By early afternoon, Palestinian channels affiliated with Hamas predictably denied the WSJ story; however, Channel 12 political commentator Amit Segal reported that Barkat has hosted the sheikhs in his home and has met with them more than ten times since February. The catch is that Israel would grant work permits to a few thousand Palestinian laborers from these clans.

There are clear risks to such an arrangement. Israel shut its borders to Palestinian workers after the October 7 massacres and kidnappings. Israel must develop internal solutions to address its chronic labor shortages, especially in the construction industry. However, Israel should leverage any opportunity to widen the divide between PA Arabs and the Palestinian
Authority.

The sheikhs’ letter is another sign that Israel’s Arab population is frustrated with Palestinian Authority corruption and is ready to reach an understanding with Israel now that it has demonstrated its military strength in the region, with the backing of President Trump. Once again, Israel can only afford to make deals that include written guarantees of vigilant enforcement and a free hand to take military action against violations of any kind.

Ditching Flawed Ideas

No matter what comes out of Netanyahu’s meetings in Washington this week, Israel still must make a reckoning to do everything humanly possible to ensure that nothing even remotely close to October 7 ever happens again.

Ran Baratz, a military history teacher at the IDF’s War Colleges, wrote a 9,000-word essay in Mosaic (January 2025). He called the IDF an “exceptional national army” with “unmatched fighting spirit, bravery, and commitment.” Yet he also stated that “despite tactical successes and heavy investment, Hamas and Hezbollah haven’t been defeated, and Israel’s IDF hasn’t secured total victory.” (I take editorial license to add the 12-day war with Iran to Baratz’s list of incomplete victories.)

He pinned these disastrous failings directly on the IDF brass. For the last 25 to 30 years, Israel’s military command has embraced what he termed a postmodern concept rooted in “the quicksand of liberal internationalism,” replacing the military’s traditional national security objective — which is to fight and defeat the enemy —with a leaner army that emphasizes intelligence, technological innovations, and defensive capabilities. Israel’s military leaders morphed into the role of “soldier-statesmen — peacemaking figures who carried themselves like diplomats, serving in the new, postmodern army.”

For proof of Baratz’s thesis, one need only look at how many former IDF chiefs of staff have served in center-left parties in the Knesset.

Baratz said Hamas’s Simchas Torah attack surprised the IDF, and the Israeli high command took weeks to plan an operation. The ground attack revealed that the initial strategy was flawed, poorly planned, and full of failures in preparation, training, force buildup, equipment, munitions, and execution. Baratz advocates for the IDF to adopt a classical military mindset, emphasizing reforming officer education. He argues that generals should be trained in military affairs to avoid being influenced by Western trends.

These are reforms Israel must initiate on its own, regardless of Trump, no matter how many nations join the Abraham Accords, and independent of any peace overtures that our longstanding enemies and rivals, and even our best friends, might tempt us with.

(Originally featured in Mishpacha, Issue 1069)