Israeli officials have told the press that they are working on a plan for evacuating civilians from the southern Gaza city of Rafah ahead of a military operation to defeat the four remaining Hamas battalions ensconced there. Benny Morris explains why, despite American protestations, such an operation is “crucial.”

If this does not happen, Hamas will survive to fight and murder and rape another day—and its leader, Yahya Sinwar, will emerge from his hiding place declaring victory. And he will be right. For Palestinian-Israeli peace to have any chance, for regional stability and for the future welfare of Israel and Israelis, especially those living in the south of the country, Hamas must be obliterated.

Above all, an Israeli failure to take Rafah and smash Hamas’s last organized military formations and its governing structures will paint Israel, in its enemies’ eyes, as a weak, defeated polity, easy prey for the next potential assailant. Paradoxically, the spectacle of Israeli weakness—as much as a Rafah offensive—could tempt Hizballah to gamble on a full-scale war.

Any possibility of foreign troops (Emirati or Saudi) or Palestinian Authority/Fatah police replacing the Israelis in the bulk of the Gaza Strip will disappear, given the likelihood that those troops would be denounced and attacked by Hamas as Israel’s agents.

Washington, meanwhile, seems to be trying to discourage an assault on Rafah, which Secretary of State Antony Blinken said would be “a mistake.” As an alternative, U.S. officials have encouraged the IDF to pursue a strategy based on targeted raids and commando operations rather than large-scale infantry maneuvers. John Spencer and Liam Collins argue that this is bad advice, based on America’s own recent military experience:

A strategy dependent on raids and airstrikes alone has never been effective in defeating a large enemy. If Israel believes a military response is the only way it can defeat Hamas, it should ignore Washington and pursue a ground invasion supported by targeted raids and airstrikes.

Hamas isn’t a typical terrorist group. It governs Gaza with significant military capability, including prepared defenses, hundreds of miles of defensive tunnels, and thousands of rockets. Its fighters were believed to number 30,000 to 40,000 at the start of the war, and most of them hide among the civilian population. This makes a strategy reliant on targeted raids extremely difficult.

Israel’s goals of freeing the hostages and defeating Hamas (the latter necessary to prevent further hostage taking) are to some extent contradictory, since Yahya Sinwar, the ruler of the Gaza Strip, will only turn over hostages in exchange for concessions. But Jacob Nagel remains convinced that Jerusalem should continue to pursue both goals:

Only consistent military pressure on Hamas can lead to the hostages’ release, either through negotiation or military operation. There’s little chance of reaching a deal with Hamas using current approaches, including the latest Egyptian proposal. Israeli concessions would only encourage further pressure from Hamas.

There is no incentive for Hamas to agree to a deal, especially since it believes it can achieve its full objectives without one. Unfortunately, many contribute to this belief, mainly from outside of Israel, but also from within.

Recent months saw Israel mistakenly refraining from entering Rafah for several reasons. Initially, the main [reason was to try] to negotiate a deal with Hamas. However, as it became clear that Hamas was uninterested, and its only goal was to return to its situation before October 7—where Hamas and its leadership control Gaza, Israeli forces are out, and there are no changes in the borders—the deal didn’t mature.