According to recent polls, economic concerns—particularly the rising cost of living—are foremost on the minds of Israeli voters. Thus, a popular trope in the Israeli left’s election campaign has it that settlements are not only the cause of Israel’s diplomatic and security problems but also are eating up government funds best spent elsewhere. Gidon Ben-Zvi begs to differ:

In fact, it’s the Israeli left’s socialist and statist heritage that bred an inefficient economic system that is only now beginning to reform. . . .

After Israel’s independence in 1948, socialist Zionism established a highly-centralized economic system dominated by political cronyism. While the statist policies of Israel’s successive Labor governments failed to create a socialist paradise, they did succeed in building monolithic, unresponsive bureaucratic institutions that held back the country’s economic growth for decades. Israelis learned to live in a perpetual state of impoverishment.

What’s more, writes Ben-Zvi, Israel’s economic situation is not nearly as bad as some would claim—largely because in recent decades the country has been steadily moving away from socialism:

Israel has enjoyed virtually uninterrupted growth for more than a decade. The worldwide Great Recession has largely bypassed the Start-Up Nation. While debt crises and bank bailouts hobble European economies, Israel has not only persevered—it has prospered. And while the cost of living has undeniably increased, household income has also grown, since the percentage of homes with two wage earners has risen from just 30 percent a decade ago to 44 percent today. Wage growth has been slow, but it has grown faster than in Europe. For these positive trends to continue, Israel needs to improve its labor productivity to ensure sustained and higher levels of economic growth.

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.