Although Jake Wallis Simons sympathizes with some of the domestic criticism of the Israeli prime minister, he found himself forced to admit that, “when it comes to making the case for Israel, the man is a genius. He is by far the best orator the Jewish state has ever produced.” Indeed, Simons pronounces Netanyahu’s address to Congress “a resounding triumph.” He adds:

Here, at long last, was a demonstration to the West of what moral clarity looks like, delivered at the very heart of the free world. “In the Middle East, Iran’s axis of terror confronts America, Israel, and our Arab friends,” Netanyahu said, eclipsing Churchill’s record for addressing Congress and echoing him in rhetoric. “This is not a clash of civilizations. It’s a clash between barbarism and civilization. It’s a clash between those who glorify death and those who sanctify life.” To prevail, he added, “America and Israel must stand together. We will win.” This received perhaps the most rapturous applause.

The speech was rich in moments that went far to win hearts and minds, making the case viscerally for why every person of conscience should support Israel in this struggle. . . . This was badly needed catnip to downtrodden and discouraged Jewish communities across the world. It roused the spirits of millions of ordinary people, both in the United States and further afield, who have looked on in dismay as the oxygen has been sucked out of the room by fanatical Gaza radicals dominating the airwaves.

Yet Simons is also inclined to agree with Lazar Berman, who argues that none of this was the prime minister’s primary goal. Indeed, Berman writes, the “real audience” wasn’t America or Israel, but Saudi Arabia:

Though the path forward was scrambled by Hamas’s attacks, Netanyahu believes that a normalization deal with Saudi Arabia is entirely attainable. The Saudis have insisted that any normalization process must include a pathway toward a Palestinian state, but Netanyahu is convinced that Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, known as MBS, knows that his core interest—confronting his arch-enemy Iran—depends on a defense partnership with Israel and the U.S.

Netanyahu pushed in his speech “a security alliance in the Middle East” with the U.S. that would guarantee American involvement in the face of future Iranian aggression. Such an idea is sure to be welcomed in Riyadh. And not only was Netanyahu showing MBS that he is still willing to shine a light on Iran’s deleterious effects on the region, he also underscored how vigorously Israel is pushing back on the Iranian threat.

Ron Ben-Yishai, reporting from a visit to IDF forces in the Gaza Strip, analyzes the state of the fighting, and “the persistent challenge of eradicating an entrenched enemy in a complex urban terrain.”

Hamas, sensing the war’s end, is mounting a final effort to inflict casualties. The IDF now controls 65 percent of Gaza’s territory operationally, with observation, fire dominance, and relative freedom of movement, alongside systematic tunnel destruction. . . . Major P, a reserve company commander, says, “It’s frustrating to hear at home that we’re stagnating. The public doesn’t get that if we stop, Hamas will recover.”

Senior IDF officers cite two reasons for the slow progress: meticulous care to protect hostages, requiring cautious movement and constant intelligence gathering, and avoiding heavy losses, with 22 soldiers killed since June.

Two-and-a-half of Hamas’s five brigades have been dismantled, yet a new hostage deal and IDF withdrawal could allow Hamas to regroup. . . . Hamas is at its lowest military and governing point since its founding, reduced to a fragmented guerrilla force. Yet, without complete disarmament and infrastructure destruction, it could resurge as a threat in years.

At the same time, Ben-Yishai observes, not everything hangs on the IDF:

According to the Southern Command chief Major General Yaron Finkelman, the IDF is close to completing its objectives. In classical military terms, “defeat” means the enemy surrenders—but with a jihadist organization, the benchmark is its ability to operate against Israel.

Despite [the IDF’s] battlefield successes, the broader strategic outcome—especially regarding the hostages—now hinges on decisions from the political leadership. “We’ve done our part,” said a senior officer. “We’ve reached a crossroads where the government must decide where it wants to go—both on the hostage issue and on Gaza’s future.”