IDF publishes report into decision-making around October 7th

[Scirocco]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cyvee8vr7l1o

https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-identified-but-ignored-5-warning-signs-of-hamas-attack-on-eve-of-oct-7-its-probe-shows/

Surely Netanyahu can't win another term?

Chilling images of normal looking people breaking into the kibbutz, knowing what they were about to do.

Thanks for posting.

Netanyahu isn't really the story here. Every survey pretty much since he was reelected has had his coalition losing the next elections. His goal right now is to hold onto power as long as possible - elections will be in Oct 2026 unless his government collapses and that's a long time ahead in terms of public opinion.

One way that he is avoiding a further slide is by not commissioning a state inquiry into Oct 7, which would point fingers of blame at him and his government. This inquiry is the army's internal inquiry, which relates only to its own functioning and not to the political echelon, so therefore does not point fingers at the politicians who were responsible for Israel's approach to defending the Gaza border.

Thanks for sharing. It makes me wonder if they turned a blind eye to look for an excuse to destroy Gaza and the West Bank etc.

Do people in Israel feel that there were security failures on 7 October? Do they feel the hostage situation has been dealt with well? I thought there was significant ill feeling about these towards current administration...?

Have you actually read the military time line @Scirocco linked to?

No. No they did not.

Honestly I think you should examine why you jumped to that question.

Just to add: it's worth reading the full series of posts (Times of Israel is the fullest English version I've seen so far) to understand also Hamas's strategy and goals in the years leading up to Oct 7.

Speaking as someone who experienced Oct 7 as utter chaos, when I turned on the TV after that Shabbat and the anchors were without words, completely lost to understand what the images were saying, and with desperate people telling their stories on the radio the next morning and trying to find missing people - even though already by the following weekend the news reported timelines of what had happened, this report (along with the specific reports about individual kibbutzim) is a really important stage in understanding what actually happened during those first 72 hours. It's a cliche, but understanding what happened and having individuals admit responsibility is an important step towards some kind of closure.

Of course we know there were security failures on 7 October! That is exactly what this report is about. The army failed on every level, from envisaging that such an attack could even take place (they had planned for a maximum of 70 terrorists to breach the fence, and 5000 did; the Gaza brigade was totally overrun and outnumbered and for hours the army had no idea what was going on), to a string of failures in dealing with the signs that something was happening on Oct 6, to a number of operational mistakes made on the day. It's all detailed in the report, and the chief of staff and other army leaders have taken responsibility and resigned their posts.

My point is that the political echelon equally needs to take responsibility, since they are in charge of the political conception that is directly responsible for the complete misjudgment of Hamas's aims and capability.

I'm in total agreement with you. I just assumed from your name you might be in Israel and have some idea of how this is leaning for next year's election?

I hate to be pessimistic but whilst Trump is around, I don't think Netanyahu is going anywhere.
That image of them both sunbathing together 🤢
Birds of a feather and all that.

Yes, I'm in Israel. Every poll unequivocally shows that Netanyahu and his coalition will not retain power after the next election. At the moment it's not even about winning the elections - it's about keeping his deeply unpopular government from falling apart and triggering new elections.

Thankyou.
In case you formed a different opinion I'm completely in the pro- Israel camp here 😉.

One of the biggest misconceptions I see on this board is that people are determined that there are two (mutually exclusive) camps and this is a kind of football match where you support one or the other. No. This is a complex conflict with (internal) political, national, and international elements, all of which are factors in the negotiations currently going on.

I'm a Jewish Israeli. I have lived here before and after Oct 7th, and I will continue to do so. Decisions about the future directly affect me and my family, and the conflict directly affects us: and yesterday there was a terror attack not far from where I live, somewhere I drive past pretty regularly.

And still. I refuse to see this as a zero-sum conflict. Everyone living between the river and the sea deserves better. Everyone deserves better leadership. The only way we will ameliorate this conflict is to make things better for BOTH Israelis and Palestinians. I'm not a wide-eyed idealist, and I don't think that a peace treaty is about to be signed with white doves flying in the air carrying olive branches. Probably change will be incremental. But both Palestinians and Israelis are dismally let down by the kind of attitude we see on this board every day, with constant bickering and sniping and attempts at any cost to increase distrust. Yes, there is distrust, and there is a long way to go, but people outside the region fanning the flames only empowers intransigent elements like Hamas and Netanyahu and the Israeli far right whose political survival relies on a no-compromise, zero sum narrative, and whose political approaches have been shown again and again to fail to provide security or a better future for their people.

I'm often, frankly, appalled where the bitterness and bad faith around this conflict is far stronger on this internet board among people who have never even been to the region let alone actually reading the languages so they can be properly informed, than it is among the real people on the ground living this conflict.

Noted, and fairly chastised.

I read I think it was in the TOI that Netanyahu (with Trump's blessings) is going to announce plans to annexe the west bank in the coming weeks. How likely do you think that is?

Part of Israel being caught off guard was the way in which Israeli intelligence were kept in the dark. Knowing that their communications were being listened to, Hamas leadership conversations just prior to Oct 7 were along the lines of " We're happy with Gazans going into Israel to work, we enjoy the revenue, let's not make waves, nothing going on here. "

Meanwhile they were planning Oct 7 . They didn't tell Hezbollah, because they knew it leaked like a sieve and they didn't tell Iran, because they knew Iran would say "Don't do it".
So they went ahead on their own. Another aspect of the failing of Israeli defence was their reliance on Electronic surveillance. One of the first targets on Oct 7 was the Israeli technology associated with detecting movements along the border.

@israelilefty
Your post about this board was very appropriate. About how those who are not directly affected appear to see this as an either or situation. Given this, I am hoping you will take this question in good faith.

There is clearly a lot for Israelis to reflect within this report. However, as someone from the outside- which I acknowledge I am, it has frequently been noted that amongst the atrocities committed by Hamas, one of them was the death of 1200 Israelis. This is used as a justification for the action against Hamas in Gaza, resulting in the devastation there.

My question is- is there the emotional and political will to look at the impact of the Hannibal Directive in the friendly fire deaths of Israelis by the IDF?

Since this was addressed to me: I'm happy to answer questions with the caveat that I am not a military or a political expert. I'll also add that I have a long-running if recently less active AMA you can use for that to avoid derailing other threads. I don't check it every day but I do try to answer everything. This is the link to the AMA.

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/AMA/4967191-im-a-jewish-israeli-ama

About the Hannibal directive: Yes, this is something discussed in the Israeli media. For those unfamiliar with the term, this is a command that was active for some years in the Israeli military intended to prevent soldiers from falling into enemy hands, which allowed forces to use a string of measures from roadblocks and creating obstacles, to using "all means" including firing in a way that potentially endangered the abducted soldier's life, in order to prevent their capture. While this directive was revoked in 2016, it was invoked in a handful of circumstances on Oct 7.

I know that at least at the beginning of the war, some commentators tried to use the existence of this directive to suggest that a significant proportion of the Israeli casualties on Oct 7 were from Israeli fire. This proposition does not appear to hold weight. 14 civilians are known to have died in this kind of circumstance on Oct 7 (out of over 800). 13 of them were in one incident, "Pessi's House" in kibbutz Be'eri, where a tank fired shells then troops entered a house in which 15 hostages were being held by some 40 militants, after an extremely long standoff. Only one hostage survived the ensuing firefight (one had already been killed before the incident). This event has been discussed in great detail in both the IDF investigation and journalistic investigations. The other incident was when a helicopter fired on a vehicle carrying Hamas militants and hostages, killing hostage Efrat Katz but freeing other hostages. I couldn't find numbers available for soldiers killed in friendly fire incidents on Oct 7 itself (as opposed to in the following war, where these incidents are reported clearly) but I doubt that the Hannibal command/approach caused a very high number of deaths among security forces, because there would be reported incidents at least through journalism if not through official channels.

So in order to answer your question: yes there is the will to look at it, but this has not been the focus of discussions about the failure of Oct 7 (other than very extensive discussions of the Pessi's house incident) probably because there are other much more urgent failings on Oct 7 and there doesn't seem to be a lot of evidence that this command greatly impacted Israeli casualties. I also wanted to footnote that while the Hannibal directive is shocking, it does need to be understood in the context of the hugely high prices Israel paid to redeem captured soldiers, including freeing over 1000 Palestinian prisoners to free just one Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, in 2011. Of those freed prisoners were many who went on to cause a lot of Israeli casualties, including Yahya Sinwar who masterminded the Oct 7 attacks. This is not an attempt to justify the doctrine but just to say that it needs to be understood in context.

Thank you for answering - the report does make reference to it from what I read, although not in detail. That is why I brought it up.

14 deaths collateral deaths - is that what is reported in Israeli media?

@Polka83

Re: the Hannibal Directive employed by the IDF Oct 7,

the Haaretz article July 7 2024 with the title below can be read if you copy its link into archive ph and it is about this.

IDF ordered Hannibal Directive on October 7 to Prevent Hamas Taking Soldiers Captive

You asked specifically about the Hannibal directive, not about collateral deaths. 14 is the number of civilian deaths on Oct 7 in that specific circumstance: when the army fired on a building/vehicle knowing that this might endanger hostages. There are also cases of other friendly fire incidents, for example, of mistaken identification, for example where civilian defenders were mistaken as terrorists. In general, the army and media are open about reporting and discussing friendly fire deaths.

I just wanted also to address another part of Polka83's post: "it has frequently been noted that amongst the atrocities committed by Hamas, one of them was the death of 1200 Israelis. I will leave aside the possible insinuation, which I've seen from some people who want to minimise Hamas's actions, that a significant number of those deaths were collateral damage by Israel. As I've partially explained above, as one would expect in such a complex situation, there were collateral deaths but I haven't heard any serious analysis suggesting that these were an unusually significant proportion of the total.

What is implied here, though, is that the justification for the war was the number killed on Oct 7. While the desire for revenge has certainly been present in public discourse about the war, and has probably influenced ways in which the was was conducted, the primary justification of the war was to destroy the military capabilities of Hamas; in other words, to ensure that such an attack cannot take place again. We should remember in relating to this goal that in addition to their murderous rampage, Hamas took control of communities in southern Israel (within Israel's internationally agreed 1948 borders), and effectively rendered a swathe of southern Israel unliveable, because nobody would agree to go back to live there while an enemy who had shown itself to have the intent and capability to launch a wide scale attack on civilian communities, and who has built enormous infrastructure in order to do so, would still be armed and in power the other side of the fence. Together with the return of the hostages, this was the primary goal of the war, and remains the sticking point in the ceasefire negotiations, because Israel is unwilling to have Hamas remain in power the other side of the border.

That's interesting @israelilefty . It does make sense that people wouldn't want to risk living near the Gaza border following the atrocities, but I hadn't actually heard that reported before.

(In contrast, there has been reporting on the 60,000 Israelis evacuated from their homes in Northern Israel due to daily rocket attacks from Hezbollah, and that the goal to move those citizens back motivated Israel's incursion into Lebanon)

How much was Southern Israel emptied out and for how long, do you know?

From a quick google for statistics, 74,600 Israelis were evacuated from their homes in the south and 68,500 in the north - these are just those living right on the borders who were officially evacuated. They were housed in hotels until at least 7 July 2024 - whole kibbutzim were literally rehoused in whole hotels, several at the Dead Sea. Northern residents are just going back now - last week my son's kindergarten class said goodbye to a girl whose family was evacuated from the north to our town. A lot of the kibbutzim on the Gaza border that were severely wrecked on Oct 7 are still in temporary locations, living in caravans until more permanent building will take place. I think that most if not all of the kibbutzim voted to eventually return to their original location (they are collectives so decide as a group), but obviously that will be a difficult decision for some members.

@israelilefty
I can see that Israelis need to be able to live safely within their borders -wherever they are. I am not saying that the sole purpose of the war was an act of revenge, but - like yourself - have seen, read and heard enough to see that there has been element of this.

As such, it may be that the method of the attack on Gaza was due to what happened on 7/10.

There are things that don’t make sense. For example - the number of burned vehicles - estimated at 1500. It has been reported that Hamas did this- but how could they have with guns? These are Israeli vehicles.

The extent of the damages on houses. The IDF have said they used heavy bombs that weren’t appropriate for the complex situation.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=VVpTaW4T524