US strategy on Gaza hostages needs a new approach - opinion

As we enter October and the passing of a full year since Hamas invaded Israel – killing over 1,200 people, including 43 Americans, and kidnapping hundreds of other innocents – American supporters of Israel must ask ourselves what our government is doing to free the hostages held in Gaza and ensure that such an attack is never allowed to occur again.

This point of reflection takes on particular significance a few weeks after the tragic news of the murders of Hersh Goldberg-Polin, Carmel Gat, Eden Yerushalmi, Alexander Lobanov, Almog Sarusi, and Ori Danino.

For millions of Americans, Hersh Goldberg-Polin is a household name. He was a native of Berkeley, California, held both American and Israeli citizenship, and was taken hostage by Hamas on October 7 after attending the Supernova music festival where he had part of his arm blown off by a Hamas grenade.

Following his capture, Hersh’s parents, Jon and Rachel, dedicated their lives to spreading awareness about their son and promoting efforts to bring him home. Shortly before his murder, they spoke at the Democratic National Convention, delivering deeply moving remarks about their son that sparked chants among the crowd of “Bring Hersh Home!”

The public-facing US strategy relating to the hostage negotiations appears to have the primary aim of achieving an agreement between Israel and Hamas. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has made dozens of visits to the region since October 7 to meet with the Israelis, Qataris, Egyptians, and others, to urge those with influence over the situation to help achieve an agreement.

Following the secretary of state’s most recent visit to Israel and his meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Blinken said on August 19 that Israel had agreed to the withdrawal requirements from Gaza that are part of the most recent “bridging proposal.” He said it was “now incumbent on Hamas to do the same,” in terms of meeting their obligations under the proposal to reach an agreement. One can refer to Vice President Kamala Harris’s August 29 comments in her interview with CNN’s Dana Bash to conclude that the American priority is to achieve “a deal.”

Kamala Harris

The vice president said, “We must get a deal that is about getting the hostages out,” and repeated the phrase “We have to get a deal done” twice, after a follow-up from Bash. Harris made a similar statement most recently during the September 10 presidential debate. After being asked about the war between Israel and Hamas, the vice president said, “This war must end... immediately; and the way it will end is we need a ceasefire deal and we need the hostages out.”

While other statements, including the one by Harris focusing on Hersh’s murder by Hamas, have admitted that “the threat Hamas poses... must be eliminated and Hamas cannot control Gaza,” this rhetoric has not been the focus of most of the public-facing diplomacy concerning the Gaza war. 

Worse yet, the aim to remove Hamas from power in Gaza does not appear achievable, were the war to end “immediately” with a “ceasefire deal,” as the vice president’s declared aim, expressed at the September 10 presidential debate.

There are significant limitations in trying to interpret the motives of the sociopathic fanatics in charge of Hamas strategy. However, one must attempt to understand the way in which Hamas interprets US declarations and why it would murder hostages whose lives are the main currency it holds in any negotiations.

The most likely rationale for Hamas’s actions is that it believes these murders will increase pressure on the Americans, who will further pressure Israelis to cede to Hamas’s demands in ongoing negotiations. As an American, I reject these tactics and urge my government to do the same.

In short, what we have been doing has not been working. The efforts to prioritize “an agreement” as the central aim of our strategy have simply been interpreted by Hamas as a willingness to accept an agreement at any cost.

We need to change this calculus before Hamas, as well as Iran and every other malign actor watching the American posture in the Middle East, doubles down further on their strategy of murder and extortion to achieve their aims. Hamas’s primary aim appears to be to survive and retain control over Gaza. If achieved, it and its allies would declare victory and place Israel and the United States in a more dangerous position.

Hamas would regroup and launch further attacks in the future. All other adversaries would conclude that Israel and the US lack the willingness to destroy their enemies and calculate that they can also launch attacks that will not result in their own demise. Likewise, American and Israeli allies would question the value of US commitments should they be attacked by our joint adversaries.

American strategy must move forward with a new resolve to pressure Hamas directly and indirectly, with every means at our disposal, to surrender and release the hostages. This includes a significant change in public rhetoric from US officials, prioritizing the dismantling of Hamas as key to any future for Gaza. It also includes a renewed pressure campaign on the Qataris and Turks, who host much of the Hamas leadership – and on Egypt, who allowed untold numbers of munitions to flow to Hamas through its border with Gaza.

These efforts must include a determination to bring the Hamas leadership and its enablers to justice, whether they be its political, financial, or military patrons, responsible for the situation we find ourselves in today. 

I would also suggest that the efforts include a vision toward a future for a region that has no place for those who believe American blood can be spilled without severe retribution.

Anything less risks inviting further weakness and future depravity by Hamas and others seeking to harm Israelis, Americans, and any others in the Middle East or beyond who yearn for a better future, built on coexistence.

The writer is a publishing contributor at The MirYam Institute and a pro-Israel activist in New York.