JPost Editorial: Now that all hostages are home, Israel must open inquiry into October 7 massacre
A profound chapter in Israel’s national trauma reached a painful conclusion on Monday: the remains of St.-Sgt. Ran Gvili, the last Israeli held in Gaza after the October 7, 2023 attack, were returned to Israeli soil. After 843 days, the state can say that there are no more Israelis in captivity.No retreat: Now that all hostages are back, Israel must finish off Hamas
Gvili’s story comprises both courage and heartbreak. A 24-year-old police officer who put on his uniform on that horrific morning while on medical leave, he joined the defense of Kibbutz Alumim and was killed while fighting to protect others. That he ran toward danger and became the last to come home should echo throughout Israeli society.
Gvili’s return is rightly mourned and honored. Families gathered in Hostages Square. The symbolic clock counting the days since October 7 has been turned off. Yet closure brings its own burden: a country that has endured this scale of loss still needs to fathom how and why Israel was so catastrophically unprepared.
Government and military leaders also framed Gvili’s return as a statement of national duty. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he told the family, “We will bring Ran home,” and added, “We will bring them all home.”
IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir said, “We kept our promise to leave no one behind,” calling it a moment the country “is excited about,” because Ran returned “to be buried in Israel.”
Across the political spectrum, voices have called for a state commission of inquiry into the gross failures of October 7. Many of those calls reflect anguish more than politics. Families who lost loved ones, freed hostages, reservists, and civilians want answers about intelligence failures, operational decisions, strategic assumptions, and the broader policy environment that left communities exposed.
At the same time, concerns raised by opponents of a sweeping inquiry deserve a fair hearing. Israel remains in a volatile security environment, and public hearings can affect operational freedom, intelligence sources, and national cohesion. Some also fear that an inquiry will turn into a political battlefield and deepen internal chasms and rifts at a time when unity still carries strategic value.
Why it's time to finish off HamasAndrew Fox: Why cutting military ties with Israel would cost British soldiers’ lives
In this war, two critical dimensions are unfolding simultaneously: the present and the future.
The insistence on returning all the hostages held in Gaza embodied the battle over the present – our moral, ethical, and existential duty to save lives here and now. Every moment in which our soldiers and civilians were held captive was an open wound in the heart of the nation, and every effort to bring them home expressed our commitment to the value of life.
At the same time, the insistence from here onward on the decisive defeat of Hamas embodies the battle over the future. A society that cannot defeat its enemies, uproot the threat of terror, and ensure secure borders for generations to come will remain trapped in an endless cycle of bloodshed and uncertainty. The dismantling and disarmament of Hamas is not only a military objective – it is a vision for a future of stability, security, and prosperity in the State of Israel.
The beginning of Phase II is an integral part of the war, and the determination to dismantle Hamas is not only part of the struggle for life, but also – and no less importantly – for the quality of life. Part of this war for life is the moral foundation that obligates us to do everything possible not to leave hostages behind.
The completion of the phase of returning the hostages from Gaza must serve as a lesson – not the first, but one that must be the last – that it is both a security and moral obligation to decisively defeat Hamas. As long as it exists, the threat of rockets, tunnels, and kidnappings will continue to haunt us, and any dream of civilian stability will remain fragile. The defeat of the October 7 perpetrators is therefore a necessary condition not only for survival in the present, but above all to ensure that no Israeli civilian or IDF soldier will again be abducted and held as an asset by Hamas in the future.
The prolonged war in Gaza and along Israel’s other borders – and especially the kidnapping of civilians and soldiers – has tested and continues to test Israeli society. It challenges us to understand that war demands painful prices and enormous economic resources. These reflect our choice to invest in building the tools necessary for our defense, rather than in monuments to our memory.
Four retired senior British Army officers have reportedly urged the prime minister to impose a comprehensive arms embargo on Israel and to “cut all military collaboration with Israel forthwith”, including links with Israeli defence firms.
In the same political climate, the UK has also taken steps to prevent Israeli students from attending one of Britain’s flagship defence courses. You may agree or disagree with any Israeli policy, and you can hold Israel to any standard you believe is appropriate. However, a blanket attempt to sever military-to-military contact with the Israel Defence Forces is not a serious way to protect British troops. It is, in fact, a notable way to ensure that British soldiers die needlessly in the next war Britain cannot escape.
Here is the uncomfortable truth: when it comes to saving young men and women after they have been torn apart by blast and shrapnel, Israel has been learning, adapting and delivering at a pace and scale that the British Army simply has not had to sustain in recent years.
The IDF’s own combat medicine data from recent conflicts shows a steady decline in the “case fatality rate” (the proportion of casualties who die) across major operations, even as injuries have become more severe. That is what a learning medical system looks like when tested under fire.
Consider the first lesson: blood, not “drips”, saves lives. For decades, armies (and civilian ambulances) often reached for clear IV fluids first. Doctors call these fluids “crystalloids” – essentially sterile saltwater solutions used to increase circulating volume.
They are not useless, but they have a fatal limitation: they do not carry oxygen, and they do not contain the clotting components that stop catastrophic bleeding. In mass trauma, too much crystalloid can dilute the body’s ability to clot, cool the casualty, and worsen shock.
The IDF’s data indicates a significant doctrinal shift away from crystalloids and towards blood-based resuscitation. During the Second Lebanon War, 92.7 per cent of casualties receiving resuscitation fluids were treated with crystalloids. In Protective Edge (2014), that figure was still 83.3 per cent. In the current war (Iron Swords), only 29.8 per cent were treated with crystalloids, reflecting a clear move towards resuscitation centred around blood products, especially whole blood.
“Whole blood” matters because it is what the body actually loses: oxygen-carrying red cells, plasma proteins, and platelets that form clots. The challenge is not the concept; it is creating a system capable of delivering whole blood safely, repeatedly, and at scale. Israel has achieved this.


























