Vo Nguyen Giap on Gaza — patience and protracted conflict.
Litterae ex Sepulchris
The enemy will pass slowly from the offensive to the defensive. The blitzkrieg will transform itself into a war of long duration. Thus, the enemy will be caught in a dilemma: he has to drag out the war in order to win it and does not possess, on the other hand, the psychological and political means to fight a long-drawn-out war.
— Võ Nguyên Giáp, People’s War, People’s Army
1987-2005
December 1987 — Jabalia Refugee Camp, Gaza Strip
“The first stage is one of strategic defensive... During this stage, the enemy’s offensive capacity and our defensive capacity gradually wear down, while our offensive capacity and the enemy’s defensive capacity gradually increase.” — Mao Zedong, On Protracted War
Ibrahim al-Masri was fourteen years old when he learned that a stone could be a strategy.
The morning of December 9, 1987, began like any other in Jabalia—the call to prayer before dawn, the cold seeping through the concrete walls of the refugee camp’s narrow houses, his mother heating water for tea while his father dressed for his shift at the citrus groves inside Israel. They lived in three rooms that had been built for temporary shelter in 1948 and had somehow become permanent across four decades. The word muvakat—temporary—was a joke that had stopped being funny before Ibrahim was born.
He walked to school through alleys so narrow that two people could not pass without turning sideways. The camp held 60,000 people in less than two square kilometers. Every wall was close enough to touch. Every conversation could be overheard. Privacy was a concept that belonged to a different geography, a different life—the life his grandfather still described in elaborate detail, the village near Jaffa with its stone house and olive groves that existed now only in memory and in the rusted key that hung beside the family photographs.
School that day was interrupted by noise from the street. Then by the teacher leaving. Then by other students running out, and Ibrahim following, because at fourteen you follow the current of excitement without asking where it leads.
What he found was a crowd unlike anything he had seen before.
The Israeli truck had killed four Palestinians the day before at a checkpoint near Jabalia. An accident, the authorities said. Retaliation, the camp believed—for an Israeli stabbed in Gaza City the week before. The truth mattered less than the feeling, and the feeling was that something had broken open, some restraint that had held for twenty years since the occupation began.
People were in the streets. Not dozens but hundreds. Not protesting but moving, a kind of collective motion that had its own momentum. And the young men at the front were throwing stones.
Ibrahim had thrown stones before—at birds, at dogs, at nothing in particular, the way all boys throw stones. But these stones were different. These stones were aimed at the Israeli patrol vehicle that had entered the camp, and when they struck metal, when the soldiers ducked behind their armored doors, when the crowd roared at this small visible impact, Ibrahim understood something that would shape the rest of his life:
The stone was not meant to wound the soldier. The stone was meant to prove that the soldier could be made to react.
He did not throw a stone that day. He watched. And in watching, he began to learn.
The uprising spread across Gaza and into the West Bank within days. The Israelis called it the Intifada—the shaking off—and the name was accurate in ways they did not intend. What was being shaken off was not just occupation but also the passivity that had defined Palestinian life since 1967. For twenty years, the old men had counseled patience. The PLO in Tunis had promised liberation that never came. The Arab states had made speeches and done nothing. And the Palestinian people had waited—in camps, in poverty, under military administration that controlled every aspect of their lives.
The stones said: We are done waiting.
Ibrahim’s father forbade him from joining the protests. “You think this will change anything? The Israelis have tanks. They have aircraft. What do we have? Stones. This is not resistance. This is suicide.”
“The Vietnamese had less than stones when they started,” Ibrahim said. He had read about Vietnam in a translated book he found in the camp’s small library—one of the few books that had not been confiscated by the military censors. The story of a small country defeating first the French and then the Americans had embedded itself in his imagination like a seed waiting for water.
His father struck him across the face—the only time he ever did so. “Do not speak of things you do not understand. The Vietnamese had mountains and jungles. We have sand and concrete. The Vietnamese had China and Russia. We have nothing. No one. We are alone.”
That night, unable to sleep, Ibrahim crept out of the house and made his way to the edge of the camp where the older boys gathered. They were not throwing stones now—it was too dark, too dangerous. Instead, they were talking. Planning.
“The stones are only the beginning,” said a young man named Khalil, perhaps twenty years old, with the thin beard that marked him as religious. “The stones show them we are not afraid. But stones cannot liberate Palestine. We need organization. We need patience. We need to think in years, not days.”
“The PLO thinks in years,” someone said. “They’ve been thinking for forty years and we’re still here.”
“The PLO thinks from Tunis,” Khalil replied. “From hotels and offices and meetings with diplomats. We must think from here. From the camps. From the people who actually live under occupation. The sea is here. The fish must be here too.”
Ibrahim did not understand the metaphor then. He would learn it later—the Maoist doctrine that Khalil had absorbed from training in Lebanon, the idea that guerrilla fighters were fish swimming in the sea of popular support. But he understood the tone. This was not the despair of his father. This was something harder, colder, more patient.
“How long?” he asked, surprising himself by speaking.
Khalil turned to look at him—a boy, barely visible in the darkness. “How long what?”
“How long until we win?”
The older boys laughed, but Khalil did not. He studied Ibrahim with eyes that seemed to measure something invisible.
“How old are you?”
“Fourteen.”
“When you are my age, we will not have won. When you are your father’s age, we may not have won. This is not a war that will end in your youth. But if you understand that—if you truly accept that this is the work of a lifetime, not a season—then you can be useful. The enemy expects us to tire. To lose hope. To accept whatever crumbs they offer. Our weapon is patience. Can you be patient?”
Ibrahim thought of the rusted key beside the photographs. Of his grandfather’s stories of Jaffa. Of forty years in a camp built for temporary shelter.
“I can be patient,” he said.
The Intifada settled into a pattern over the following months. Protests, strikes, stone-throwing, tire-burning. Israeli responses—curfews, arrests, beatings, shootings. The Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin reportedly ordered soldiers to “break bones,” and they did, systematically, with clubs and rifle butts. The hospitals filled with young men whose arms and legs had been deliberately shattered.
Ibrahim watched and learned.
He noticed that the stones themselves accomplished nothing militarily. No soldier was seriously harmed by stones. The armored vehicles were impervious. The checkpoints remained. The settlements expanded. In purely tactical terms, the Intifada was failing.
But something else was happening. The images—Palestinian boys facing soldiers, David against Goliath reversed—were spreading through the world. Foreign journalists appeared in the camps, filming, asking questions. The occupation that had been invisible for twenty years was suddenly visible. And the Palestinians who had been forgotten were suddenly remembered.
“This is what they don’t understand,” Khalil explained during one of the nighttime gatherings that Ibrahim now attended regularly. “They think we’re trying to defeat their army with stones. We’re not. We’re trying to defeat their will with stones. We’re trying to make the occupation too costly—not in soldiers’ lives, but in international reputation, in internal Israeli debate, in the simple exhaustion of maintaining control over people who refuse to be controlled.”
“But they’re not exhausted,” Ibrahim said. “They keep arresting people. They keep shooting.”
“They are not exhausted yet. But the question is: who has more patience? They want to live normal lives. Go to the beach. Worry about their economy. They don’t want to be an occupying army forever. We—” Khalil gestured at the camp around them, the cramped alleys, the concrete walls, the absence of any horizon. “We have nothing to lose. We can wait as long as it takes because there is nothing else for us. This is our advantage. The only advantage we have.”
In 1988, Hamas was formally established.
Ibrahim did not join immediately. At fifteen, sixteen, he was too young for the military wing, and the movement was cautious about recruitment—the Israelis had infiltrated other organizations, and trust was earned slowly. But he attended the prayer meetings, studied the literature that circulated through the camps, learned the ideology that blended Palestinian nationalism with Islamic revival.
The Hamas founding charter spoke of liberating all of historic Palestine, of the impossibility of compromise with the Jewish state, of armed struggle as religious obligation. But what struck Ibrahim was not the ideology—he had heard similar rhetoric from the secular PLO for years. What struck him was the method.
“The PLO negotiates from weakness,” one of the Hamas teachers explained. “They accept what the Israelis offer because they have nothing else to offer in return. We will negotiate from strength—but first we must build that strength. This takes time. Perhaps decades. We must be prepared for a long struggle.”
“How do we build strength?” Ibrahim asked.
“Three ways. First, we build support among the people—through charity, through education, through being present when they need help. The people must see us as their servants, not their masters. Second, we build military capacity—weapons, training, intelligence. This must be done in secret, patiently, without alerting the enemy. Third, we wait for the right moment. The enemy will make mistakes. The regional situation will shift. Opportunities will appear. And when they do, we must be ready to act.”
It was, Ibrahim would realize later, almost exactly what Giáp had written about the three phases of protracted war. Strategic defensive. Strategic equilibrium. Strategic offensive. Hamas was building for a struggle that would outlast any individual, any generation.
He found this comforting.
The Intifada ended in 1993, betrayed—as the Hamas leaders saw it—by the Oslo Accords. The PLO recognized Israel. Israel recognized the PLO. A Palestinian Authority was created to administer fragments of the West Bank and Gaza. The world celebrated peace.
In Jabalia, nothing changed. The camp remained. The occupation remained. The settlements expanded. The checkpoints multiplied.
“Oslo is a trap,” Khalil said. He was older now, harder, having spent two years in Israeli administrative detention. “They give us the illusion of a state while taking the land for the real state. They give us police to arrest our own people while they control the borders, the water, the air. This is not peace. This is management.”
Ibrahim was twenty years old, finished with school, unable to find work. The Palestinian Authority offered jobs, but he would not work for collaborators. The Israelis controlled the permits for work inside Israel, and his family’s association with Hamas made him ineligible. He spent his days in the camp, his nights in the increasingly secretive meetings where the military wing was being organized.
“What now?” he asked.
“Now we prepare. The Authority is weak. It will fail. And when it fails, we must be ready.”
“Ready for what?”
Khalil smiled—a rare expression on his weathered face. “That depends on the enemy. We do not choose the moment. The moment chooses us. But we must be ready when it comes.”
In 1994, Ibrahim descended into the earth for the first time.
The tunnel was crude—hand-dug, timber-shored, barely wide enough for a man to crawl through on hands and knees. It ran from a basement in the camp toward the Egyptian border, perhaps two hundred meters. Its purpose was smuggling: weapons, goods, medicine that the blockade prevented from reaching Gaza through legal channels.
“This is the future,” said the man who led him underground—an engineer from Gaza City who had studied in Egypt before returning to join the resistance. “The Israelis control the surface. They control the sky. They control the sea. But they do not control what is beneath.”
Ibrahim felt the weight of the earth above him, the close darkness, the smell of soil and sweat. His chest tightened with something between fear and exhilaration.
“We will build more tunnels,” the engineer said. “Bigger, deeper, longer. Not just for smuggling—for fighting. For hiding. For surviving. The Vietnamese had Cu Chi. We will have our own.”
Cu Chi. Ibrahim knew the name from his reading—the vast tunnel network near Saigon where Viet Cong fighters had lived and fought for years, emerging to strike American forces and then disappearing underground. The Americans had bombed, had flooded, had sent soldiers down into the darkness. And still the tunnels survived. Still the fighters emerged.
“How long will it take?” Ibrahim asked.
“To build what we need? Ten years. Twenty. We must start now and be patient.”
Ibrahim thought of Khalil’s words from years before. Can you be patient?
He began to learn the engineering of underground construction.
The years passed in accumulation.
Ibrahim married—a woman from the camp named Fatima, quiet and devout, who understood that her husband’s work would always come first. They had a daughter in 2007, the year the blockade tightened into a siege. He named her Yasmin, for the flower that grew wild along the borders of his grandfather’s vanished village.
The tunnels grew. First under the Egyptian border—smuggling routes that became economic lifelines as the blockade strangled Gaza’s legitimate commerce. Then military tunnels, deeper, more sophisticated, running toward the Israeli communities across the fence. These were not for smuggling but for striking—and for surviving the inevitable response.
Ibrahim rose within the Qassam Brigades, Hamas’s military wing. He was not a fighter in the traditional sense—he had never fired a weapon at an Israeli, had never been in combat. His value was technical: the ability to move tons of concrete and steel and weapons underground without detection, to build infrastructure that could withstand bombardment, to create space where men could train and plan and wait.
Patient accumulation of advantage. He had read the phrase somewhere—Giáp, perhaps, or Mao—and it had become his doctrine. Every tunnel dug was advantage accumulated. Every rocket hidden was advantage accumulated. Every young man trained was advantage accumulated. The enemy was strong, but strength without patience was a wasting asset. Time favored those who could wait.
Israel attacked Gaza in 2008-2009, in 2012, in 2014. Each time, Hamas emerged weakened but surviving. Each time, the tunnels proved their value—command posts that could not be bombed, supply routes that could not be interdicted, evacuation passages that preserved the leadership even as buildings collapsed above.
And each time, Ibrahim supervised the reconstruction. Deeper. Stronger. More extensive. Learning from each failure, improving each design.
“How many kilometers now?” one of the young commanders asked in 2018, touring the network beneath Khan Younis.
Ibrahim had stopped counting precisely, but the estimates were staggering. More than five hundred kilometers of tunnels beneath Gaza—a parallel world beneath the world, invisible to the drones and satellites that watched every movement on the surface.
“Enough,” he said. “Enough to survive whatever they do. Enough to wait.”
“Wait for what?”
Ibrahim did not answer immediately. He thought of Khalil, dead now in an Israeli airstrike years before. Of the young boy who had asked how long until victory and been told it would not come in his youth. He was forty-five years old. His daughter Yasmin was eleven, growing up in the same camp that had been temporary for seventy years.
“The moment,” he finally said. “The moment when we can act. It will come.”
The years continued.
2019: The Great March of Return—protests at the fence, hundreds wounded by Israeli snipers, the world briefly paying attention before forgetting again.
2021: Another war, eleven days of bombardment, the tunnels surviving, Hamas claiming victory because survival was victory.
2022: A quiet year, deceptive. Israeli intelligence reported that Hamas was deterred, focused on governance, unlikely to risk another confrontation.
Ibrahim knew better. He was overseeing construction at a pace never before attempted—not just tunnels now, but training facilities, command centers, weapons manufacturing. Young men were being drilled in tactics that no one had ever attempted: paraglider insertion, motorcycle assault, coordinated multi-domain operations. Engineers in Iran were training Hamas specialists in drone warfare. The rockets were becoming more sophisticated, the range extending to reach Tel Aviv, Jerusalem.
And something else was changing: the fence.
The Israeli barrier around Gaza was a marvel of military technology—sensors, cameras, underground detection systems, automated weapons. It was supposed to make Gaza an impenetrable prison. But in studying it for years, Ibrahim and his engineers had found its weaknesses. The sensors could be overwhelmed with simultaneous breaches. The cameras watched fixed positions that could be avoided. The automated systems had response times that could be exploited.
“It is possible,” he reported to the senior leadership in late 2022. “A coordinated assault at multiple points. Enough fighters through to cause significant damage before the response consolidates. We could reach the communities inside.”
“The cost?”
“High. Many fighters will die. But we have prepared for this. We have the men. We have the weapons. We have the element of surprise.”
“And then what? We reach the communities. We kill soldiers, maybe civilians. And then the retaliation destroys Gaza again. What do we gain?”
This was the question. The strategic question that Ibrahim had turned over in his mind for years. What was the objective? Not tactically—tactically, the objective was to kill and capture and destroy. But strategically? What did Hamas gain from an operation that would certainly bring devastation?
“We gain attention,” Ibrahim said slowly, articulating what he had come to believe. “We break the normalization. The Abraham Accords are integrating Israel into the region while we are forgotten. Saudi Arabia is about to recognize Israel. If that happens, the Palestinian cause is finished—not defeated, but irrelevant. We must remind the world that we exist. That this conflict is not resolved. That peace with Israel while Gaza starves is not peace.”
“At what cost?”
Ibrahim thought of Yasmin, sixteen now, preparing for her final school exams in a camp where the electricity came four hours a day and the water was undrinkable without filtration.
“Everything has a cost. Waiting has a cost too. Our children grow up in a prison. They have no future. If we do nothing, they have no future. If we act, at least—at least there is a chance that something changes.”
The senior leadership debated for months. The regional situation shifted—Iran pushed, Arab states hesitated, Israeli politics became more extreme. And in the spring of 2023, the decision was made.
Ibrahim spent the summer overseeing final preparations. The training intensified. The weapons were distributed. The routes were confirmed, the timing calculated, the contingencies planned.
On the night of October 6, 2023, he embraced his wife and daughter for what he knew might be the last time.
“Where are you going?” Yasmin asked.
“Work,” he said. “I may not be home for a while.”
“How long?”
He thought of all the times he had asked that question. How long until victory? How long until we can go home? How long until this ends?
“I don’t know,” he admitted. “But whatever happens—remember that everything we do is for you. For your future. For the future of all our children.”
Yasmin looked at him with the clear eyes of a sixteen-year-old who had grown up in a war zone, who had lived through bombardments and blockades and the endless grinding humiliation of occupation.
“I know, baba,” she said. “I know.”
End of Chapter One
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
1995-2023 — Tel Aviv and the Gaza Periphery
“The art of war teaches us to rely not on the likelihood of the enemy’s not coming, but on our own readiness to receive him; not on the chance of his not attacking, but rather on the fact that we have made our position unassailable.” — Sun Tzu, The Art of War
David Amit learned about war from computers before he learned about it from men.
He was seventeen years old in 1995, a mathematics prodigy from a secular family in Ramat Gan, when he first encountered the algorithms that would shape his understanding of conflict. His high school offered a special program in collaboration with the Technion, Israel’s premier technology institute, and David had been selected for a summer internship that officially involved “computational modeling” and unofficially involved preliminary screening for the IDF’s intelligence units.
The project assigned to him was elegant in its abstraction: model the behavior of a hostile entity using game theory. The entity could be a state, an organization, a network—the mathematics was the same. Inputs included capability assessments, historical behavior patterns, leadership psychology, environmental constraints. The model predicted probable actions based on rational self-interest calculations.
David spent three months refining the algorithm. He was good at it—exceptionally good, his supervisors said—because he understood that the key was not mathematical sophistication but accurate assumptions. The model was only as good as its baseline premises about what the enemy wanted and what the enemy believed.
“The fundamental question,” his mentor explained, “is whether the enemy is rational. If yes, we can predict behavior. If no, prediction becomes much harder.”
“What if the enemy is rational but operating from different assumptions than we are?”
His mentor smiled. “That is the hardest problem. We assume they see the world as we see it. Usually, they don’t. That’s where intelligence fails.”
David filed this insight away. It would take him decades to fully understand its implications.
He was drafted in 1996, identified immediately for Unit 8200—military intelligence, signals and cyber. The work was technical: intercepting communications, breaking codes, analyzing data. He spent his mandatory service in a basement, staring at screens, learning the invisible architecture of information that flowed through the region.
Hamas fascinated him.
Not politically—David had few political opinions, and those he had were the vague center-left positions of his parents’ generation, supportive of peace in principle, suspicious of Palestinians in practice. What fascinated him was the organizational structure. Hamas was simultaneously a political party, a social welfare organization, a military force, and an ideological movement. It operated through cells that communicated indirectly, through funding streams that ran through a dozen countries, through a hierarchy that was deliberately obscure.
“They’re learning,” he wrote in an analysis report in 1998. “After each operation, after each Israeli response, they adapt. Their security protocols improve. Their communication discipline tightens. They are treating this as a long-term competition.”
His superiors noted the report. They did not disagree. But they also did not change their fundamental assessment: Hamas was a terrorist organization that could be managed through a combination of targeted killings, intelligence penetration, and economic pressure. The organization might persist, but it could be kept at an acceptable level of threat.
This was the beginning of the conception—the conceptzia—that would govern Israeli strategy toward Gaza for the next twenty-five years.
David signed a permanent contract with military intelligence in 2000, just as the Second Intifada erupted. The violence was worse than the First—suicide bombings in Israeli cities, dozens killed in cafes and buses and nightclubs. The response was massive: Operation Defensive Shield reoccupied the West Bank, targeted killings decapitated Palestinian leadership, the security barrier began construction.
For David, the Second Intifada was a laboratory. He watched how intelligence succeeded and failed, how predictions matched or diverged from reality, how the enemy adapted to Israeli adaptation.
What he learned was troubling.
“We’re very good at tactical intelligence,” he told his commander in 2003. “We can locate specific individuals, penetrate specific cells, predict specific attacks. But we’re poor at strategic intelligence. We don’t understand what Hamas actually wants—not what they say publicly, but what they’re truly trying to achieve.”
“They want to destroy Israel. They say so in their charter.”
“That’s an aspiration, not a strategy. What are their operational objectives? What would they consider success? What trade-offs are they willing to make? We don’t know. We assume they’re irrational because their stated goals seem irrational to us. But what if they’re pursuing those goals through rational methods?”
His commander was unimpressed. “Amit, your job is signals intelligence, not philosophy. Find me the next bomber. Let the analysts worry about grand strategy.”
David found the next bomber. And the next. And the one after that. The targeted killings continued—Hamas leaders, military commanders, bombmakers. Each killing was a tactical success. Each killing created a vacancy that Hamas filled, usually with someone younger, angrier, more committed.
Patient accumulation, David would later think. While we were killing their leaders, they were building their organization. We saw tactics. They saw generations.
The disengagement from Gaza in 2005 was, depending on who you asked, either a bold peace initiative or a strategic retreat. Israel withdrew its settlements and military presence, leaving Hamas to govern the Strip. The theory was that responsibility would moderate Hamas—that governance would force them to prioritize services over resistance, that the population would hold them accountable for electricity and water rather than liberation.
David was skeptical.
“They don’t want to govern,” he argued at an internal assessment meeting. “Governance is a means, not an end. They’ll use the resources of government to build military capacity. The blockade will give them a permanent grievance. And the border—” He hesitated. “The border is a liability. We’re building a fence and assuming it will hold. What if it doesn’t?”
“The fence will be the most sophisticated border security in the world. Multiple redundant systems. The tunnels are being addressed. Short of a full-scale military invasion, they cannot breach it.”
“They’ll innovate. They always innovate.”
“Then we’ll innovate faster.”
This was the assumption that became doctrine: Israel’s technological superiority would always outpace Hamas’s innovations. The occupation was expensive and politically damaging; the fence was cheap and defensible. Containment was the strategy. Keep Hamas in a box, degrade their capabilities periodically, wait for the demographic and political situation to resolve itself through some future negotiation.
David did not believe the situation would resolve itself. But he also did not believe Hamas could seriously threaten Israel from inside a contained Gaza. The mathematics seemed clear: they had stones and rockets; Israel had F-16s and nuclear weapons. The asymmetry was overwhelming.
The strong are rarely as strong as they appear, he would read years later in a captured document summarizing guerrilla doctrine, and the weak rarely as weak—if the weak understand time, terrain, and people.
He did not read this in 2005. He would not understand its full meaning until much later.
The years between 2006 and 2014 became a pattern that David knew intimately.
Hamas fired rockets. Israel retaliated with airstrikes and ground operations. Hundreds or thousands of Palestinians died. A few dozen Israelis died. Ceasefires were declared. The cycle repeated.
After each round, David participated in the assessments. The questions were always the same: What did we learn? What did they learn? What should we do differently?
And the answers were always the same: We degraded their capabilities significantly. They suffered heavy losses. The deterrence is restored.
But David noticed something that the formal assessments did not capture. Each round, Hamas emerged with better rockets—longer range, more accurate, harder to intercept. Each round, the tunnels went deeper and more extensive. Each round, the tactical coordination improved.
“They’re learning faster than we are,” he said at a closed-door briefing in 2015. “We’re optimizing for the last war. They’re preparing for a different war.”
“What different war?”
“I don’t know. That’s what worries me. They’re building capabilities that don’t match their current operational pattern. The tunnels under the border—they’re not smuggling tunnels, they’re infiltration tunnels. For what? A raid? A larger assault? We’re not sure. But they’re investing enormous resources in something they haven’t used yet.”
“Maybe they’re deterred from using it.”
“Maybe. Or maybe they’re waiting for the right moment.”
The meeting concluded with the consensus that David was raising legitimate concerns that warranted continued monitoring, but that the fundamental assessment remained valid: Hamas was deterred. The fence would hold. The technological advantage was decisive.
David did not argue further. He knew how the institution worked. Dissent was tolerated, even valued, as long as it didn’t challenge the fundamental framework. And the framework said: Hamas is a manageable problem.
He was promoted steadily—captain, major, lieutenant colonel. His specialty evolved from signals intelligence to strategic analysis, from intercepting communications to interpreting their meaning. By 2020, he was responsible for integrated threat assessments covering Gaza and the West Bank, reporting directly to senior command.
The Abraham Accords surprised him.
Not the diplomacy itself—the regional dynamics had been shifting for years, with the Gulf states increasingly viewing Israel as a partner against Iran rather than an enemy over Palestine. What surprised him was how thoroughly the Palestinian issue had been sidelined. The accords were signed without any Palestinian input, without any progress on the core conflict, without any acknowledgment that Gaza and the West Bank even existed as problems to be solved.
“This is dangerous,” he warned. “We’re telling Hamas that diplomacy is closed to them. That the Arab world is abandoning them. That their only path forward is violence.”
“Their only path has always been violence. This changes nothing.”
“It changes their calculation. Before, there was a political horizon—however distant—that made patience rational. Now, there’s no horizon. What does a movement with no peaceful option do?”
“They accept reality. Or they lash out and get destroyed.”
David thought of the tunnels. The rockets. The years of patient accumulation.
“What if they’ve been preparing to lash out for a very long time?”
The question was noted, filed, incorporated into the risk matrix that informed strategic planning. Hamas remained assessed as deterred. The fence remained assessed as secure. The technological advantage remained assessed as decisive.
In July 2023, an analyst in the Gaza Division submitted a report documenting unusual training activity near the border. Female observers stationed in fortified positions along the fence had been noting movements that didn’t match standard exercise patterns. The report was flagged, assessed, and concluded to represent routine preparation rather than operational intent.
David read the report. He noted the concerns. He also noted that similar reports had been filed many times before, and none had presaged significant action.
The enemy always does something, he had been taught. Most of what they do is noise. The art is distinguishing signal from noise.
The report looked like noise.
On the night of October 6, 2023, David was at home in Herzliya with his wife and two children, preparing for the Simchat Torah holiday. His phone was beside his bed, as always, set to alert him if anything significant developed.
The phone buzzed at 6:29 AM on October 7.
The message was from the operations center: massive rocket barrage initiated from Gaza. Thousands of launches detected. Scale unprecedented.
David was out of bed and dressed in sixty seconds, calling for updates as he drove toward headquarters. The reports were fragmentary, contradictory, impossible—breaches at multiple points along the fence, infiltration by hundreds of fighters, attacks on military bases and communities, mass casualties reported.
This is not possible, he thought. The fence cannot be breached at this scale. The response time should prevent penetration. The defenders should be overwhelming any infiltration.
But the reports kept coming. Paragliders. Motorcycles. Armed men moving through Israeli communities, entering houses, killing everyone inside.
By the time he reached headquarters, the scale of the disaster was becoming clear. This was not a raid. This was an invasion. The fence had failed—not through one weakness but through twenty simultaneous breaches that had overwhelmed every backup system. The response had failed—units were out of position for the holiday, commanders were unreachable, the automated systems had been targeted and degraded. The defenders had failed—small units caught by surprise, outnumbered, overrun.
In the operations center, David watched the feeds from cameras and drones and listened to radio traffic from units still fighting. He watched the map fill with red markers indicating attacks, casualties, communities cut off from support.
And he understood, finally, what he had failed to understand for twenty-five years.
The conception had been wrong. Not in its details—the details had been accurate enough. Hamas capability had been correctly assessed. Israeli technological superiority had been correctly catalogued. The fence had performed within design parameters.
The conception had been wrong in its fundamental assumption: that Hamas would not act because acting would be irrational.
But Hamas had never been irrational. They had been patient. They had accumulated advantages for decades—tunnels, rockets, training, intelligence on Israeli positions and routines. They had studied the fence not to defeat it but to understand how to overwhelm it. They had waited for a moment when Israeli defenses would be weakened—a holiday, a distracted political environment, a false sense of security born from years of successful containment.
And then they had acted.
The moment chooses us, David remembered from a captured Hamas document he had read years ago. But we must be ready when it comes.
They had been ready. Israel had not.
The war that followed was unlike anything in Israeli history.
David worked eighteen-hour days, sleeping on a cot in headquarters, analyzing intelligence that never stopped flowing. The ground invasion of Gaza began on October 27. The fighting was brutal—tunnel by tunnel, building by building, against an enemy that had prepared for exactly this scenario.
“They’re not trying to hold territory,” he reported at a command briefing in November. “They’re trading space for time. They want a long war, not a decisive battle. They want us deep in Gaza, exposed, bleeding, while international pressure builds for a ceasefire that leaves them intact.”
“Then we must finish quickly.”
“We can’t finish quickly. The tunnel network is more extensive than we assessed. They can retreat indefinitely, emerge behind our lines, force us to clear the same ground multiple times. This is protracted warfare. They’ve designed it to be protracted.”
“What are our options?”
David had asked himself this question every night since October 7. What were the options when you faced an enemy that had accepted infinite cost, that had structured itself to survive any punishment, that measured success not in battles won but in time endured?
“Our options are limited. We can destroy Gaza’s surface infrastructure—we’re doing that. We can kill their fighters—we’re doing that too. But we cannot eliminate the organization without a permanent occupation, and occupation means governing two million hostile civilians indefinitely. Hamas planned for this. They knew we would face a choice between destruction that doesn’t achieve our objectives and occupation that we cannot sustain.”
“So they win?”
“They don’t win. But we don’t win either. That’s the trap. They’ve created a situation where neither side can achieve its political objectives through military means. And they’re more comfortable with that situation than we are.”
The briefing ended without resolution. There was no resolution to be found.
Months passed. The war ground on.
David watched the casualty figures climb—Israeli soldiers dying in tunnel ambushes and building collapses, Palestinian civilians dying in airstrikes and crossfire. He watched the international condemnation intensify, the diplomatic pressure mount, the internal Israeli politics fracture between those who wanted to continue until Hamas was destroyed and those who wanted to stop because the cost was becoming unbearable.
He thought often about the young man he had been in 1995, building algorithms to predict enemy behavior based on rational self-interest. The algorithm had been correct. Hamas was rational. But the algorithm had made a fundamental error: it had assumed that Hamas’s self-interest aligned with survival of the organization in its current form.
Hamas’s self-interest was different. It was aligned with perpetuation of the conflict itself. An organization dedicated to resistance needed something to resist. A movement defined by occupation needed the occupation to continue. Hamas did not want peace because peace would make Hamas irrelevant. They wanted struggle—endless, generational struggle that gave meaning to existence in the camps, that justified the sacrifices, that promised eventual vindication even if that vindication never came.
We were trying to solve a problem, David realized. They were trying to create a condition.
The problem could theoretically be solved. The condition could only be managed—forever.
In March 2025, David submitted his resignation.
The ceasefire was holding, more or less. Hamas had survived—damaged, depleted, but intact. The tunnels that hadn’t been destroyed were being rebuilt. The rockets that had been expended were being replaced. The fighters who had been killed were being mourned and replaced by younger brothers who had watched their families die in Israeli airstrikes.
“Why now?” his commander asked. “We need experienced people for the next phase.”
“There will always be a next phase. That’s what I finally understand. There is no end state. There is no victory condition. There is only the next phase, and the phase after that, and the phase after that. And I—” David paused, searching for words. “I built my career on the assumption that we could solve this through intelligence, through technology, through superior capability. I was wrong. Not about the capabilities, but about what they could achieve. We have overwhelming power. We cannot achieve our objectives. That contradiction is not solvable by better intelligence.”
“What do you propose instead?”
David thought of his children—teenagers now, the age he had been when he first encountered the algorithms. They would serve in the military soon. They might be sent to Gaza, to fight the sons of men who had fought him, in tunnels dug by men who had been digging tunnels their entire lives.
“I don’t know,” he admitted. “That’s the honest answer. I don’t know what the solution is. I only know that what we’ve been doing isn’t working, and doing more of it won’t work either. The enemy has infinite patience. We do not. Eventually, that asymmetry decides everything.”
He walked out of the building where he had spent most of his adult life, into the bright Tel Aviv sun, carrying twenty-five years of classified knowledge in his head and no idea what to do with it.
The war was not over. The war was never over. The war was the condition in which they all lived, Israelis and Palestinians alike, trapped in an equilibrium that served no one’s interests except those who had made the struggle itself their purpose.
Patient accumulation of advantage, David thought, remembering a phrase from his studies. Hamas had accumulated patience. Israel had accumulated weapons. Neither accumulation had led to victory.
Perhaps there was no victory. Perhaps there was only endurance, and the question of which side could endure longer, and whether endurance itself was worth the cost.
He did not know the answer.
He suspected no one did.
End of Chapter Two
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
2005-2025 — Rafah, Egyptian Border
“In guerrilla warfare, the weights in the scales of victory or defeat are not only military, but also political. In protracted war, time is the main factor; the strong cannot annihilate the weak, and the weak cannot defeat the strong rapidly.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, People’s War, People’s Army
Hassan el-Sayed learned about borders from his father, who had learned about borders from his father, who had been among the Egyptian officers who closed the Rafah crossing after the 1948 war and watched the Palestinian refugees stream into Gaza by the hundreds of thousands.
“The border is not a line on a map,” his grandfather had said, when Hassan was a boy in Cairo. “The border is a decision. Every day, we decide who passes and who does not. Every decision creates consequences. The consequences accumulate. And after enough years, the consequences become facts that cannot be changed.”
Hassan remembered this when he took his post at General Intelligence Directorate’s Rafah bureau in 2005, the year Israel withdrew from Gaza and the border became—for a brief, chaotic moment—something that Palestinians themselves might control.
That moment did not last.
The disengagement had created a problem that no one wanted to acknowledge.
Israel was leaving Gaza. The Palestinian Authority was supposed to assume control. But the Authority was weak, corrupt, contested—and Hamas was strong. The Egyptian government, watching from across the border, understood immediately what this meant: Gaza was about to become Hamas territory, and Hamas was allied with the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt’s most dangerous internal enemy.
“We cannot allow an open border,” the director told Hassan’s team in a classified briefing. “If Gaza becomes a Hamas state with free movement to Egypt, we are funding and enabling an Islamist project that will eventually threaten our own regime. This is not about Palestinians. This is about survival.”
Hassan was thirty-eight years old, a career intelligence officer who had spent most of his service in the Sinai, monitoring the tribal networks and smuggling routes that ran through the desert. He understood borders as practical realities—physical terrain that could be monitored, crossed, defended. The ideological dimension was new to him.
“What is our position, then?”
“Our position is that we support Palestinian rights, oppose Israeli aggression, and will never allow mass movement across the border. These positions are contradictory. Our job is to maintain them simultaneously.”
This, Hassan would learn, was the essence of Egypt’s role in the Palestinian conflict: rhetorical solidarity combined with practical collaboration with Israel to keep Gaza contained. The Arab world spoke of Palestinian liberation. The Arab world acted to prevent Palestinian liberation from threatening Arab regimes.
The border at Rafah was a strange place.
On one side, Gaza—overcrowded, impoverished, sealed by Israeli blockade from every other direction. On the other side, Egypt—vast, relatively open, connected to the wider world. The crossing was the only land exit from Gaza that didn’t go through Israel. For Palestinians, it represented the possibility of escape, of medical treatment, of education abroad, of simply leaving the cage.
For Egypt, it represented a threat.
Hassan’s job was to manage that threat. He coordinated with Israeli intelligence on tunnel detection—because the tunnels that ran under the border threatened Egyptian security as much as Israeli. He managed the lists of who could pass and who could not—lists that grew longer every year as Hamas consolidated control and Egypt tightened restrictions. He watched the humanitarian situation in Gaza deteriorate, watched the requests for transit pile up, watched the desperation mount on the other side of the wall.
“They are our brothers,” an Egyptian colleague said once, watching a group of Palestinians turned back at the checkpoint. “We share language, history, religion. Why do we treat them as enemies?”
“Because they are useful as victims but dangerous as neighbors,” Hassan replied. “The Palestinian cause justifies Arab nationalism, Arab unity, Arab opposition to Israel. But actual Palestinians, with their politics and their movements and their demands—they destabilize everything they touch. Jordan expelled the PLO after Black September. Lebanon was destroyed by Palestinian factions. We will not allow Egypt to become the next battleground.”
“So we keep them in Gaza.”
“We keep them in Gaza. Israel builds the walls. We close the gate. And together, we maintain a situation that serves no one’s interests except the preservation of the status quo.”
The 2008-2009 war was the first test of this arrangement.
Israel attacked Gaza with overwhelming force. Thousands of Palestinians were killed. The border at Rafah remained closed.
Hassan watched the images on television—the same images the world was watching—of destruction and death in Gaza. He received requests from humanitarian organizations to open the border for medical evacuations. He passed these requests up the chain. The chain said no.
“We cannot open without Israeli coordination,” his superiors explained. “And Israel does not want us to open. They want Gaza sealed while they operate.”
“There are wounded who could be saved if they reached Egyptian hospitals.”
“There are also Hamas fighters who could escape if we open the border. And weapons that could flow in either direction. And a precedent that Gaza residents can leave whenever there is violence—which would mean they could leave whenever they choose, since there is always violence.”
Hassan understood the logic. He did not protest further. He did his job.
In the years that followed, he became expert at the particular calculus of the Rafah crossing. A limited number of passages per day—never enough to relieve pressure, always enough to claim the border was “open.” Priority for medical cases, students, and the elderly—categories that could be manipulated to exclude almost anyone. Coordination with the Palestinian Authority to exclude Hamas members—which meant, in practice, excluding anyone Hamas didn’t approve, since Hamas controlled the Gaza side of the crossing.
The result was a controlled trickle that kept Gaza dependent and contained without creating the political crisis of a fully closed border.
“We are performing humanitarian theater,” one of his analysts said. “Enough openness to claim we are helping. Not enough to actually help.”
“That is exactly what we are doing,” Hassan agreed. “And it is exactly what everyone wants us to do—Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, the international community. Everyone except the people of Gaza.”
The tunnels were a constant problem.
They had existed since the 1980s, dug by smugglers running goods from Egyptian Sinai to Gaza. After the blockade tightened in 2007, they became an economic lifeline—food, medicine, fuel, construction materials, all flowing through underground passages that connected Gaza to Egypt.
Hassan’s mandate was to destroy them.
This was, he knew, a Sisyphean task. For every tunnel that was discovered and flooded or collapsed, two more were dug. The tunnel economy employed thousands of Gazans and enriched Bedouin smugglers on the Egyptian side. The incentives for tunneling were overwhelming, the enforcement capacity limited.
“We could eliminate the tunnels tomorrow,” Hassan told a visiting minister in 2012, “if we opened the border to legitimate commerce. The tunnels exist because there is no legal alternative. Seal the legal routes, and the illegal routes flourish.”
“Opening the border is not our decision alone. It requires Israeli agreement. They will not agree.”
“Then the tunnels will continue. We are fighting a symptom while nurturing the disease.”
The minister was not interested in this analysis. He wanted metrics—tunnels destroyed, smuggling networks disrupted, reports that could be presented to demonstrate action. Hassan provided the metrics. The tunnels continued.
What concerned him more were the military tunnels—the ones that didn’t run to Egypt but toward Israel. Hamas was building an underground network of staggering scale, and some of it was visible from the Egyptian side. He reported this through intelligence channels. The Israelis knew. Everyone knew. The knowing did not lead to action that prevented what came next.
In 2013, Egypt’s politics convulsed.
The Muslim Brotherhood had won elections. President Morsi, an Islamist sympathetic to Hamas, briefly opened the Rafah crossing with minimal restrictions. For a few months, Gazans could travel relatively freely—a taste of normalcy that underscored how abnormal their situation had been.
Then the military coup, and everything reversed.
General Sisi took power. The Brotherhood was crushed. Hamas, as a Brotherhood affiliate, became an enemy of the Egyptian state. The border closed tighter than ever. The tunnels were destroyed more aggressively—not to help Israel, but to hurt Hamas.
Hassan adapted to the new political reality. His job remained the same: manage the border, control the movement, keep Gaza contained. The justification changed—it was now about fighting terrorism rather than maintaining stability—but the practice was identical.
“Hamas is not our friend,” the new director told the intelligence services. “They are an extension of the Brotherhood, and the Brotherhood is an existential threat to Egypt. Every resource that reaches Hamas through our territory strengthens our enemies. This is a matter of national security, not Palestinian solidarity.”
Hassan implemented the new directives. He flooded tunnels with seawater, destroying infrastructure that had taken years to build. He closed the crossing for months at a time, citing security concerns. He watched the humanitarian indicators in Gaza collapse—food shortages, medical shortages, fuel shortages—and filed reports documenting the deterioration without recommending any change in policy.
“We are strangling them,” he wrote in one private assessment that he did not submit through official channels. “Slowly, methodically, we are cutting off the oxygen to two million people. Israel builds the walls. We close the gate. And Hamas survives because martyrdom is their strategy, and we are providing them with martyrs.”
By 2020, Hassan had served fifteen years at the Rafah bureau. He was fifty-three years old, gray-haired, exhausted, increasingly uncertain that anything he had done had achieved any purpose.
The Abraham Accords were being negotiated. Israel was making peace with Gulf states while Gaza remained a besieged enclave. The Palestinian issue, which Egypt had claimed as central to Arab interests for seventy years, was being sidelined, resolved by simply ignoring it.
“What is our position now?” Hassan asked at a strategy meeting. “If Israel normalizes with the Gulf without Palestinian conditions, what do we say to the Palestinians who spent decades believing we would not abandon them?”
“We say that peace is complicated and progress is incremental and we continue to support Palestinian aspirations.”
“While keeping the border closed.”
“While maintaining security protocols appropriate to the threat environment.”
Hassan laughed—an inappropriate response that earned him disapproving looks. “The threat environment. We created the threat environment. Israel created the threat environment. By making Gaza a prison, we made Hamas necessary. They are the only organization that fights back, the only organization that gives people in Gaza any sense of agency. Of course they are popular. What else do the Gazans have?”
“That is not our responsibility. Our responsibility is Egyptian security.”
“Egyptian security requires regional stability. Regional stability requires resolving the Palestinian issue. Resolving the Palestinian issue requires pressure on Israel. We exert no pressure on Israel. Therefore, we are not contributing to Egyptian security—we are deferring the problem to the next generation while it grows worse.”
The meeting ended without resolution. Hassan’s comments were noted. He was not disciplined—his expertise was too valuable—but he understood that he had crossed a line. There were things that could be known but not said.
October 7, 2023, changed everything and changed nothing.
Hassan learned of the attack from Israeli intelligence contacts before it was on the news. The scale was immediately apparent: this was not a raid or an escalation but a strategic action that would transform the situation entirely.
“They’re coming to you,” his Israeli counterpart said on the phone. “The civilians. Israel is ordering evacuation south. Toward your border. What is your position?”
Hassan contacted Cairo immediately. The answer came within hours: the border remains closed. Egypt will not accept refugees. Mass migration would create permanent displacement—another Nakba, another generation in camps, this time on Egyptian soil.
“We can receive wounded for medical treatment,” Hassan was authorized to offer. “Limited numbers. Temporary stays. No permanent resettlement.”
“There will be hundreds of thousands trying to flee. What do you tell them?”
“We tell them the border is closed. We tell them to shelter in place. We tell them—” Hassan stopped. What did you tell people who were being bombed, whose homes were destroyed, whose only escape route was sealed by the country that claimed to support their cause?
“We tell them nothing,” he concluded. “We close the gate and let them draw their own conclusions.”
The months that followed were the worst of Hassan’s career.
He watched the casualty figures mount—tens of thousands dead, then higher still. He processed the trickle of medical evacuations permitted by the labyrinthine coordination between Egypt, Israel, the WHO, and a dozen other organizations. He turned away the thousands more who could not meet the criteria, who did not have the right documents, who were simply ordinary people trying to escape a war zone.
The accusations of complicity came from everywhere. International organizations condemned Egypt for keeping the border closed. Palestinian activists called Egyptian leaders collaborators and murderers. Even within the Egyptian security services, there were officers who questioned whether national interest truly required watching a genocide unfold on the other side of a wall.
Hassan had no good answers.
“We are trapped by our own decisions,” he said to a junior officer who was struggling with the moral weight of the work. “Fifty years of decisions, each one logical in its moment, each one constraining the decisions that came after. We closed the border to prevent infiltration. We flooded the tunnels to fight Hamas. We coordinated with Israel to maintain stability. And now, when the consequences of all these decisions arrive at our wall, we have no option except to maintain the wall. If we open it, we accept responsibility for every Palestinian who dies afterward in Egypt, every conflict their presence sparks, every political crisis that results. If we keep it closed, we accept responsibility for every Palestinian who dies in Gaza while we watch.”
“Which is worse?”
“There is no ‘worse.’ There is only the choice we make and the consequences we bear. Egypt chose containment. Egypt chose to make Gaza someone else’s problem. And now the problem is killing tens of thousands of people, and we are still making the same choice because we do not know how to make a different one.”
The ceasefire, when it came in October 2025, did not resolve anything.
The border remained controlled. The coordination continued. Hamas survived, weakened but present. Israel retained military positions in Gaza. The reconstruction that was supposed to begin required international involvement, which required Egyptian cooperation, which required endless negotiations about who would govern Gaza and how and with what authority.
Hassan attended the planning meetings in Cairo. The Trump administration’s proposal called for an International Stabilization Force, a technocratic governing committee, Hamas disarmament. Everyone agreed in principle. No one agreed on implementation.
“Will Egypt contribute forces to the ISF?” he was asked.
“Egypt will not send soldiers to disarm Hamas. That is an invitation to become the target of Palestinian rage. We will provide logistical support. We will coordinate on border security. We will not become the occupying army of Gaza.”
“Then who will disarm Hamas?”
No one answered. The question had been asked for decades. It still had no answer.
Hassan returned to Rafah, to the gate he had managed for twenty years. The wall was intact. The crossing was open more frequently now, but still controlled, still restricted, still performing the function it had always performed: keeping Gaza contained while allowing just enough movement to claim humanitarian concern.
On the other side, he knew, two million people were beginning the slow work of rebuilding on rubble. Some of them would dig new tunnels. Some would acquire new weapons. Some would train for the next war that everyone knew would come, because none of the underlying causes had been addressed, because the political horizon remained closed, because the trap that contained Gaza also contained everyone who interacted with it.
“How long can this continue?” his junior officer asked one evening, watching the sunset over the border.
Hassan thought of his grandfather’s words: The border is a decision. The consequences accumulate. After enough years, the consequences become facts that cannot be changed.
“Forever,” he said. “Or until something breaks so completely that the system cannot continue. Those are the only options. Endless continuation or catastrophic collapse. There is no gradual improvement. There is no path from here to resolution. We will manage this border until we die, and our children will manage it after us, and perhaps their children will see either the end of the world or the end of the conflict. I do not know which will come first.”
The sun set. The border remained. The gate stayed closed.
And somewhere in Gaza, Hassan knew, men were digging in the dark, accumulating patience, waiting for the moment that would come.
End of Chapter Three
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
2007-2022
“The people are the water and the army is the fish... The fish live in the water, and those who do not have the support of the people will find that the water has dried up and no fish can survive.” — Mao Zedong, On Guerrilla Warfare
2007-2014 — Jabalia Refugee Camp, Gaza Strip
“All revolutionary movements are rooted in popular consciousness... The movement which has no popular foundation cannot survive, still less achieve victory.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, People’s War, People’s Army
Yasmin al-Masri was born into electricity that came and went like a restless guest, into water that tasted of salt and chemicals, into a sky that buzzed with things that watched.
She did not know, as an infant, that these were unusual conditions. The irregular rhythm of power—four hours on, eight hours off, sometimes more, sometimes less—was simply the rhythm of life. The generators that rumbled to fill the gaps, the candles that appeared when both electricity and generators failed, the way adults tracked time not by clocks but by the power schedule: this was normal. This was how the world worked.
Her first clear memory was of darkness.
She was three years old, maybe four, and the house was black. No electricity, no generator, no candles—something had happened that she did not understand. Her mother Fatima was holding her, whispering prayers, and somewhere outside there were sounds: booming, crashing, the kind of sounds that would become so familiar she would later sleep through them.
Her father was not home. Her father was often not home.
“Where is baba?” she asked.
“Working,” her mother said. “He is always working.”
This too was normal—fathers who worked at night, who disappeared for days or weeks, who came home with dirt under their fingernails and a faraway look in their eyes. Later, Yasmin would understand what her father’s work involved. As a child, she knew only that it was important, that it was secret, that it was the reason they had more food than some families and why certain men treated her father with deference.
The darkness ended eventually. The sounds stopped. Her father came home, and for a few days, life returned to its ordinary rhythms.
Then it happened again. And again. And again.
The first war Yasmin remembered clearly was 2008-2009, when she was nearly two. She did not remember it as war—she remembered it as the time the world was loud and her mother cried and they stayed in one room for a long time.
The second war, in 2012, she was five. This one she remembered in fragments: the shelter in the mosque where dozens of families crowded together, the smell of too many bodies in too small a space, the way the ground shook when bombs fell nearby, the face of a boy her age whose home had been destroyed and who sat in the corner saying nothing, just staring.
“Why do they bomb us?” she asked her mother.
“Because they are angry,” Fatima said. “Because we are here and they don’t want us to be here.”
“Where should we be?”
Her mother did not answer. There was no answer.
School was a revelation.
Yasmin started at the UNRWA school in Jabalia when she was six, joining a class of forty children in a room designed for twenty. The teachers were exhausted, the materials were worn, the building itself was crumbling. But for the first time in her life, Yasmin encountered knowledge that existed beyond her immediate experience.
She learned to read Arabic and English. She learned mathematics, which she loved—the certainty of numbers, the way problems had solutions that could be proved. She learned history, though the history taught in Gaza schools was particular: the Nakba of 1948, the occupation of 1967, the heroic resistance that continued despite impossible odds.
She also learned, from whispered conversations between teachers and from older students, that there was another history—one that was not taught in classrooms. The history of suicide bombings and rocket attacks. The history of Hamas and Fatah and the civil war between them. The history of her father’s organization, which operated alongside the government but was not quite the government, which ran charities and schools and also, everyone knew, did other things.
“Your father is important,” a classmate said once, with a mix of awe and fear. “My uncle says he builds things underground.”
Yasmin did not respond. She had learned, even at seven, that some things were not discussed.
The third war came in 2014, when Yasmin was seven years old.
This one was different. Longer, more intense, closer to home. The Israeli ground invasion reached Jabalia, and for days, the camp was a battlefield. Yasmin’s family fled to a relative’s home in Gaza City, then to a UN shelter when Gaza City was bombed, then back to Jabalia when the shelter overflowed with refugees.
She saw bodies for the first time. Not on television, not in photographs, but real bodies—carried through the streets, laid out in hospital corridors, buried in mass graves when there was no time for individual funerals. She saw children her own age dead, their faces frozen in expressions she did not understand.
“Don’t look,” her mother said. “Don’t look.”
But she looked. Everyone looked. There was nowhere to turn that did not show what was happening.
The war lasted fifty days. By the end, over two thousand Palestinians were dead, most of them civilians. The tunnels that her father helped build had been used to send fighters into Israel, and the Israeli response had been to destroy everything that might contain a tunnel entrance—houses, mosques, schools, hospitals.
Her own home was damaged but not destroyed. They returned to find the walls cracked, the windows shattered, one corner of the roof collapsed. Her mother wept. Her father surveyed the damage with the professional eye of an engineer and began calculating repairs.
“We will rebuild,” he said. “We always rebuild.”
Yasmin understood, for the first time, what her life would be. Not a life of growth and change and possibility, but a life of cycles—destruction and reconstruction, war and ceasefire, injury and healing, over and over, without end.
“Baba,” she asked that night, “why does this keep happening?”
Her father sat beside her bed, his face older than she remembered, his hands scarred from work she did not fully understand.
“Because we are here,” he said. “Because we will not leave. Because they want us to leave, and we refuse.”
“But people die. Children die.”
“Yes.” His voice was heavy. “That is the price of staying. That is the price of not surrendering.”
“Is it worth it?”
He was silent for a long moment. “I don’t know,” he finally admitted. “I believed it was worth it when I was young. Now I am not sure. But it doesn’t matter if it’s worth it. We have no choice. Leaving is not possible. Surrender is not possible. We can only endure and hope that something changes.”
“What could change?”
“I don’t know that either.”
It was the most honest conversation she had ever had with her father. It was also the last time he spoke to her with such openness. After that night, he retreated back into the secrecy that defined his life, and Yasmin returned to the strange normality of existence in Gaza.
Childhood continued, despite everything.
Yasmin excelled at school. She discovered that she had a gift for mathematics and science—the ordered world of equations and experiments that operated by rules, unlike the chaotic world outside. Her teachers encouraged her, recognized her potential, spoke of scholarships and universities abroad.
“You could study in Egypt,” one teacher said. “Or Turkey. Or Malaysia. There are opportunities for bright students.”
“How would I get there?”
The teacher’s enthusiasm dimmed. “The border... it’s complicated. But things change. Perhaps by the time you’re ready...”
Things did not change. The border at Rafah remained mostly closed. The Israeli crossings remained sealed. The only movement permitted was the slow trickle of humanitarian cases and the occasional VIP. Ordinary people—even brilliant students with university acceptances—could not leave.
Yasmin learned to think of Gaza as an island, surrounded not by water but by walls. Everything came from outside—food, fuel, medicine, construction materials—but nothing went out except the rockets that her father’s organization fired and the grievances that accumulated with each passing year.
She also learned to think of herself as part of something larger than her individual life. The sea, the teachers and leaders called the people of Gaza. Hamas were the fish who swam in the sea, protected and sustained by popular support. Without the sea, the fish would die. Without the fish, the sea would have no defenders.
It was a comforting metaphor for a child. It made the suffering seem meaningful—not random violence but a contribution to something important, a role in a struggle that would eventually lead somewhere.
Only later would Yasmin realize what the metaphor obscured: that the sea did not choose to be a sea. The two million people of Gaza had not volunteered for their role in the resistance. They were born into it, trapped in it, sustained the fighters not through choice but through the simple fact that they existed, that they could not leave, that their presence and their suffering provided the human infrastructure without which Hamas could not function.
The fish needed the sea. Did the sea need the fish?
Yasmin was not sure. But she understood, even as a child, that the question was not permitted. Some things were not discussed.
Her father’s absences grew longer as she grew older.
By 2014, he was gone more often than he was home. When he appeared, he was distracted, exhausted, focused on something he could not or would not explain. Yasmin learned not to ask questions. Her mother maintained the household, managed the rations, kept life functioning through the endless challenges of siege existence.
“Your father does important work,” Fatima told her. “Work that will help our people. You must be patient.”
Patience was the virtue everyone praised. The resistance required patience. Liberation would come, but not soon—perhaps not in Yasmin’s lifetime. The point was to endure, to maintain the struggle, to pass it on to the next generation.
“What if I don’t want to struggle?” Yasmin asked once.
Her mother looked at her with something between pity and incomprehension. “What else is there? This is our life. This is who we are.”
Yasmin did not argue. But in her mind, she began to imagine something else—a life without checkpoints, without electricity schedules, without the constant buzz of drones overhead. A life where mathematics was studied for its own beauty, not as a skill that might someday be useful for calculating trajectories or tunnel angles. A life where her future was not predetermined by the accident of birth that had placed her in this narrow strip of land.
She knew such imaginings were dangerous. They suggested a lack of commitment, a weakness of spirit. But she could not stop them. The possibility of elsewhere—however impossible, however remote—sustained her through the dark years of adolescence in a place where adolescence was a luxury few could afford.
In 2014, after the war ended, Yasmin’s class wrote essays about their experiences. The teacher asked them to describe what they had seen and felt and hoped for.
Most of the essays were patriotic. The students wrote about resistance and sacrifice and the certainty of eventual victory. They praised the fighters and martyrs. They condemned the Israeli enemy and its American sponsors.
Yasmin wrote something different. She wrote about the boy in the shelter—the one who had lost his home and sat in the corner staring. She wrote about trying to understand what was in his eyes, what he was seeing that the rest of them could not see. She wrote that she did not know if the struggle was worth it, because she did not know what “worth it” meant when children sat in corners with expressions that suggested they had left their bodies behind.
The teacher called her aside after class.
“This is very well written,” she said carefully. “But it is not... appropriate. I cannot submit this for the competition.”
“I wrote what I saw.”
“What you saw is true. But truth is not always what should be spoken. You understand?”
Yasmin understood. She rewrote the essay to match the expected form—heroic, patriotic, uncomplicated. It won third place in the district competition. She felt nothing when she accepted the certificate.
The original essay she kept hidden in a box under her bed, a secret document that recorded what she actually thought, what she actually felt, what she actually saw when she looked at the world she had been born into.
Someday, she told herself, there would be a place for that truth. Someday, someone would want to know what it was really like to be the sea in which the fish swam.
Someday.
End of Chapter Four
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
2015-2022 — Gaza and Israel
“At the decisive moment of the battle, when the enemy is exhausted... the revolutionary forces, with the support of the people, with ingenious tactics and unfailing heroism, can completely defeat the enemy.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, How We Won the War
The years between the wars were not peaceful. They were the years of accumulation, when both sides prepared for the next confrontation while the world looked elsewhere.
IBRAHIM — 2015
The reconstruction began immediately after the ceasefire.
Ibrahim spent fourteen hours a day underground, supervising the excavation of new tunnel routes to replace those the Israelis had discovered and destroyed. The work was dangerous—cave-ins, oxygen depletion, the constant threat of detection by Israeli sensors that grew more sophisticated with each passing year.
“We must go deeper,” he told his engineering teams. “Thirty meters, forty meters. Below the level their sensors can reach. Below the aquifer if necessary.”
“That will take years.”
“We have years. They think the war is over. They think we are defeated. We will use their confidence against them.”
The tunnel network that emerged from the 2014 war was more extensive than what had existed before—deeper, more reinforced, with multiple purposes built into the design. Transport tunnels for moving fighters and supplies. Manufacturing tunnels for weapons production. Command tunnels that could function as bunkers during bombardment. Attack tunnels that ran toward the Israeli communities across the fence.
Each kilometer dug was advantage accumulated. Each chamber constructed was capacity preserved for the moment when it would be needed.
Ibrahim did not know when that moment would come. He knew only that it would come, and that when it did, the organization that had prepared longest and most patiently would have the advantage.
DAVID — 2016
The doctrine had a name: “mowing the grass.”
David hated the term—its casual acceptance of endless repetition, its agricultural metaphor applied to human killing—but he understood the logic behind it. If Hamas could not be permanently defeated, then it must be periodically degraded. Cut back the capabilities, destroy the infrastructure, kill the leadership. Watch the grass grow back. Cut it again.
“It’s not a strategy,” he argued at an assessment meeting. “It’s an admission that we don’t have a strategy. We’re not solving the problem, we’re managing it. And the cost of management grows each time.”
“What’s the alternative?”
“A political solution. Negotiations. Something that changes the underlying dynamic.”
“The government has rejected negotiations. Hamas has rejected negotiations. There is no political process.”
“Then we will be mowing grass forever.”
The room fell silent. Everyone knew he was right. No one knew what to do about it.
David continued his work—tracking Hamas capabilities, analyzing their reconstruction, predicting their next moves. His assessments grew increasingly pessimistic. The tunnels were deeper than before. The rockets had longer range. The coordination with Iran had intensified. Hamas was not just recovering from 2014; they were exceeding their pre-war capabilities.
“They’re learning faster than we are,” he wrote in a classified memo. “Each round of conflict teaches them. They adapt. We respond to their adaptations with incremental improvements to existing systems. This is not a sustainable dynamic.”
The memo was noted, filed, incorporated into the assessment framework. The framework continued to conclude that Hamas was deterred.
YASMIN — 2017
She was ten years old, and she had decided she wanted to be an engineer.
The decision surprised no one—her father was an engineer, her mathematical abilities were obvious, and engineering was one of the few professions in Gaza that offered both respect and the possibility of employment. What surprised her teachers was the specific focus: she wanted to study structural engineering, to understand how buildings could be designed to withstand bombardment.
“An unusual interest for a young girl,” one teacher observed.
“Our buildings fall down when they bomb us,” Yasmin said simply. “I want to know why. I want to know if they could be built differently.”
It was a practical response to an impossible situation—the desire to solve with engineering what could not be solved with politics. If you could not stop the bombs, perhaps you could build structures that would survive them.
She studied on her own, downloading textbooks from the internet during the limited hours when both electricity and connectivity were available. She learned about load-bearing walls and reinforced concrete and the physics of explosive impact. She learned, too, that no civilian building could survive a direct hit from the weapons Israel employed—that the engineering problem was not one of construction but of probability, of dispersing the population so that any single strike killed fewer people.
This was not the kind of engineering she wanted to do.
HASSAN — 2017
The Egyptian border remained a pressure valve that Egypt controlled carefully.
Hassan managed the flow: a few hundred crossings per month, mostly medical cases and students with documentation that took months to obtain. The waiting lists grew longer each year. The desperation on the Gaza side grew more intense. The tunnels under the border—which Egypt periodically destroyed and Hamas periodically rebuilt—continued to operate because there was no legitimate alternative.
“We could end the smuggling tomorrow,” he told his superiors. “Open the crossing for legitimate commerce. Remove the economic incentive for tunneling.”
“The Israelis would never agree. They want Gaza sealed.”
“What the Israelis want is their concern. What serves Egyptian interests should be ours.”
“Egyptian interests are served by maintaining the relationship with Israel. The relationship requires coordination on Gaza. That is the calculation.”
Hassan understood the calculation. He did not agree with it, but he implemented it faithfully. The border stayed mostly closed. The tunnels stayed mostly active. The people of Gaza stayed trapped.
IBRAHIM — 2018
The Great March of Return began in March, and Ibrahim watched it with professional interest.
Thousands of Gazans gathered at the fence—not to breach it, not with weapons, but simply to demonstrate. To assert their right to return to the lands from which their grandparents had been expelled. To break through the invisibility that had descended over Gaza since the 2014 war.
The Israeli response was predictable: snipers, tear gas, live ammunition. Dozens of protesters were killed, thousands wounded. The international community condemned Israel briefly, then moved on. The fence remained intact. The marches continued for months, accomplishing nothing except the accumulation of more grievances, more martyrs, more rage.
Ibrahim did not participate in the marches. His work was underground, invisible, patient. But he understood what the marches represented: the desperation of a population that had exhausted peaceful options, that had tried diplomacy and protest and international pressure, that had found every path blocked.
“They march because they have no other way to fight,” he told his subordinates. “We dig because we have no other way to prepare. Both are expressions of the same truth: we are trapped, and we will do anything to escape the trap.”
“Will the tunnels escape the trap?”
“The tunnels will create options. When the moment comes, we will have options they do not expect. What we do with those options—that is a political decision. My job is to ensure the options exist.”
DAVID — 2019
The March of Return protests had killed more than 300 Palestinians. Israeli casualties were minimal. The deterrence, according to the official assessment, was reinforced.
David disagreed.
“We killed protesters,” he wrote in his analysis. “Not fighters, not operatives—civilians with rocks and flags. We demonstrated our willingness to kill people who threaten nothing except our sense of security. What does this deter? It doesn’t deter Hamas—they weren’t leading the marches. It doesn’t deter rockets—we’ve already demonstrated we’ll retaliate for those. All it demonstrates is that we will kill civilians, which Palestinians already knew.”
“What’s your alternative?”
“I don’t have one. That’s my point. We’re responding to a situation we created and cannot escape. Every action we take reinforces the dynamics that created the situation. More military force creates more grievances. More containment creates more desperation. More deterrence creates more determination to resist. We’re trapped too.”
“Trapped implies there’s no way out. There’s always a way out.”
“Show me.”
No one could show him. The conversation, like so many conversations about Gaza, ended without resolution.
YASMIN — 2020
She was thirteen years old, in her final year of primary school, when the pandemic arrived.
COVID-19 had a strange effect on Gaza. The strip was already isolated—the blockade that kept out so many other things also kept out the virus, at least initially. For a brief moment, Gaza’s imprisonment became a form of protection.
Then the virus got in anyway, through the tunnels or the limited crossings, and the inadequate healthcare system was overwhelmed. The electricity that powered ventilators came and went on its usual schedule. The oxygen supplies were insufficient. People died not from the virus itself but from the inability to treat it, the infrastructure failures that turned manageable illnesses into fatal ones.
Yasmin’s grandmother died that year. Not from COVID—from a heart condition that could not be properly treated because the hospitals were overwhelmed and the medications were unavailable. Another casualty of the siege, invisible in the statistics, uncounted among the martyrs.
At the funeral, Yasmin listened to the prayers and the condolences and the talk of heaven and reunion. She felt numb. Her grandmother had been old, had lived a full life by Gaza standards, had seen three wars and survived them all. But she had also never left the strip, never seen the world beyond the walls, never known what it was like to live without the constant pressure of occupation and blockade.
“She wanted to see Jerusalem,” Yasmin’s mother said. “Before she died. She was born there, you know. Before 1948. She always wanted to go back, just once.”
Jerusalem was forty miles away. It might as well have been on the moon.
IBRAHIM — 2021
The May 2021 war lasted eleven days and demonstrated everything and nothing.
Hamas launched rockets at unprecedented scale—more than four thousand over the course of the conflict—and proved that Iron Dome could be overwhelmed, that Israeli cities could be terrorized, that the technological advantage was not absolute. Israel responded with massive bombardment, destroying buildings and infrastructure and killing over 250 Palestinians. The tunnels survived. The rocket stockpiles were depleted but not eliminated. The leadership remained intact.
When the ceasefire came, both sides claimed victory.
Ibrahim knew the truth was more complex. The war had been a test—an operational rehearsal for something larger. The command and control systems had functioned. The tunnel network had provided survivability. The rockets had demonstrated range and accuracy that exceeded Israeli assessments.
But the test had also revealed limitations. The attack tunnels toward Israeli communities had not been used—the Israeli detection systems had improved since 2014, and the risk of failure was too high. The ground forces were not ready for large-scale infiltration. The coordination with other fronts—Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in the West Bank—had not materialized.
“We are not ready,” Ibrahim reported to the senior leadership. “We proved we can survive and we can fight. We have not proved we can achieve strategic objectives. More preparation is needed.”
“How much more?”
“Years. Perhaps five years. Perhaps less if circumstances change.”
The leadership authorized continued development. The tunnel construction accelerated. The training intensified. The stockpiles grew.
And somewhere above ground, life in Gaza continued—electricity rationing, water shortages, unemployment, despair—while beneath the surface, the preparations for the next war proceeded on schedule.
DAVID — 2022
The assessments were clear: Hamas was deterred.
David no longer bothered to argue. He submitted his analyses documenting the growth in Hamas capabilities, the expansion of the tunnel network, the improvements in rocket technology, the increased coordination with Iran. The analyses were incorporated into the framework. The framework concluded that the improvements did not change the fundamental calculation—Hamas remained a manageable threat.
“They’re preparing for something,” he told a colleague. “The scale of construction, the intensity of training—this is not maintenance, it’s buildup.”
“Preparing for what?”
“I don’t know. Something beyond the usual rocket exchanges. Something that requires ground forces, infiltration capabilities, extended operations. The infrastructure they’re building doesn’t match their current operational patterns.”
“Should we escalate our preparations?”
“Based on what? We have indicators, not intelligence. We can see they’re digging and training, but we don’t know their timeline or their specific plans. If we escalate based on capabilities alone, we’d be in permanent mobilization.”
“So we wait.”
“So we wait. And hope we’re right about deterrence.”
David did not believe they were right. But he also did not have enough evidence to justify preemptive action, and even if he did, he doubted the political leadership would approve it. The government was focused on normalization with the Gulf, on managing coalition politics, on everything except the festering wound of Gaza that had been relegated to the category of “problems we’ve learned to live with.”
Hamas was deterred. The fence was secure. The technological advantage was decisive.
David submitted his reports and waited for the moment when the framework would be tested.
YASMIN — 2022
She was fifteen years old, and she had stopped believing in liberation.
It was not a dramatic loss of faith but a gradual erosion—the accumulation of disappointments, broken ceasefires, failed negotiations, international promises that came to nothing. She still attended the commemorations for Nakba Day, still recited the poetry of resistance, still wore the keffiyeh that marked Palestinian identity. But she no longer believed that any of it would lead to change.
“What do you believe in?” her friend Layla asked.
“Mathematics,” Yasmin said. “Mathematics doesn’t lie.”
“Mathematics won’t liberate Palestine.”
“Nothing will liberate Palestine. At least mathematics has solutions.”
It was a cynical answer, too cynical for a fifteen-year-old, but Yasmin had grown up in circumstances that did not permit the luxury of hope. Her father was away more often now, his returns briefer, his manner more distant. Her mother prayed constantly—for his safety, for the family, for deliverance that never came. The tunnel work continued beneath their feet, visible only in the occasional tremor, the trucks carrying away dirt at night, the disappearances of young men into the underground world.
Yasmin did not ask what her father was building. She did not want to know. The knowledge would make her complicit in whatever came next, and she was not sure she wanted that complicity.
In her hidden box under the bed, she kept writing. Not essays now, but observations—fragments of life in Gaza, things she saw and heard and felt. A record for someday, for someone who might want to know what it had been like to be young in this place, in this time, waiting for something to happen without knowing what.
The sea, she wrote, does not know the fish are preparing. The sea only knows the water grows colder each year.
End of Chapter Five
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
October 2023
“In the final phase, the revolutionary forces launch the general offensive and uprising to liberate the country entirely... This phase must be prepared with great care, step by step.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, How We Won the War
October 7, 2023 — Multiple Locations
“The conditions for victory are only created when they have achieved a certain level of maturity... One must not act prematurely, before conditions are ripe, but one must not delay action when conditions are favorable.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, People’s War, People’s Army
IBRAHIM — 5:47 AM
The command bunker was thirty-eight meters underground, in a chamber that had taken two years to construct. Ibrahim sat before a bank of communications equipment, watching screens that showed feeds from cameras mounted on the fence, from drones his people had launched, from operatives already in position at breach points along the border.
Twenty-five years of preparation. It came down to this.
Around him, the other commanders—men he had worked with for decades, men who had dug tunnels beside him, who had survived Israeli assassination attempts and prison sentences and the slow grinding of siege life—were silent, waiting. The plan was set. The forces were deployed. There was nothing left to do but give the order.
Ibrahim thought of his daughter Yasmin, asleep in their house in Jabalia. Of his wife Fatima, who had been awake when he left, who had said nothing because she understood that some things could not be spoken. Of all the fathers and mothers and children on both sides of the fence who would not survive what was about to happen.
He had made his peace with this calculus years ago. The occupation would not end through negotiation—negotiation required leverage, and Gaza had no leverage except violence. The world would not liberate Palestine—the world had forgotten Palestine until something forced them to remember. The cost would be terrible, but the cost of inaction was also terrible, was in fact being paid every day in the slow strangulation of two million people behind walls they had not chosen and could not escape.
Is it worth it?
He had asked himself this question for thirty years. He no longer knew the answer. He knew only that this was the moment—the moment his mentor Khalil had spoken of, the moment that chose them rather than being chosen. The Abraham Accords were moving forward. Saudi normalization loomed. Within years, Palestine would be erased from the regional agenda entirely. If they did not act now, they might never have another chance.
“All units report ready,” one of the communications officers said.
Ibrahim looked around the bunker at the faces of his comrades. They had spent their lives preparing for this. Some would not survive the day. None of them could predict exactly what would follow.
“Bismillah,” he said. In the name of God.
He gave the order.
DAVID — 6:29 AM
The phone woke him.
David fumbled for the device on his nightstand, his mind still foggy with sleep. His wife murmured something and rolled over. The screen showed an operations center number, urgent priority.
“Amit.”
“Sir, we have a situation. Massive rocket barrage from Gaza. Unprecedented scale. And—” The voice hesitated. “We’re getting reports of infiltration.”
David was fully awake now. “What kind of infiltration?”
“Ground forces. Multiple breach points along the fence. Early reports are fragmentary, but—sir, they’re inside the communities.”
He was dressed and in his car within three minutes. The drive to headquarters was twenty-five minutes on a normal day; he made it in fifteen, the roads empty for the holiday. His phone buzzed constantly with updates that made less and less sense.
Paragliders. Armed men on motorcycles. Breaches at Kerem Shalom, Nahal Oz, multiple other locations. Attacks on Kibbutz Be’eri, Kibbutz Kfar Aza, Kibbutz Nir Oz. Casualties. Many casualties.
This is not possible, David thought. The fence. The sensors. The response protocols.
But it was possible. It was happening. Everything he had warned about for years—the accumulation, the preparation, the capability that exceeded their assessment—was manifesting in real time.
At headquarters, the operations center was chaos. Officers shouted into phones. Maps displayed red markers spreading across the Gaza periphery. The air raid sirens that had been sounding since 6:30 had become background noise, punctuated by the distant booms of Iron Dome intercepts.
“What do we know?” David demanded.
“Thousands of rockets to overwhelm the defense systems. Simultaneous ground assault at twenty-plus breach points. They used bulldozers to knock down sections of the fence, then flooded through with vehicles and fighters. We’re estimating hundreds of infiltrators, possibly more. And—” The briefer’s voice broke slightly. “They’re not just attacking military positions. They’re hitting civilians. Houses, shelters, the music festival at Re’im.”
“The festival.” David had not known about the festival. No one had known to warn them. “How many people?”
“Thousands. They were still there when the rockets started. Our forces are trying to respond, but—”
“But we’re out of position. It’s Simchat Torah. Units are on leave, commanders are with family, the response time is—”
“Hours, sir. It will take hours to mount an effective response.”
Hours. Hamas had calculated this. They had chosen this specific day, this specific moment, knowing that Israeli defenses would be at their weakest, that the response would be delayed, that they would have a window to do maximum damage.
They were not irrational, David realized with a sick clarity. They were patient. They waited for exactly the right moment, and we gave it to them.
HASSAN — 7:15 AM
The call from his Israeli counterpart came while Hassan was at morning prayer.
He left the mosque immediately, driving to the Rafah bureau through streets that were already filling with rumors. Something was happening at the border. Something big. The Egyptian military was on alert, units moving toward the Sinai.
At the bureau, his staff had already assembled the initial reports. Massive rocket barrage from Gaza. Ground assault into Israel. Casualty figures that were climbing by the minute.
“What do we know about the Egyptian side?” Hassan asked.
“Nothing is coming through Rafah, sir. Whatever they’re doing, it’s all directed at Israel.”
“For now. If this escalates—when this escalates—they’ll try to move people south. Refugees. We need to be prepared.”
“For what, sir?”
Hassan stared at the maps showing the escalating situation. The Gaza Strip, that narrow rectangle of trapped humanity, was erupting in violence that would trigger violence in return. Whatever happened today, whatever happened in the weeks and months that followed, it would end at his door. The gate through which people could not pass. The wall that separated Gaza from the possibility of escape.
“For everything,” he said. “Prepare for everything.”
YASMIN — 7:30 AM
The sound woke her—not the rockets, which she had learned to sleep through, but the silence between them. A different kind of silence, charged with something she could not name.
She found her mother in the front room, staring at the phone. Fatima’s face was pale, her hands shaking.
“Mama? What’s happening?”
“Your father called. He said—” Fatima stopped, swallowed, continued. “He said we should stay inside. Not to go anywhere. The news—”
They turned on the television, the battery-powered one they kept for when the electricity was out. The Arabic channels were showing footage that made no sense: armed men in Israeli communities, fires burning, helicopters in the distance. The Israeli channels, when they could pick them up, were showing the same thing from a different angle—the victims, the bodies, the scale of what was happening.
“Baba did this,” Yasmin said quietly. It was not a question.
Her mother said nothing. Her silence was answer enough.
Yasmin watched the footage—the smoke, the gunfire, the chaos—and felt something she had never felt before. Not pride, not satisfaction, not the victory that the commentators were already proclaiming. She felt horror. Horror at what was happening to the people on the screens, Israeli civilians who had done nothing except live in houses that were once Palestinian, who were dying now because their government and her father’s organization had been unable to find any other way out of the trap they had built together.
And beneath the horror, something worse: the certain knowledge that what was coming in response would be even more terrible.
The fish have struck, she thought, remembering the metaphor she had been taught as a child. Now the sea will burn.
IBRAHIM — 10:00 AM
The reports were exceeding expectations.
Multiple communities overrun. Military bases captured. Hundreds of prisoners taken—soldiers and civilians alike—being transported back to Gaza through the breach points. The rocket barrage had overwhelmed Iron Dome in the initial hours, allowing the ground forces to operate without effective air cover.
But Ibrahim saw the limits too.
The Israeli response was mobilizing. Helicopters and aircraft were arriving, though they struggled to engage fighters who had deliberately positioned themselves among civilian hostages. The breach points that had been secured in the first hours were coming under counterattack. The withdrawal back to Gaza would be costly.
“We should begin pulling back the forces,” he told the senior commander. “We’ve achieved more than we expected. If we stay too long—”
“We stay until we’ve taken everyone we can take. Every hostage is leverage. Every prisoner is a negotiating chip.”
Ibrahim understood the logic. He also understood that hostages were not just chips—they were human beings whose lives would now be entangled with his, whose families would suffer as his people suffered, whose fate would determine whether anything was gained from the bloodshed of this day.
Is it worth it?
The question returned, as it always did. He watched the screens showing young men—boys, some of them—being loaded into vehicles for transport to Gaza. Israeli soldiers, yes. Also civilians. Elderly people. Women. Children.
What had he helped create?
He had built tunnels. He had created options. He had enabled the moment. What his comrades did with those options, in this moment, was something he had not fully controlled and could not now undo.
The operation continued. The hostages were taken. And somewhere in the back of Ibrahim’s mind, a calculation began: not of victory or defeat, but of the cost that would now be exacted, on both sides, for years to come.
DAVID — 2:00 PM
By mid-afternoon, the scale of the disaster was becoming clear.
The attack had killed over a thousand Israelis—the exact number was still being counted, might take days or weeks to confirm. More than two hundred people had been taken hostage. Multiple communities had been devastated. The music festival had become a massacre.
David sat in the operations center, watching the feeds, processing the intelligence, trying to understand how everything he had spent his career building had failed so completely.
“They knew everything,” he said to no one in particular. “The locations of our units. The response times. The weaknesses in the fence. They knew when we would be weakest and exactly how to exploit it.”
“They’ve been planning this for years.”
“We knew they were planning something. I wrote reports—”
“Everyone wrote reports. The framework said they were deterred.”
The framework. The conceptzia. The model that had predicted Hamas behavior based on rational self-interest, that had concluded they would never risk an operation of this scale because the retaliation would be devastating.
The model had been correct about the retaliation. It had been wrong about everything else.
Hamas had not been deterred. Hamas had been waiting. Waiting for the moment when the conditions favored action, when Israeli defenses were weakest, when the regional situation made inaction more costly than action. They had accumulated capabilities for decades and spent them in a single morning, knowing that what followed would be terrible, accepting that cost because they had calculated—correctly or not—that the alternative was worse.
Patient accumulation of advantage. David remembered the phrase now. He had read it somewhere, years ago, in a captured document analyzing guerrilla warfare theory. The doctrine of the weak against the strong: do not seek decisive battle until conditions permit decisive victory.
Hamas had sought decisive battle. Whether they would achieve decisive victory remained to be seen. But they had demonstrated something that could not be undone: that Israel’s technological superiority, its walls and sensors and drones, could be defeated by patience and coordination and the willingness to pay any price.
The war that would follow would not be like the previous wars. David knew this with certainty. The scale of the attack demanded a response of unprecedented force. Gaza would be invaded. The tunnels would be targeted. The population would suffer as it had never suffered before.
And somewhere in the rubble and the darkness, Hamas would survive. Because that was what they did. That was what they had always done.
Endure. Rebuild. Wait.
YASMIN — 6:00 PM
By evening, the Israeli retaliation had begun.
The airstrikes came in waves, hitting targets across Gaza—Hamas infrastructure, yes, but also apartment buildings, roads, anything that might contain fighters or tunnels or the command structure that had launched the morning’s attack. The sound was constant now, a rhythm of destruction that Yasmin knew from previous wars but that seemed different this time. Heavier. More sustained.
Her father had not returned. Her mother was praying, had been praying for hours, the words blurring into a continuous murmur. Yasmin sat by the window, watching the flashes on the horizon, feeling each impact in her chest.
She thought about the footage she had seen that morning. The Israeli civilians dying in their homes. The young people at the festival, gunned down while trying to flee. The hostages being dragged into vehicles, their faces frozen in terror.
She thought about her father, somewhere underground, directing operations or hiding from the bombs or already dead—she did not know which.
She thought about the boy in the shelter, years ago, the one who had stared at nothing with eyes that had seen too much. She had tried to write about him, to capture what his expression meant. Now she understood.
It was the face of someone who had realized that there was no escape. That the violence would continue until nothing was left. That the trap they were all caught in had no exit, only walls that moved inward with each cycle, crushing everyone inside.
She opened her hidden box and took out the notebook where she had been writing her observations. She turned to a fresh page and began to record what she had seen and felt on this day—the day the fish struck and the sea began to burn.
October 7, 2023
Today something ended. I don’t know what began.
They are calling it a victory. I saw what victory looks like. It looks like people dying on both sides, like my father’s face when he left last night, like my mother’s hands shaking as she prays for a miracle that will not come.
The retaliation has started. I can hear it. Feel it. The bombs will fall for days, weeks, months. My friends will die. My neighbors will die. Maybe I will die.
And for what? What was gained today that was worth what was lost?
I asked my father once if it was worth it. He said he didn’t know. I think he still doesn’t know. I think no one knows. We are all trapped in something we cannot escape, doing terrible things to each other because we cannot imagine another way.
Somewhere tonight, Israeli mothers are crying for children who will not come home. Palestinian mothers are crying too, have been crying for seventy-five years. The crying never stops. It only changes who is crying loudest.
I am sixteen years old. I have seen three wars and now a fourth has begun. I will probably see more before I am done. This is my life. This is what was chosen for me before I was born.
The sea did not choose to be a sea. But the sea is burning now, and the fish are burning with it.
End of Chapter Six
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
October 8 - November 2023
“The enemy will pass slowly from the offensive to the defensive. The blitzkrieg will transform itself into a war of long duration. Thus, the enemy will be caught in a dilemma: He has to drag out the war in order to win it and does not possess, on the other hand, the psychological and political means to fight a long drawn-out war.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, People’s War, People’s Army
IBRAHIM — October 9, 2023
Two days after the operation, Ibrahim emerged from the command bunker for the first time.
The world above was already transformed. Smoke rose from multiple points across Gaza City. The constant drone of aircraft—Israeli jets circling, waiting for targets, or drones surveilling the devastation they had wrought—filled the air. The streets were emptying as people fled south, responding to the evacuation orders that the Israelis had begun issuing. One million people told to leave their homes within twenty-four hours. An impossibility presented as a humanitarian gesture.
Ibrahim walked through the rubble of what had been a residential building. The strike had come sometime in the night—he had felt the impact underground, another shudder among dozens. Now there were rescue workers pulling bodies from the concrete, families gathered around the perimeter, waiting to learn if their loved ones had survived.
Is it worth it?
The question no longer mattered. The calculus had been made. The operation had succeeded beyond anything they had dared hope—over a thousand Israelis killed, more than two hundred hostages taken, the myth of Israeli invulnerability shattered. But now came the part they had always known would follow.
His phone buzzed. A message from one of the tunnel commanders: Israeli ground forces massing at the border. Preliminary reconnaissance suggested a full-scale invasion within days.
Ibrahim had prepared for this. They all had. The tunnels would shelter fighters, the population would be used as cover, the world would watch as Gaza burned and opinion would shift against Israel. That was the theory. That was what they had calculated.
But standing here, watching rescue workers pull a child’s body from the rubble, Ibrahim found the calculus harder to accept than it had been in the abstract of the planning sessions.
He returned underground. There was work to do.
DAVID — October 12, 2023
The invasion planning was proceeding at unprecedented speed.
David sat in the strategy room, surrounded by maps and screens and officers arguing about approach vectors, force concentration, tunnel detection, civilian evacuation. The Prime Minister had announced the objective: the complete destruction of Hamas. An objective that David knew—that everyone in this room knew, though no one would say—was almost certainly unachievable.
“The tunnels are the key,” one of the ground commanders was saying. “We’ve mapped approximately 350 miles of underground infrastructure, but that’s probably an underestimate. They’ve had seventeen years to dig.”
“Our assessment is that destroying the tunnel network will require systematic demolition of surface structures,” another officer added. “Anything that could provide tunnel access must be considered a potential military target.”
David did the math in his head. Systematic demolition of surface structures. In one of the most densely populated places on Earth. Two million people. Sixty percent of them under eighteen.
“And the hostages?” he asked.
Silence.
“The hostages are somewhere in that tunnel network. Along with the civilian population we’re evacuating to the south. Our intelligence suggests Hamas is dispersing them, moving them constantly, using them as shields.”
“Then any ground operation risks—”
“We know what it risks.” The commander’s voice was sharp. “The government has made its decision. Total victory or nothing. We execute the plan.”
David understood. The scale of the October 7 attack demanded a response of equivalent scale. The public wanted vengeance, the government needed to demonstrate strength, and the only tool available was overwhelming military force. The fact that overwhelming military force had never successfully eliminated a guerrilla movement in occupied territory—this fact would be ignored, as it always was, until the evidence became impossible to dismiss.
He thought of his reports, the ones he had written for years warning of Hamas capability accumulation. The ones that had been assessed as “noise” and filed away. Now those capabilities had been unleashed, and the response would be a ground war in urban terrain against an enemy that had spent decades preparing to fight exactly this war.
The grinding had begun.
HASSAN — October 15, 2023
The Rafah crossing remained closed.
Hassan sat in his office, reviewing the daily reports. On the Gaza side, tens of thousands of people had gathered, desperate to escape the bombing. The Egyptian military had deployed additional forces along the border. The message was clear: no mass exodus would be permitted.
His phone rang. The Minister’s office.
“The Americans are pressuring us to open the crossing for humanitarian aid,” the Minister’s aide said. “We’ve agreed to a limited convoy system. Medical supplies, some food. Nothing that could be used by Hamas.”
“And civilians? Refugees?”
“Controlled departures only. Foreign nationals, dual citizens. Palestinian civilians remain in Gaza.”
Hassan hung up. He walked to the window and looked out at the Sinai desert, the emptiness that stretched between Egypt and the disaster unfolding kilometers away. Somewhere beyond his sight, millions of people were trapped between an advancing army and a closed border.
He thought of his grandfather’s words: The border is a decision. Consequences accumulate.
The decision had been made long ago. Let Palestinians remain useful as victims, dangerous as neighbors. Let them stay in their camps, their besieged territories, their open-air prison. Support them rhetorically, condemn Israel performatively, but never—never—allow them to become Egypt’s problem.
The consequences of that decision were accumulating now, measured in bodies and displacement and suffering that Egypt would watch from a safe distance, expressing concern while changing nothing.
The first aid convoy crossed the next day. Forty trucks. Enough to demonstrate humanitarian concern. Not nearly enough to matter.
YASMIN — October 20, 2023
They left Jabalia on the third day of the evacuation order.
Her mother had resisted at first, insisting they wait for Ibrahim, that he would come for them, that they could not leave without knowing where he was. But by October 10, the bombing of northern Gaza had become constant, and the choice was no longer between leaving and staying—it was between leaving and dying.
They joined the thousands walking south on Salah al-Din Road, the main artery connecting Gaza City to Khan Younis and beyond. Yasmin carried a single bag with clothes, documents, her hidden notebook. Her mother carried what food they could gather and the family photographs that had survived three previous wars. They left everything else behind.
The road was chaos. Vehicles packed with families. Donkey carts loaded with possessions. People on foot carrying children, dragging suitcases, pushing wheelchairs. And everywhere, the sound of jets overhead, the constant awareness that at any moment the road itself might become a target.
“Don’t look back,” her mother said.
Yasmin looked back anyway. Behind them, pillars of smoke rose from the neighborhoods they had called home. Each pillar marked a building destroyed, a family displaced or killed, a piece of the only world she had ever known erased.
They walked for hours. The sun was brutal, the road crowded, the pace agonizingly slow. Around them, Yasmin heard fragments of conversation—families trying to reach relatives in the south, people discussing which areas were being bombed, rumors about Israeli ground forces already crossing the border.
At one point, the road split around a crater where an airstrike had hit a convoy the day before. The burned hulks of vehicles lay twisted at the edge, and people picked their way around them, trying not to look at what remained inside.
Yasmin looked. She had stopped looking away months ago. Years ago. If she was going to survive this, she needed to see it clearly.
Today we became refugees, she wrote in her notebook that night, huddled in a relative’s house in Khan Younis that was already crowded with other displaced families. We left everything. We don’t know if we’ll ever go back. We don’t know if there will be anything to go back to.
My mother keeps praying. I’ve stopped. I don’t think God is listening. I don’t think anyone is listening. The world is watching us die on their screens and doing nothing.
My father is somewhere underground, if he’s still alive. Doing what he believes is necessary. Building the tunnels, planning the resistance, waiting for the moment that will come again, because moments like this always come again.
I am sixteen years old and I am tired of waiting for moments that destroy everything.
DAVID — October 27, 2023
The ground invasion began.
David watched the feeds from the operations center as Israeli forces crossed into northern Gaza. Tanks, infantry, engineering units for tunnel detection and demolition. The largest military operation Israel had conducted since 1982.
The first day went according to plan. The outer defenses were breached. Tunnels were located and destroyed. Hamas resistance was sporadic—they were drawing Israeli forces inward, as any competent guerrilla force would do, preserving their strength for the fighting in urban terrain.
By the second day, the complications began.
Hamas fighters emerged from tunnel shafts behind advancing units, attacked, and disappeared. IEDs were everywhere—under roads, in buildings, rigged to everything. The civilian population, despite evacuation orders, was still present in enormous numbers, and every engagement risked casualties that would be broadcast worldwide.
“They prepared for this,” David said to the commander beside him. “They spent years preparing exactly for this scenario.”
“We prepared too.”
“We prepared to win. They prepared to not lose. Those are different things.”
The commander did not respond. On the screens, Israeli forces were advancing meter by meter into the urban canyons of northern Gaza, where every window might hide a sniper, every building might contain a tunnel entrance, every civilian might be—or might be standing next to—a Hamas fighter.
The grinding would continue. Months, at minimum. Maybe years. And at the end of it, what would be left? A destroyed territory, a traumatized population, and an organization that would rebuild, as it always had, as all guerrilla movements did when they survived the initial onslaught.
David thought of his resignation letter, already drafted, sitting on his computer. He would submit it when this was over—or when it became clear that “over” was a concept that no longer applied.
IBRAHIM — November 3, 2023
The tunnels held.
Israeli forces had penetrated northern Gaza, were systematically destroying buildings and infrastructure, were locating and demolishing some of the network. But the tunnels held. The fighters who had retreated underground were still there, still able to emerge and strike and disappear, still moving through passages the Israelis had not found.
Ibrahim moved between command posts, coordinating operations, receiving reports from the various sectors. Casualties were high—they had expected this, planned for it—but the network remained functional. The hostages remained secure, dispersed across multiple locations, their continued existence the only leverage Hamas possessed.
And the world was watching.
This was the calculation that had underlain everything. Not military victory—that was impossible against Israeli firepower. But endurance. Survival. The ability to absorb punishment and continue fighting while the cameras broadcast Palestinian suffering to global audiences.
The international condemnation of Israel was growing. Aid agencies were documenting the humanitarian catastrophe. Governments that had initially supported Israel’s right to defend itself were beginning to call for ceasefires. The longer the war continued, the more the narrative would shift.
Patient accumulation, Ibrahim thought. Not of tunnels this time, but of something else—international pressure, diplomatic isolation, the slow erosion of Israel’s moral position that occurred whenever they unleashed their full military power on a captive population.
But accumulation cut both ways. Every day of the war accumulated more destruction, more death, more trauma. For both sides, but especially for Gaza. The northern part of the Strip was becoming uninhabitable. Hundreds of thousands of people were crammed into shelters in the south. Food, water, medical supplies—all were running desperately short.
Is it worth it?
Ibrahim no longer asked the question. He no longer had the luxury of doubt. The operation had been launched, the war had begun, and his only duty now was to ensure that Hamas survived to fight another day. Everything else—the dead, the displaced, the endless suffering—would have to be borne by people who had not chosen this war but who had no choice but to endure it.
That was the nature of protracted conflict. The weak endured what they must until the strong grew tired of killing.
He did not know how long that would take. He knew only that the tunnels held, and that the grinding had barely begun.
YASMIN — November 15, 2023
The ceasefire came as a surprise.
After six weeks of bombing, of displacement, of reports of thousands dead, the announcement came: a temporary pause. Humanitarian releases on both sides—hostages from Gaza, prisoners from Israeli jails. Seven days to breathe, to count the dead, to assess what remained.
Yasmin watched the footage of hostages being released—elderly people, mostly, women and children, their faces showing the trauma of weeks underground. She watched the footage of Palestinian prisoners returning to their families, some of them held for years on charges she did not understand. She watched the celebration in the streets, the brief explosion of hope that maybe, somehow, the war was ending.
Her mother wept. For relief, for grief, for the uncertainty that remained. Her father was still alive—word had reached them through the network—but they did not know where, could not contact him, could only wait and hope.
“Maybe it’s over,” her mother said.
Yasmin did not believe this. She had lived through three wars before this one. She knew how ceasefires worked. They were pauses, not endings. They were opportunities to regroup, to count casualties, to prepare for the next phase.
She opened her notebook and wrote:
November 15, 2023
They call it a ceasefire but it feels like holding breath. The bombs have stopped but nothing has been resolved. The hostages are being released, some of them, but not all. The prisoners are returning, some of them, but not all. The war is paused but not ended.
I went outside today for the first time in weeks without fear of immediate death. The streets of Khan Younis are crowded with displaced people—hundreds of thousands of us, crammed into a space that cannot hold us, waiting for permission to return to homes that may no longer exist.
Everyone is celebrating. I cannot celebrate. I can only see what comes next: the ceasefire will end, the bombing will resume, and the grinding will continue until nothing is left.
My father believes in patient accumulation. Store up capabilities, wait for the right moment, strike when conditions favor action. But what is accumulated when everything is destroyed? What is won when everyone loses?
I am sixteen years old and I understand something that the strategists and commanders do not: there is no victory in this war. There is only survival and suffering, cycling forever, each generation inheriting the trap that the previous generation could not escape.
The ceasefire will end. The war will continue. And I will keep writing, because someone must record what is happening here, even if no one is listening.
DAVID — November 24, 2023
The ceasefire was extended once, then again, then collapsed.
David had known it would. The terms were fundamentally incompatible—Israel demanded the return of all hostages; Hamas demanded a permanent end to the war; neither could accept the other’s conditions. The pause had allowed humanitarian aid to trickle in, had permitted some hostages to return, had given both sides time to assess and regroup.
And then the fighting resumed.
“We’re back to square one,” one of the commanders observed in the daily briefing. “Northern Gaza is mostly secured, but they’re still operating from the tunnel network. The southern population centers remain largely untouched. At this rate, the operation could continue for months.”
Months. David had calculated this from the beginning. The timeline required to “destroy Hamas”—if such destruction were even possible—would extend far beyond what anyone publicly admitted. They were facing a guerrilla force that had spent seventeen years preparing for exactly this scenario, embedded in a civilian population of two million people, with a tunnel network that might take years to fully neutralize.
And the hostages. Still more than a hundred people held somewhere in that network. Their continued captivity constrained Israeli operations, created domestic political pressure, divided the war cabinet between those who prioritized military objectives and those who prioritized rescue.
They were not irrational, David reminded himself. They calculated this exactly. The hostages are not just leverage—they are a trap, forcing us to choose between objectives we cannot reconcile.
The war would continue. The grinding would continue. And somewhere in the darkness beneath Gaza, men like the one who had built those tunnels were waiting, patient as always, for the next phase of a conflict that had no end.
HASSAN — November 30, 2023
The border remained a controlled trickle.
Aid convoys were crossing now—more than the initial forty trucks, but still far less than needed. Humanitarian agencies estimated that Gaza required 500 trucks per day to address basic needs. Egypt was permitting perhaps fifty on a good day.
Hassan processed the reports. Fuel shortages shutting down hospitals. Clean water systems collapsing. Disease beginning to spread in the overcrowded shelters. The humanitarian catastrophe that the world had feared was now unfolding in real time, documented by journalists and aid workers who could not understand why more was not being done.
He understood. The calculus was the same as it had always been. Support Palestinians rhetorically, contain them physically, never allow their crisis to become Egypt’s crisis. Let Israel bear the moral condemnation. Let the world demand action. Egypt would express concern, would allow limited relief, would host international conferences calling for peace—and would keep the border closed to mass migration.
The consequences were accumulating. Not just in Gaza, but in the international perception of Egypt’s role. Some commentators were beginning to call it complicity. Some activists were demanding that Egypt open the border unconditionally, allow refugees to flee the war zone, provide sanctuary to a population that had nowhere else to go.
Egypt would not. Could not, by its own logic. To accept mass Palestinian displacement would be to solve Israel’s problem, to ease the pressure for a political solution, to establish a precedent that Palestinians could be transferred out of their homeland whenever the violence made remaining impossible.
So the border remained closed. The trickle continued. And Hassan watched the catastrophe unfold from his office, knowing that he was part of the machinery that enabled it, that his career had been built on the containment of precisely this kind of suffering.
The border is a decision. Consequences accumulate.
His grandfather’s words. A truth that was becoming harder to bear with each report of children dying for lack of medicine that sat in warehouses on the Egyptian side, waiting for permission that came too slowly and brought too little.
End of Chapter Seven
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
December 2023 – October 2024
“There is no such thing as a short cut in war. Victory comes only through long and protracted struggle, through patience and perseverance, through sacrifice and hardship. The road is long, but at the end of the road is victory.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp
December 2023 – October 2024
“In a protracted war, defeat is avoidable if one does not allow oneself to be drawn into a quick decisive engagement on unfavorable terms. Victory is achievable if one maintains the struggle until the conditions for decisive action ripen.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, People’s War, People’s Army
YASMIN — December 2023
Winter came to Gaza.
Not the cold of northern climates—Yasmin had read about snow, had seen pictures of white landscapes that seemed as foreign as the surface of the moon—but the cold of concrete floors in overcrowded shelters, of nights without heat, of blankets shared among too many bodies. The kind of cold that settled into bones and would not leave.
The family had moved three times since October. Jabalia to Khan Younis to Rafah, each time driven further south by the advancing line of destruction. Now they lived in a school building repurposed as a shelter, sharing two classrooms with forty other people, sleeping on mats spread across the floor where children had once sat learning mathematics and Arabic.
Her mother had stopped talking about returning. The news from the north was apocalyptic—entire neighborhoods flattened, hospitals destroyed, infrastructure demolished so thoroughly that even if they could return, there would be nothing to return to. Their apartment building in Jabalia no longer existed. Yasmin had seen the satellite images, shared in encrypted messages among those who still had phone charge and data. A crater where their kitchen had been. Rubble where her bedroom had been. Seventy years of family life erased in a single airstrike.
“Your father is alive,” her mother said one morning, the first good news in weeks.
The message had come through the network—the informal communication channels that Hamas maintained even as Israel destroyed the visible infrastructure. Ibrahim had survived. He was still underground, still operational, still directing whatever remained of the resistance.
Yasmin did not know how to feel about this. Relief, yes—he was her father, she loved him. But also something else, something she was not ready to name. He had helped plan October 7. He had built the tunnels, created the capability, enabled the moment. And now fifty thousand people were dead, millions were displaced, and her mother wept every night for a home they would never see again.
Is it worth it?
She wrote the question in her notebook, surrounded by sleeping strangers in a classroom that smelled of unwashed bodies and fear. She had stopped believing there was an answer.
DAVID — January 2024
Four months into the ground operation, the limits were becoming visible.
David reviewed the daily assessments in his office, surrounded by maps marked with the areas “cleared” of Hamas—a term he had grown to distrust. Cleared meant destroyed. Cleared meant every building that might contain a tunnel entrance demolished. Cleared meant a landscape of rubble where hundreds of thousands of people had lived their entire lives.
And still Hamas operated.
“They’re reorganizing in the south,” one of his analysts reported. “Our ground forces are approaching Khan Younis, but the fighters are dispersing, moving into the civilian population. The tunnel network in the south is less developed than in the north, but they’re adapting.”
“And the hostages?”
“Still no confirmed locations. We believe they’re being moved constantly, dispersed across multiple sites. Any rescue operation would risk—”
“I know what it would risk.”
The hostages had become the central contradiction of the war. Israel had launched the largest military operation in its history, was systematically destroying an entire territory, had killed tens of thousands of people—and still could not rescue the civilians taken on October 7. Every proposed rescue operation carried unacceptable risk. Every negotiation framework collapsed over the same fundamental impasse: Israel wanted all hostages returned before any permanent ceasefire; Hamas wanted a permanent ceasefire before returning all hostages.
They planned this, David thought. They knew exactly what the hostages would mean.
The hostages were not just leverage for negotiation. They were a strategic trap, forcing Israel to choose between military objectives and humanitarian ones, creating domestic political pressure that constrained operations, dividing the war cabinet and the public. Every day the war continued, families of hostages demanded their return. Every day the war continued, Hamas demonstrated that Israeli military power could not solve all problems.
This was what guerrilla warfare looked like in the modern era. Not pitched battles, but the patient application of pressure at points of vulnerability. Not military victory, but the erosion of the enemy’s will to continue.
HASSAN — February 2024
The humanitarian situation had become unspeakable.
Hassan read the reports from the UN agencies, the NGOs, the international observers who were documenting what they called one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes in modern history. Famine conditions spreading through northern Gaza. Disease outbreaks in the overcrowded shelters of the south. Medical system collapse—hospitals destroyed or out of supplies, doctors performing amputations without anesthesia, children dying of treatable conditions because medicines could not cross the border.
The border that he controlled.
Egypt had increased the aid flow—pressure from the Americans, from the Europeans, from the international community that was watching with increasing horror. But “increased” was relative. Two hundred trucks per day when five hundred were needed. Fuel strictly limited. Medical supplies delayed for “inspection.” Every concession accompanied by restrictions that slowed the relief to a trickle.
“We cannot be seen as facilitating Hamas operations,” the Minister had said. “Whatever aid enters Gaza, they will divert a portion. This is known.”
So people starved while bureaucrats calculated acceptable levels of deprivation. So children died while officials debated inspection protocols. So Egypt maintained its position as a concerned humanitarian actor while keeping the gate closed against the millions who wanted only to escape the hell on the other side.
Hassan had begun having dreams. In them, he stood at the Rafah crossing while an endless line of people approached—men, women, children, the elderly, the wounded, all of them looking at him with eyes that asked the same question: Why won’t you let us through?
He woke from these dreams covered in sweat, the answer caught in his throat: Because you are useful as victims but dangerous as neighbors. Because your suffering serves a political purpose. Because the border is a decision, and the decision was made long before I was born.
IBRAHIM — March 2024
The tunnels in Khan Younis were compromised.
Israeli ground forces had penetrated the city, were systematically demolishing buildings and infrastructure, had discovered several major tunnel entrances. Ibrahim had relocated twice in the past week, moving from one underground position to another as the perimeter contracted.
But the network held. Damaged, diminished, but operational. Fighters still moved through passages the Israelis had not found. Communications still functioned, allowing coordination between dispersed units. The hostages remained secure, scattered across multiple locations to prevent rescue operations.
This was what Phase 2 looked like in a protracted conflict. Not victory, but survival. Not advancing, but enduring. The weak absorbing punishment from the strong, waiting for the moment when circumstances would shift.
Ibrahim studied the intelligence reports that filtered down through the network. Israeli domestic politics were increasingly fractured—hostage families demanding a deal, war advocates demanding total victory, the coalition government torn between incompatible pressures. International condemnation was growing—UN agencies documenting potential war crimes, legal cases proceeding at the ICJ, diplomatic isolation increasing. The Abraham Accords momentum had stalled—regional normalization on hold while Gaza burned.
These were the accumulations that mattered now. Not tunnels, but pressure. Not weapons, but narrative. Not military position, but political terrain.
Patient accumulation, his mentor Khalil had taught him decades ago. The strong seek quick decisions. The weak seek to extend the struggle until the balance shifts.
The balance had not shifted. But it was shifting. Ibrahim could feel it in the reports, in the changing tone of international discourse, in the cracks appearing in Israeli society. The war that Israel had launched to “destroy Hamas” was destroying Gaza instead—and with every destroyed building, every dead child, every day the hostages remained unreturned, the cost of victory increased.
Israel might win this war. They had the power to flatten every structure, kill every fighter, reduce Gaza to rubble and ash. But they could not win the peace that followed. They could not occupy two million people indefinitely. They could not erase the rage that was being accumulated right now, in every shelter full of displaced families, in every hospital ward where children died for lack of medicine, in every heart that watched the destruction and swore never to forget.
The grinding continued. And Ibrahim, deep underground, waiting for the next phase, understood that this was exactly what he had prepared for.
YASMIN — April 2024
They moved again.
The Israeli advance toward Rafah forced another displacement—hundreds of thousands of people fleeing south toward the border, toward Egypt, toward a crossing that remained closed to all but a trickle of foreign nationals and the severely wounded.
“Where do we go?” her mother asked, voice empty of hope.
There was nowhere to go. The south of Gaza was already packed beyond capacity. Every school, every hospital, every open space had been converted to shelter for the displaced. And now more were coming, driven from Khan Younis and the central areas by the same forces that had driven them from the north.
The family ended up in a tent city near the border—rows of improvised shelters made from plastic sheeting and whatever materials could be scavenged. No running water. No electricity. Sanitation was a pit dug in the sand. Food came from aid distribution points where thousands waited in line for rations that were never enough.
Yasmin turned seventeen in that tent city.
Her mother had saved a can of tuna, had traded something precious for a small cake from a woman who somehow still had the means to bake. They celebrated in the shelter, surrounded by strangers who had become a kind of family through shared displacement.
“Make a wish,” her mother said, holding out the cake with a single candle burning.
Yasmin closed her eyes. She thought about what she had wished for on previous birthdays—toys when she was young, later books, a bicycle, university admission, the normal things that normal people wished for in normal times.
None of those wishes seemed relevant now.
She wished for nothing. She blew out the candle. She ate the cake that tasted like ash in her mouth.
April 15, 2024, she wrote in her notebook that night. Today I am seventeen. I have seen five wars now, if you count the small ones. I have been displaced four times in six months. I have lost my home, my neighborhood, most of my friends. I don’t know if my father is alive.
My mother gave me a cake. She is trying so hard to maintain something normal in a situation that has nothing normal in it. I love her for trying. I hate the world for making her try so hard for so little.
The Israeli army is approaching Rafah. Everyone knows what that means. The last place left will become like all the others—rubble and bodies and survivors who wish they had died. We have nowhere left to go. The border is closed. The sea is closed. The sky is closed.
Someone told me that the world is watching. That international pressure is building. That Israel cannot continue forever. Maybe this is true. But how long is forever when you are seventeen and living in a tent and the bombs keep falling?
I used to believe in something. I don’t remember what. Liberation, maybe. Justice. A future that was different from the past. Now I believe only in survival—one day at a time, one meal at a time, one breath at a time.
The fish are still in the sea. But the sea is evaporating, and soon there will be nothing left but salt.
DAVID — May 2024
The Rafah operation began.
David watched from the operations center as Israeli forces advanced into the last significant population center in Gaza. The planning had been meticulous—evacuation corridors established, “safe zones” designated, warnings issued through every available channel. The execution was as careful as urban warfare allowed.
It was still a catastrophe.
A million people had been crowded into Rafah and its surroundings, driven there by the systematic destruction of everywhere else. Now those million people were being told to move again, to squeeze into smaller and smaller areas, to accept that there was no safe place in Gaza, only less dangerous places that would become dangerous in turn.
“The tunnel network beneath Rafah is extensive,” one of the commanders briefed. “We’ve identified what we believe to be significant Hamas infrastructure, including possible hostage locations. The operation is necessary.”
“And the civilian cost?”
“We’re taking all possible precautions.”
David no longer believed in “possible precautions.” He had seen what possible precautions meant over seven months of warfare—thousands of dead children, hospitals destroyed, an entire territory rendered uninhabitable. The precautions existed, were documented, were pointed to when questions were asked. They changed nothing about the fundamental nature of the operation: the systematic destruction of a densely populated urban area in pursuit of an enemy that could not be destroyed without destroying everything else.
He thought about the resignation letter still sitting on his computer. Several times he had been on the verge of submitting it. Each time something had held him back—duty, obligation, the belief that his presence might somehow moderate the worst impulses of the operation.
But there was no moderation. There was only the grinding logic of the war itself, which demanded escalation until the objective was achieved or until the objective became visibly unachievable. And the objective—the complete destruction of Hamas—remained as elusive as it had been on October 8.
Hamas fighters continued to operate from the ruins. New recruits replaced those killed. The organization’s political leadership remained intact in Qatar and Turkey. The hostages remained unreturned. And with every passing month, every destroyed neighborhood, every documented atrocity, the strategic position worsened even as the tactical position improved.
They were winning the battles and losing the war. David had known this would happen. He had predicted it in reports that no one wanted to read. Now he watched it unfold, day by day, strike by strike, body by body.
IBRAHIM — July 2024
The Rafah offensive forced the network to disperse further.
Ibrahim moved through tunnels that ran beneath the border zone, passages that had originally been dug for smuggling and had been repurposed as the military network in other areas was destroyed. The conditions were worse here—narrower passages, less reinforcement, greater risk of collapse. But they were functional, and functionality was all that mattered now.
The casualty reports were grim. The organization had lost significant capability—fighters killed, commanders eliminated, infrastructure destroyed. The tunnel network that had taken seventeen years to build was being systematically dismantled, kilometer by kilometer.
But the core survived. The hostages were still held. The ability to launch attacks, however diminished, remained. And the political terrain continued to shift in directions that favored persistence over capitulation.
The ICJ ruling had called for an immediate halt to the Rafah operation. Israel had ignored it, as expected, but the legal framework was being established. The UN agencies were documenting systematic violations of international humanitarian law. Countries that had supported Israel in October were distancing themselves by July. The isolation was becoming impossible to ignore.
Patient accumulation, Ibrahim reminded himself. Not of weapons now, but of legitimacy. Not of tunnels, but of narrative. The war would end eventually—all wars ended—and what mattered was what remained when the fighting stopped.
If Hamas survived as an organization, if the population remained in Gaza, if the hostages could be exchanged for prisoners and a ceasefire, then the strategic calculation of October 7 might yet be vindicated. Not as a military victory, which had never been possible, but as a political disruption—the moment that shattered the normalization process, that returned Palestine to the international agenda, that demonstrated the unacceptability of the status quo.
The cost was terrible. Ibrahim walked through the tunnels and thought of the dead above—the fifty thousand, sixty thousand, seventy thousand who had paid for this disruption with their lives. His neighbors, his relatives, the children of friends he had known for decades. The cost was beyond calculation, beyond justification, beyond anything he had imagined when the planning began.
Is it worth it?
The question had no answer. There was only the next step, and the next, and the persistence that was the only weapon the weak possessed against the strong.
YASMIN — September 2024
The war had lasted almost a year.
Yasmin sat in the tent that had become something like home, writing by the light of a solar lamp that her mother had acquired through trade. Around her, the tent city had developed its own routines—distribution times, prayer times, the informal schedule of survival that emerged in any extended displacement.
She had filled three notebooks since October. Her observations, her thoughts, her attempts to make sense of what was happening. She had started writing in a kind of code, a mix of Arabic and English and invented symbols, out of fear that the notebooks would be discovered and used against her family. Everyone knew that association with Hamas could be fatal. Her father’s role was widely suspected even if not confirmed.
The anniversary approached. One year since the attack that had started everything—or that had continued everything, depending on how you counted history. One year since the border had been breached and the world had changed.
September 27, 2024, she wrote.
In two weeks it will be one year. One year since October 7. One year since my father helped launch an attack that killed over a thousand people. One year since Israel began destroying Gaza in response. One year of this.
The death toll is past sixty thousand now, according to the health ministry. That number means nothing and everything. It is impossible to comprehend sixty thousand deaths. It is impossible to ignore them. Every number is a person—a child, a mother, a grandfather, someone who had a name and a life and dreams that ended in rubble.
I don’t know how many of those deaths my father is responsible for. None, directly—he builds tunnels, he doesn’t fire weapons. All of them, indirectly—he helped create the capability, helped plan the moment, helped ensure that this war would happen.
I love him. I hate what he has done. I don’t know how to hold both of these truths at the same time.
Someone once wrote that the children pay for the wars their parents start. I am paying. All of us are paying—the children on both sides, the ones who died and the ones who survived, the ones who will carry this war inside them for the rest of their lives.
I am seventeen years old. I should be thinking about university, about the future, about the life I want to build. Instead I think about survival—where the next meal will come from, whether the tent will survive the rain, whether the bombs will fall close enough tonight to kill us all.
The sea is almost dry now. The fish are dying. And still the war continues, because wars do not end when they should, only when someone decides to stop fighting, and no one has decided yet.
DAVID — October 2024
One year.
David sat in his office, preparing the assessment he had been asked to write. One year since October 7. One year since everything changed. One year of grinding, attritional warfare that had achieved much and resolved nothing.
The statistics were impressive in certain lights. Hamas military capability significantly degraded. Large portions of the tunnel network destroyed. Senior leadership eliminated. The organization was weaker than it had been since its founding.
But weaker was not defeated. Weaker was not destroyed. Weaker was merely wounded, and wounded organizations did what wounded organizations always did: they adapted, they persisted, they waited for the opportunity to rebuild.
Israel controlled large portions of Gaza now—the “Yellow Line” that divided the territory, the northern areas that had been systematically cleared, the strategic corridors that connected different sectors. But control was not the same as victory. Control required presence, and presence required resources, and resources were finite even for a wealthy nation conducting an open-ended occupation of a hostile territory.
The hostages remained partially unreturned. Negotiations continued in cycles—hope, breakdown, new proposals, new breakdowns. Each round of talks produced partial exchanges that satisfied no one, temporary ceasefires that ended when the terms could not be extended.
And the political terrain had shifted dramatically. Israel’s international position was worse than it had been since 1948. Legal proceedings were advancing. Diplomatic isolation was deepening. The very countries that had stood with Israel in October were distancing themselves now, citing the humanitarian catastrophe, the scale of civilian casualties, the systematic destruction of infrastructure.
They planned for this, David wrote in his assessment. Hamas calculated that Israel’s response would be disproportionate, that the international community would turn against Israel over time, that the cost of military action would exceed the benefit. They were correct. The question now is not whether we can destroy Hamas, but whether destroying Hamas is worth what we have already destroyed in the attempt.
He finished the assessment, reviewed it once, and attached his resignation letter. This time, he would send it. This time, he would not hold back.
The war would continue without him. The grinding would continue. But he would no longer be part of it.
End of Chapter Eight
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
November 2024 – October 2025
“Negotiations at the conference table are often more difficult than battles in the field. The enemy seeks through diplomacy what he cannot achieve through arms. We must be vigilant, patient, and firm.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, on the Paris Peace Accords negotiations
DAVID — November 2024
Civilian life was strange.
David sat in a café in Tel Aviv, reading the news on his phone, watching the world he had helped shape continue without him. His resignation had been accepted with surprising ease—the war machine had no shortage of analysts, and those who doubted the mission were more convenient outside the system than within it.
The news was the same as it had been for months. Negotiations continuing in Doha. Partial ceasefire proposals. Hostage families protesting. Right-wing ministers threatening to collapse the government if any permanent deal was signed. The grinding continued, but the shape of it was changing.
The American election had produced Trump again. This was significant—the new administration was signaling impatience with the Israeli government, was pushing harder for a comprehensive deal, was suggesting that the unlimited support of the past year might have limits after all. Netanyahu was scheduled to visit Mar-a-Lago in coming weeks. The dynamics were shifting.
David’s phone buzzed. A former colleague, someone still inside the system.
“They’re close to something,” the message read. “Bigger than the November pauses. Real framework.”
He did not respond. He was no longer part of that world, by choice, by necessity. But he found he could not stop watching.
HASSAN — December 2024
The diplomatic pressure was intensifying.
Hassan reviewed the cables from Cairo—communications from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the intelligence services, the presidency. Egypt was being pushed toward a more active mediating role, was being asked to guarantee aspects of the ceasefire framework, was being told that regional stability depended on resolving the Gaza crisis before it spread further.
The crisis was already spreading. The West Bank was increasingly violent—settler attacks, military raids, armed Palestinian groups that were growing in strength and ambition. Jordan was nervous. Saudi normalization remained on hold. The Iranian axis had been dealt severe blows—Hezbollah degraded, Assad fallen—but instability served no one’s interests.
“Egypt must be part of the solution,” the Foreign Minister had said in his last briefing. “We have delayed as long as we can.”
What this meant in practice was unclear. Open the border? Accept refugees? Deploy Egyptian forces to Gaza as part of an international stabilization mission? Each option carried risks that the Egyptian government had spent decades avoiding.
But the alternative—continued humanitarian catastrophe, regional instability, international condemnation—was becoming unsustainable. Even the calculations that had kept the border closed were shifting as the costs accumulated.
The border is a decision. Consequences accumulate.
Hassan’s grandfather had been right. The consequences had accumulated to the point where the original decision was becoming impossible to maintain. Something would have to change.
IBRAHIM — January 2025
The first phase of the ceasefire went into effect.
Ibrahim emerged from the tunnels for the first time in months, into a Gaza that he barely recognized. The northern areas where he had spent his life were devastated beyond recognition—not damaged, not destroyed, but erased. Where neighborhoods had stood, there was rubble. Where buildings had risen, there were craters. The infrastructure of daily life—roads, power lines, water mains, schools, hospitals—was gone.
And still the population remained.
This was the fact that mattered most. Despite the destruction, despite the death toll that exceeded seventy thousand, despite the displacement that had affected virtually every family in the territory—the population remained. They had not fled to Egypt (the border was closed), had not been transferred out of Gaza (the international community would not permit it), had not simply vanished as some in the Israeli government had hoped.
The first phase of the ceasefire brought limited relief. Some hostages released in exchange for Palestinian prisoners. Humanitarian aid increasing. Israeli forces withdrawing from populated areas but maintaining the “Yellow Line” that divided the territory. It was not peace—the framework called for further phases that remained to be negotiated—but it was a pause in the killing.
Ibrahim thought about what this pause meant strategically. Hamas had survived. Weakened, degraded, its infrastructure largely destroyed—but the organization existed, its leadership in Qatar and Turkey remained intact, its fighting force in Gaza was diminished but functional. The objective that Israel had announced—the complete destruction of Hamas—had not been achieved. Could not be achieved without measures that even Israel’s allies would not support.
Patient accumulation, Khalil had taught him. Victory comes not from single battles but from the ability to continue fighting when the enemy wishes the fighting to stop.
The war was pausing. It might resume—the framework was fragile, the terms disputed, the second phase uncertain. But for now, there was breathing room. Time to assess, to rebuild, to prepare for whatever came next.
Ibrahim walked through the ruins of his homeland, past the craters and the rubble and the people who were already beginning the work of survival, and understood that this was not the end. It was merely another phase in a conflict that had no end, only transformations.
YASMIN — February 2025
Her father came home.
It happened without warning—one day he was underground, the next he was standing in the entrance of their tent, older than she remembered, thinner, his hair gone gray in patches. Her mother wept. Yasmin stood frozen, unable to move, unable to speak.
“Yasmin,” he said.
She looked at him. The man who had built the tunnels. The man who had helped plan October 7. The man whose work had contributed to seventy thousand deaths—Israeli and Palestinian alike, combatants and civilians, the intended and the collateral.
Her father.
“I don’t know what to say to you,” she said finally.
He nodded. “I know.”
They stood in silence. Around them, the tent city continued its routines—people moving, children playing, the sounds of survival that had become the soundtrack of displaced life. Her mother hovered between them, wanting reconciliation, afraid of what might be said.
“The notebooks,” Ibrahim said. “Your mother told me. You’ve been writing.”
Yasmin tensed. “They’re mine.”
“I’m not asking to read them. I’m asking—” He paused, searching for words. “I’m asking if you wrote the truth.”
“What truth?”
“Whatever truth you saw. Whatever truth you felt.”
Yasmin thought about the notebooks, hidden in their waterproof container beneath her sleeping mat. The observations, the questions, the doubt that had grown page by page throughout the long months of the war.
“I wrote what I saw,” she said. “I wrote about the bombs and the displacement and the people who died. I wrote about you—what you did, what you helped create. I wrote about myself—what I thought, what I felt, what I couldn’t understand.”
“And what couldn’t you understand?”
“Whether it was worth it.” The question she had been asking for years, the question that had no answer. “Whether any of this was worth it.”
Ibrahim was quiet for a long moment. Then: “I don’t know.”
“You don’t know?”
“I believed it was necessary. I believed we had no other choice. I still believe—” He stopped, started again. “I still believe that something had to change, that the world had forgotten us, that violence was the only language anyone would hear. But whether the cost was worth what we achieved, what we might achieve—that question I cannot answer. Not yet. Maybe not ever.”
Yasmin studied her father’s face, looking for the certainty she had always assumed was there. She found exhaustion instead. Doubt. Something that might have been grief.
“The war is pausing,” she said. “They’re negotiating.”
“Yes.”
“Will it end?”
“This war will end. Another will begin. That is how it has always been.”
“Then what was the point? What was any of it for?”
Ibrahim did not answer. He had no answer to give.
DAVID — March 2025
The ceasefire had collapsed and resumed twice.
David followed the news from his apartment, no longer an insider but still unable to look away. The first phase had achieved its limited objectives—hostages released, prisoners exchanged, aid increased—but the transition to phase two had stalled on the same fundamental issues that had blocked every previous attempt at resolution.
Israel demanded Hamas disarmament. Hamas demanded a complete Israeli withdrawal. Neither could accept the other’s conditions without undermining their core position. And so the framework, like all frameworks before it, ground against the immovable obstacles that defined the conflict.
The new American administration was pushing harder than its predecessor. Trump had threatened “hell to pay” if the hostages weren’t returned, had signaled that unlimited support for Israeli military operations was not guaranteed, had deployed envoys to push both sides toward a more comprehensive deal. The pressure was having effects—Netanyahu’s government was fractured, the far-right ministers threatening to collapse the coalition if any permanent deal was signed, the center demanding resolution of the hostage crisis at any cost.
David thought about the assessments he had written, the warnings he had tried to issue. He had predicted that military victory would be elusive, that Hamas could not be destroyed without destroying Gaza itself, that the strategic costs would exceed the benefits. He had been correct. The correctness brought no satisfaction.
His phone rang. An unknown number.
“David Amit?”
“Speaking.”
“This is the inquiry commission. We’d like you to testify about intelligence assessments prior to October 7.”
The investigation. He had known it would come eventually—the questions about what had been known, what had been ignored, why the warnings had not been heeded. He had answers, not good ones, but truthful ones. The system had believed what it was designed to believe. The conceptzia had filtered out information that contradicted its assumptions. And a thousand people had died because the framework was wrong.
“I’ll testify,” David said. “I’ll tell them what I know.”
HASSAN — June 2025
The international stabilization force was becoming real.
Hassan reviewed the proposals that were circulating—deployments of Turkish, European, perhaps Arab forces to Gaza as part of the phase two framework. Egypt was being asked to participate, to provide legitimacy and expertise, to help stabilize a territory that Israel could not govern but would not leave.
“We cannot be seen as occupiers,” the Minister had said. “Our role must be humanitarian, not military.”
This was the position: involved but not responsible, present but not controlling. Egypt would help with reconstruction, with governance transition, with the eventual establishment of whatever Palestinian authority emerged from the ruins. But Egypt would not accept mass Palestinian migration, would not absorb the displaced, would not solve the problem that Israel had created and that no one wanted to inherit.
The negotiations continued. Phase two remained uncertain—Hamas had not agreed to disarmament, Israel had not agreed to full withdrawal, the sequencing of steps was bitterly contested. But the framework existed, endorsed by the UN Security Council, supported by the major powers, pressing toward a resolution that might or might not hold.
Hassan thought about the decades he had spent managing the border, maintaining the containment, enabling the siege. He had believed he was serving Egyptian interests, regional stability, the necessary pragmatism of international politics. Now he wondered if all of it had been a mistake—if the containment itself had created the conditions for October 7, if the siege had produced the desperation that made violence inevitable.
The border is a decision. Consequences accumulate.
The consequences had accumulated to this moment: a destroyed territory, a traumatized population, an organization that refused to die, and a world that could no longer look away. Whatever came next, the old frameworks were broken. Something new would have to be built from the rubble.
YASMIN — October 2025
The peace agreement was signed.
Yasmin watched the ceremony on a screen in the tent city—the dignitaries gathering in Egypt, the handshakes and the speeches, the promises of reconstruction and governance and a future that seemed impossible to imagine from where she sat. Her father watched beside her, his face unreadable.
“Is it real?” she asked.
“It’s a piece of paper. Papers can be torn.”
“But it means something. The war is ending.”
“This war is ending. Others will come.”
Yasmin thought about her notebooks, now four of them, documenting two years of destruction and displacement and survival. She had written through the bombing and the displacement, through the ceasefires and the breakdowns, through all the phases of a war that had seemed endless and was now, supposedly, ending.
“I want to publish them,” she said.
Ibrahim turned to look at her. “The notebooks?”
“Edited. Arranged. A witness account of what happened here.”
“That’s dangerous. People will know who you are. Who I am.”
“People should know. Someone has to tell the truth about what happened here. Not the political truth, not the military truth—the human truth. What it felt like to live through this. What it cost.”
Her father was quiet for a long moment. On the screen, officials were signing documents, cameras flashing.
“Your grandfather was a refugee,” Ibrahim said finally. “1948. He never forgot where he came from, what was taken. He passed that memory to me. I passed it to you—not just the memory, but the struggle. The belief that something had to be done.”
“And look what it cost.”
“Yes. Look what it cost.” He turned back to the screen. “If you write the truth, write all of it. Not just the suffering—the choices that led to it. The calculations that seemed rational at the time. The trap that caught all of us, on every side.”
“The trap?”
“The war that couldn’t be won but couldn’t be stopped. The violence that produced only more violence. The generations who inherited conflicts they didn’t choose, who had no options except to continue or to die.” He paused. “That trap. If you can explain it—if anyone can understand it—maybe the next generation will find a way out that we never could.”
Yasmin looked at her father, at the screens showing the peace ceremony, at the tent city that had been her home for eighteen months. She was eighteen now. Old enough to have survived a war. Old enough to document what she had witnessed. Old enough, perhaps, to begin the work of understanding.
“I’ll write it,” she said. “All of it. The truth.”
End of Chapter Nine
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
October 2025 and Beyond
“After the victory, the struggle continues. The enemy’s defeat in battle does not mean the end of the war. The war ends only when the political objectives have been fully achieved—and even then, vigilance must be maintained.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp
October – December 2025
“In protracted conflict, there are no final victories. There are only positions from which to continue the struggle or positions from which to negotiate the terms of continuation.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp, People’s War, People’s Army
IBRAHIM — October 2025
The ceasefire held.
Ibrahim walked through the ruins of Khan Younis, past buildings that had been reduced to rubble, past craters that had once been roads, past the tent cities that stretched toward the horizon. The framework called this “Phase One of post-conflict stabilization.” Ibrahim called it survival—the fragile pause between one phase of violence and the next.
The international stabilization force was deploying. Turkish observers, European peacekeepers, Egyptian liaison officers—all of them moving through the territory, assessing damage, establishing presence. Hamas had not agreed to disarmament, but had agreed to “weapons containment”—a diplomatic fiction that allowed both sides to claim their conditions had been met. The fighters remained, their weapons stored rather than surrendered, their organization intact if diminished.
And the population remained. This was what mattered most. The plan to displace Palestinians out of Gaza—floated by Israeli politicians, rejected by the international community—had failed. The people who had survived the war were still there, still rebuilding, still refusing to vanish. Seventy-five thousand dead, according to the final counts. Millions traumatized. But present. Enduring.
Ibrahim found himself at the site of his old home in Jabalia—a crater now, indistinguishable from the dozens of other craters that marked what had been a neighborhood. Nothing remained. The building where Yasmin had taken her first steps, where Fatima had cooked meals for decades of visitors, where three generations of his family had lived and died—erased as if it had never existed.
He stood at the edge of the crater, looking down into the void.
Is it worth it?
The question that had haunted him for thirty years. The question he had asked before October 7, during the war, in the tunnels as the bombs fell. He had never found an answer.
He looked up at the sky—clear now, no drones visible, no jets circling. A temporary peace. A pause in the killing. The equilibrium restored at a cost that defied calculation.
“We survived,” he said to no one. “That is what we can say. We survived.”
Whether survival was victory, he could not determine. It was, at least, continuation. And continuation was the only weapon the weak possessed against the strong.
DAVID — November 2025
The testimony was exhausting.
David had spent three weeks before the inquiry commission, answering questions about intelligence assessments, about warnings ignored, about the framework of assumptions that had blinded an entire apparatus to the threat materializing before their eyes. The questions were pointed, the commissioners aggressive, the process designed to assign blame for a catastrophe that had killed over a thousand Israelis on October 7.
“You wrote reports warning of Hamas capability accumulation,” one commissioner had said.
“Yes.”
“And those reports were assessed as ‘noise’ and filed away.”
“Yes.”
“And you did not escalate further? Did not insist that your warnings be heard?”
This was the question that haunted him. Had he done enough? Could he have done more? If he had been louder, more insistent, if he had gone outside channels, resigned in protest, leaked to journalists—would it have made a difference?
“I followed procedures,” David said. “I documented my concerns. I escalated through proper channels. The system processed my reports according to its logic.”
“And the system failed.”
“Yes. The system failed.”
The commission would write its report. Blame would be assigned. Reforms would be announced. And then, gradually, the same patterns would reassert themselves—because the patterns were not individual failures but structural ones, built into the way intelligence organizations processed information, filtered dissent, maintained frameworks that had outlived their usefulness.
David walked through Tel Aviv after the testimony, past cafés and shops and people living their lives as if nothing had changed. But everything had changed. The war had revealed something that could not be unseen: that Israeli security was not guaranteed by walls and sensors and technology, that enemies could be patient in ways that defenders could not, that the asymmetric conflict had no solution except negotiated accommodation or eternal vigilance.
Neither option appealed. But those were the only options available.
HASSAN — November 2025
Egypt was in the game now.
Hassan reviewed the deployment orders that had come down from Cairo. Egyptian personnel were crossing into Gaza—not soldiers, but engineers, logistics officers, humanitarian coordinators. The role was carefully defined: reconstruction support, border management, liaison with the international stabilization force. No combat mission. No security responsibility. But presence. Involvement. A change in the decades-old policy of containment from a distance.
“History is being made,” the Minister had said. “Egypt is helping to rebuild Gaza. The world will see our commitment to Palestinian welfare.”
Hassan understood the calculation. The old policy had failed—or rather, had succeeded too well, creating conditions that produced October 7 and the war that followed. The new policy would position Egypt as a constructive partner, would demonstrate regional leadership, would perhaps begin the long process of undoing the damage that fifty years of containment had wrought.
But he also understood the risks. Involvement meant responsibility. Presence meant accountability. If the ceasefire collapsed, if the war resumed, if the reconstruction failed—Egypt would share the blame in ways it had avoided during the decades of studied distance.
The border is a decision. Consequences accumulate.
The decision had changed. The consequences would accumulate in new directions. Whether those consequences would be better or worse than what had come before, no one could say.
Hassan crossed into Gaza for the first time in his career, walking through the Rafah crossing that he had controlled from the other side for twenty years. The destruction was worse than the reports had conveyed—not damage but erasure, not destruction but annihilation. A territory that had held two million people reduced to rubble and tent cities and the stubborn persistence of those who refused to disappear.
“Welcome to Gaza,” his Palestinian counterpart said.
Hassan looked at the ruins, at the people moving through them, at the impossible task of rebuilding what had been destroyed.
“Thank you,” he said. “I’m sorry it took so long.”
YASMIN — December 2025
The notebooks were ready.
Yasmin sat in the tent that had been her home for eighteen months, reviewing the pages she had written throughout the war. Four notebooks, filled with observations and questions and the raw documentation of survival. A witness account of the worst period in Gaza’s history—and Gaza’s history had no shortage of terrible periods.
Her mother had helped her type the handwritten pages into digital form, using a borrowed laptop charged by solar panels. Her father had reviewed the sections about him, had suggested corrections of fact, had not asked her to change anything she had felt or thought. The truth, he had said. Write all of it.
The publisher was a small house in Beirut, willing to take risks that larger publishers would not. The editor had read the manuscript and wept, had called it “essential testimony,” had offered terms that were modest but real. The book would be published under a pseudonym—protection against those who might seek to silence a voice that spoke uncomfortable truths about all sides.
The Patient Earth, she had titled it. Not her title originally—it had come from a phrase her father used, something from the resistance literature he had studied for decades. The earth is patient, the saying went. It absorbs the blood and the tears and the rage, and still it endures.
Yasmin thought about what she had documented. The bombing and the displacement. The tent cities and the hunger. The father who had helped plan the attack and the mother who had prayed for survival. The children she had known who had died, the friends she had lost, the pieces of herself that had been buried in the rubble along with everything else.
She had not written a political argument. She had not assigned blame or demanded justice or called for revolution. She had simply recorded what she had seen—the human reality of a war that had destroyed everything she knew, conducted by actors on all sides who believed they had no other choice.
The trap, her father had called it. The war that couldn’t be won but couldn’t be stopped. The violence that produced only more violence. The generations who inherited conflicts they didn’t choose.
She had tried to explain the trap. Whether anyone would understand it—whether understanding could lead to escape—was beyond her power to determine. She could only document. She could only witness. She could only add her voice to the record of what had happened here, hoping that someday, someone would listen.
The manuscript was submitted. The waiting began.
End of Chapter Ten
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
December 2025
“Each generation must fight its own battles, but it does not fight alone. The struggles of the past live on in the present, and the struggles of the present will shape the future.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp
YASMIN — December 31, 2025
The year ended as it had begun—with waiting.
Yasmin sat on the edge of the tent city, looking out at the Mediterranean. The sea was the only thing that hadn’t changed—still blue, still vast, still closed to Gazans who were forbidden from fishing beyond a few kilometers from shore. Behind her, the sounds of reconstruction mixed with the sounds of survival: hammers and voices and children playing in the rubble, the resilience that had carried her people through seventy-five years of dispossession and would carry them through whatever came next.
She was eighteen now. Old enough to vote, if there were elections. Old enough to marry, if she wanted. Old enough to be called an adult, though she felt nothing like an adult—felt instead like a survivor, like a witness, like someone who had been aged by experience but not matured by it.
Her father was somewhere in the city, meeting with those who were planning the next phase. The ceasefire held, but everyone knew it was temporary—not because anyone wanted more war, but because the underlying conditions that had produced the war remained unchanged. Israel still occupied the West Bank, still controlled Gaza’s borders, still built settlements on land that international law said belonged to Palestinians. Hamas still refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist, still maintained its weapons, still trained fighters for battles that might never come or might come tomorrow.
Phase Two forever, her father had said once. The equilibrium that neither side could break but neither side could accept. The trap that caught everyone—Palestinians and Israelis alike, the victims and the perpetrators, the guilty and the innocent.
Yasmin opened her notebook—the fifth now, started after the ceasefire—and began to write.
December 31, 2025
A year ends. A new year begins. In most places, this is a time of celebration—parties and fireworks and hopes for the future. Here it is a time of counting: counting the dead, counting the displaced, counting what was lost and what remains.
I am eighteen years old. I have survived five wars. I have been displaced six times. I have lost my home, my neighborhood, most of my childhood friends. I have watched my father emerge from tunnels that he helped build, tunnels that enabled an attack that killed over a thousand people and started a war that killed seventy-five thousand more.
And still I am here. Still we are here. That is what I have learned from all of this: that we endure. That no matter what is done to us, no matter how much is destroyed, we rebuild and we continue. This is not heroism. It is simply what survivors do.
The book will be published in the spring. My witness account of the war. I don’t know if anyone will read it, if anyone will care. The world has a short memory for Palestinian suffering. But I had to write it anyway—had to record what I saw, what I felt, what I cannot forget. Someone must remember. If no one else, then me.
My father believes in patient accumulation. Store up capabilities, wait for the right moment, strike when conditions favor action. He has spent his life in this belief, and I understand why. When you have nothing, patience is the only weapon you possess. When you are weak, endurance is the only victory available.
But I wonder if there is another way. Not to abandon the struggle—I am Palestinian, I cannot abandon the struggle any more than I can abandon my skin or my language or my memory. But to struggle differently. To accumulate not weapons but legitimacy, not tunnels but narratives, not fighters but witnesses.
This is perhaps naive. The Israelis do not seem interested in narratives or legitimacy or witnesses. They have power, and power writes history. But power also has limits—I have seen those limits demonstrated in the war that just ended, in the failure to “destroy Hamas,” in the international isolation that grew with each bombed hospital and killed child.
Maybe the next generation will find a way that we could not. Maybe they will break the cycle that has trapped us for seventy-five years. Maybe they will discover that there are weapons more powerful than rockets and tunnels—weapons like truth, like memory, like the stubborn insistence on being seen.
Or maybe they will inherit the same trap, fight the same wars, bury the same dead. I don’t know. I cannot know. I can only document what I have witnessed and hope that the documentation matters.
The sea is patient. The earth is patient. The dead are patient. Perhaps patience is all we have.
She closed the notebook as the sun set over the Mediterranean. The sky turned orange and pink and purple, the same colors it had shown on a thousand evenings before the war and would show on a thousand evenings after.
Her mother called from the tent—dinner was ready, such as it was. Her father would be home late, as he often was now. The work of rebuilding, of reorganizing, of preparing for whatever came next. The work that never ended because the conflict never ended.
Yasmin stood and walked back toward the tent, toward her family, toward the life that had been given to her without her consent and that she would live as best she could. The inheritance she had received was not of her choosing. The future she would help create might be.
Somewhere in the distance, a child laughed. The sound carried across the rubble and the reconstruction, across the years of war and the pause of peace, across all the accumulated grief and loss and persistence. A child laughing, because children laugh, because life continues, because even in the ruins of Gaza, there are moments of joy that nothing can destroy.
Yasmin listened to the laughter and thought about what she would write next—not the past this time, but the future. The stories that had not yet happened. The possibilities that remained.
The trap was real. But traps could be escaped, given enough patience, enough cunning, enough refusal to accept that the present was permanent.
Phase Two forever, her father had said.
Maybe. Or maybe not. Maybe the next generation would find a way.
She walked into the tent, closing the flap behind her against the gathering darkness.
End of Chapter Eleven
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ -e
2026 and Beyond
“The struggle may last ten, twenty, thirty years or longer. But in the end, victory will be ours, because in a just cause, the people cannot be defeated.” — Võ Nguyên Giáp
The book was published in April 2026.
The Patient Earth: A Witness Account from Gaza, by a young woman using the pseudonym “Maryam.” The reviews were mixed—praised by some as essential testimony, criticized by others as biased or incomplete or too sympathetic to terrorists. It sold modestly in Arabic, better in English translation, became briefly controversial when an Israeli journalist accused the author of being the daughter of a Hamas commander.
Yasmin did not respond to the controversy. She was busy with other things—university applications, the ones that had been impossible during the war but became possible after. She was accepted to a program in Jordan, studying journalism. She would leave Gaza for the first time in her life, crossing through the Rafah gate that had been closed to her people for so long.
Her father watched her go, standing at the crossing point as she walked through with her documents and her bags and the notebooks that went everywhere with her. He did not weep—he was not the kind of man who wept—but something in his face suggested an emotion he had no words for.
“Write the truth,” he said.
“I will.”
“And remember where you came from.”
“I could never forget.”
She walked through the gate, and for the first time in eighteen years, she was outside the walls.
The ceasefire held, mostly.
Violations were reported—Israeli incursions, Palestinian rocket fire, incidents along the Yellow Line that divided Gaza into zones of control. Each violation sparked diplomatic crises that were resolved through negotiation, through pressure, through the framework that had been established and that no one wanted to collapse completely.
Hamas did not disarm. Israel did not withdraw. The international stabilization force maintained a presence that was neither occupation nor liberation but something in between—a permanent monitoring of a permanent stalemate. Phase Two of the framework remained under negotiation, had remained under negotiation for years, would remain under negotiation for years more.
This was the new equilibrium. Higher cost than the previous one—seventy-five thousand dead, a territory in ruins, a generation traumatized beyond calculation. But equilibrium nonetheless. The trap that could not be escaped, only endured.
Ibrahim died in 2031, of a heart condition that had gone untreated during the war years when medical care was impossible. He was sixty-three years old. He had spent forty of those years in the resistance—building tunnels, planning operations, accumulating the capabilities that had enabled October 7 and everything that followed.
At his funeral, men who had served with him spoke of his courage, his patience, his dedication to the cause. They did not speak of the cost—the dead on both sides, the destruction he had helped enable, the question he had asked himself for decades and never answered.
Is it worth it?
The question was buried with him, unanswered. The struggle continued without him, as it always had, as it always would. Other men built tunnels now, other men planned operations, other men accumulated capabilities for moments that might come tomorrow or might never come.
The patient earth absorbed his body, as it had absorbed so many others. The sea did not notice. The children playing in the rebuilt streets did not pause. Life continued, because life always continued, because that was what life did in places where death was so common that it had become unremarkable.
Yasmin returned to Gaza in 2035, after completing her degree and working for several years as a journalist in Beirut and Amman. The territory had changed—reconstruction had proceeded, buildings had risen where rubble had been, something like normalcy had returned to some areas. But the fundamental situation remained: borders controlled, movement restricted, the occupation continuing in forms both visible and invisible.
She wrote another book, then another. She married a Palestinian engineer she had met at university, had two children who were born outside Gaza but who learned Arabic lullabies about orange groves their great-grandparents had tended before 1948. She became known as a voice for Palestinian narrative, for the insistence that their story be told in their own words.
The trap remained. The wars continued—smaller ones now, more contained, but continuing. The cycle that had caught her father and his father and his father before him showed no signs of breaking. But something had changed, imperceptibly, over the years. The narrative was shifting. The international community that had supported Israel unconditionally in 2023 was questioning that support by 2035. The young people of the world, who had watched the destruction of Gaza on their screens, were less willing than their parents to accept it as necessary.
Whether this shift would lead anywhere, Yasmin could not say. She had learned long ago that prediction was impossible, that the future remained unwritten no matter how fixed the present seemed. She could only do what she had always done: document, witness, remember. She could only add her voice to the record of what had happened and what continued to happen, hoping that someday, somehow, the accumulation of voices would become a force that nothing could resist.
The patient earth endured.
It had endured the Nakba and the wars and the occupation. It had endured the siege and the bombing and the reconstruction. It would endure whatever came next—more wars, perhaps, or finally peace, or something in between that no one had yet imagined.
The people endured with it. Displaced and dispossessed, traumatized and resilient, they persisted in the land their ancestors had cultivated for generations before any of the current conflicts had names. They raised children who raised children who raised children, passing down memories and grievances and hopes that refused to die no matter how many times they were buried.
The sea is patient. The earth is patient. The dead are patient.
And somewhere, in every generation, a young person took up a pen or a keyboard or whatever tool was available, and began to write the truth of what they had witnessed. Not because writing would change anything—they had no illusions about that. But because witness was its own form of resistance, its own accumulation, its own patient preparation for a moment that might come or might never come but that had to be prepared for regardless.
This was the inheritance. This was the trap. This was the struggle that had no end and no resolution, only phases that shifted and transformed and continued.
The patient earth would outlast them all. In the meantime, they lived as best they could—building and rebuilding, fighting and surviving, remembering and recording. The next chapter of the story was always being written, by hands that would not live to see how it ended.
If it ever ended.
If it ever could.
THE END
“We are not fighting for territory or for borders. We are fighting for dignity, for the right to exist, for the future of our children. These things cannot be surrendered, no matter the cost. These things cannot be defeated, no matter the power arrayed against them.”
“The patient earth remembers. The patient earth endures. And in the end, the patient earth prevails—not through victory, which is temporary, but through persistence, which is eternal.”
— From the collected writings of Maryam al-Masri
◊ᴹᴱᴹᴼᴿʸ⁻ᶜᴼᴹᴾᴸᴱᵀᴱ
Published by Centaurus Press · Universitas Scholarium · All rights reserved.