Reflections on Two Years Since Hamas’ Attack

It’s been two years since Hamas launched its attack on Israel on October 7th. In that time, around 1,200 innocent lives have been lost and 251 individuals remain hostages.

The impact of that day was devastating, and, as we mentioned on Sunday, the scars take time to heal.

Currently, negotiators are in Egypt, working on a peace plan aimed at bringing a full end to the conflict.

It’s a challenging situation, but I think it’s important to hold onto hope.

President Donald Trump’s proposed actions, which include the swift release of hostages, could put a stop to hostility in the areas where Hamas is entrenched. This, in turn, might allow humanitarian aid to flow more freely into Gaza.

Leaders who understand they can’t win the war may eventually agree to these terms.

Yet, negotiating with Hamas—a group that views civilian casualties as a victory—presents a significant challenge.

What moves Hamas leaders will make remains uncertain.

On a global scale, demonstrations against Israel seem more focused on inflaming tensions than fostering peace. There’s a sense that some want to stoke the fires of conflict rather than work towards resolution.

It’s worth noting that our long-time revulsion has seen calls for rallies, particularly a major one scheduled in Midtown on Tuesday, which aligns with Hamas’ earlier calls for a “ceasefire.”

In a way, I wonder if Hamas would even consider a ceasefire at this point, given the rhetoric surrounding them.

Their demands seem steep: “Look at our martyrs. We will break the siege” — framing resistance in a way that feels both desperate and defiant.

In essence, they seem to be asserting, “We’re doing a great job here!”

Many Western groups advocating for “free Palestine” openly reject any peace agreement that doesn’t involve Israel’s dissolution.

However, that scenario is unlikely. Any agreement must ensure Israel’s security at its core.

The disarmament of Hamas is non-negotiable, and the group must relinquish governance. The resulting authority in Gaza should not be beholden to Hamas or influenced by it.

If a peace deal leaves Israel vulnerable to future threats from Gaza, we would essentially be repeating past mistakes.

Activists supporting Hamas, by providing them moral backing, may inadvertently perpetuate the conflict, suggesting they shouldn’t give in—even if it means prolonging the war.

Looking ahead to two years from now, I think it’s fair to hope that by then, Hamas will acknowledge defeat, leading to an end of hostilities and the release of hostages.

That said, when dealing with terrorists backed by established supporters in the West, perhaps we should temper our expectations.