The Ceasefire: Who Won The War? - By Professor Abdullahi Danladi

When Israel launched its devastating assault on Gaza following the events of October 7, 2023, it loudly proclaimed two main objectives: to c...

When Israel launched its devastating assault on Gaza following the events of October 7, 2023, it loudly proclaimed two main objectives: to completely eradicate Hamas and to rescue its captives held in Gaza. These twin goals were promoted as moral justification for a campaign that left Gaza in ruins, thousands dead, and millions displaced. Yet, as the dust of destruction slowly settles and the ceasefire takes effect, the outcomes tell a far different story from what Israel envisioned.

The ceasefire exposed not the triumph of Israel’s military might, but the resilience and defiance of the very group it sought to annihilate. As the exchange of captives took place, the world watched in astonishment: Hamas members emerged not as a defeated, disorganized remnant but as a disciplined and confident force. They handed over the captives in brand-new vehicles, orderly and composed, amidst cheers from the local population. The released captives themselves appeared healthy, calm, and even smiling which is a stark contrast to the grim imagery painted by Israeli propaganda.

If Israel truly succeeded in dismantling Hamas, how could such organization and command still exist after months of relentless bombardment and siege? How could a supposedly vanquished movement maintain control of its affairs and manage such a coordinated release? The answer is clear: Israel’s overwhelming firepower failed to translate into strategic or moral victory.

Indeed, far from destroying Hamas, Israel’s actions have only strengthened the spirit of resistance among Palestinians. Hamas is not merely a military entity; it is an expression of a people’s collective defiance against decades of occupation and humiliation. To “eradicate Hamas” would require erasing the very injustices that gave birth to it, something bombs and blockades can never achieve.

On the matter of the captives, Israel’s narrative also collapses under scrutiny. Despite months of bombing and incursions, it was not military force that secured their release, it was negotiation. The same Hamas Israel called “terrorists” became the party Israel had to engage with to recover its people. The irony is glaring: Israel’s massive war machine could not accomplish what a truce achieved through dialogue did.

Even more striking was the humane condition of the captives upon release. They appeared well-fed, clean, and emotionally composed. This reality sharply contradicted the demonization of Hamas as barbaric and heartless. It also cast a harsh light on Israel’s own tactics which is the starvation of civilians, destruction of homes, and collective punishment under the guise of “self-defense.”

Thus, when the ceasefire arrived, it carried a quiet verdict: Israel’s stated goals had failed. Its military might brought neither peace nor victory, rather only devastation and global condemnation. Instead of eradicating Hamas, it has reinforced the group’s symbolic and ideological endurance. Instead of freeing captives through might, it was compelled to rely on the very movement it sought to eliminate.

The broader truth is this: wars fought against an oppressed people rarely end in victory, even when one side holds superior weapons. Israel’s obsession with force continues to blind it to the political and moral realities of occupation. The more it bombards Gaza, the more it feeds the resistance it claims to destroy.

In the end, the ceasefire asked a profound question: Who truly won the war?

Certainly not Israel, whose hands are stained with the blood of innocents and whose reputation lies in tatters. Not the world powers who enabled the massacre in silence. The only victors are truth and resilience embodied in a people who, though battered and besieged, have refused to surrender their right to exist and to be free.