Taking hostages turned out to be Hamas’s undoing

For two decades following the folly of Israel’s ill-advised 2005 unilateral withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, Hamas perfected a cynical script: Launch rockets at Israeli civilians, provoke retaliation, use Gazan civilians as human shields, and wait for international pressure to force a cease-fire before Israel can achieve its military objectives. This pattern recurred in 2008’s Operation Cast Lead, 2012’s Operation Pillar of Defense and 2014’s Operation Protective Edge. Each time, initial global outrage against Hamas gave way to demands that Israel halt its operations. Each time, Hamas survived to fight again, emerging stronger and stronger.

Oct. 7 shattered this cycle. The hostage-taking transformed the moral landscape in ways Hamas failed to anticipate. While hostages remained in Gaza, it was no longer reasonable for international leaders to demand that Israel stop military operations. How could the world ask a nation to abandon its citizens to captivity while letting Hamas militants—the hostage-takers and torturers—continue to hold hostages and terrorize Israel?

True, a politicized battery of United Nations organizations engineered a massive disinformation campaign, demonizing Israel as it waged a just war by just means. And true, weak leaders in the U.K., France, Australia and Canada succumbed to local and international propaganda, demanding that Israel stop defending itself and rewarding Palestinian terrorism by recognizing a Palestinian state. That appeasement prevented an earlier hostage release deal and prolonged the war. It also exposed those leaders’ moral weakness, and it ultimately failed.

Instead, President Trump’s 20-point peace plan prevailed. It demanded the immediate release of the hostages and the dismantlement of Hamas—which will either be dismantled diplomatically or destroyed militarily.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepted Mr. Trump’s plan, and many world leaders endorsed or welcomed it. Moral clarity, backed by soldiers’ bravery, overcame moral bankruptcy. Mr. Netanyahu was right when he said in a July 2024 speech before the U.S. Congress that “the war in Gaza could end tomorrow if Hamas surrenders, disarms and returns all the hostages." It took 15 months for many to realize that this was true. In the same speech, the prime minister warned that if Hamas didn’t lay down its arms and return the hostages, “Israel will fight until we destroy Hamas’s military capabilities and its rule in Gaza."

Hamas’s refusal to take these actions exposed fatal contradictions in the group’s propaganda. Why not release the hostages and lay down arms to stop the war? The cognitive dissonance was difficult to explain.

During Chancellor Friedrich Merz’s state visit to Turkey last week, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan criticized Germany for supporting Israel. Mr. Merz unapologetically replied that his government has stood by Israel since the Oct. 7 atrocities. “Israel exercised its right to self-defense," he said, “and it would have taken only one decision to avoid the countless unnecessary casualties: Hamas should have released the hostages earlier and laid down its arms."

The hostage-taking prevented the conflict from dissolving into the traditional false narratives about “occupation," “resistance" and “apartheid." Despite strenuous efforts to turn reality on its head, including through bogus international lawfare, many saw the truth—innocent people being held hostage by a genocidal terrorist organization committed to murdering Jews.

Even Israel’s harshest critics struggled to argue that a nation should abandon its captive citizens. The hostage-taking provided what decades of legitimate Israeli grievances couldn’t: a broadly recognized imperative that eventually overcame the propaganda. The Palestinians’ greatest weapon—the ability to manipulate international sympathy—turned against them.

Senior Hamas terrorist Mousa Abu Marzouk recently admitted that freeing the hostages would “remove Israel’s justification to continue the war." In a recent interview to “60 Minutes," U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff said that the aim in negotiations was to show Hamas that the hostages were no longer assets to them but a liability.

By shattering the cycle that had shielded Hamas for two decades, the hostage-taking ironically gave Israel the time and space it needed to degrade the terrorist organization drastically and strike a deal that dictates Hamas’s dismantlement.

The job isn’t finished, but Israel stands stronger than ever, having risen from one of its darkest hours to one of its brightest. The lesson for genocidal organizations should be clear: Hostage-taking can backfire, leading to terrorists’ destruction.

Mr. Falk is the foreign policy adviser to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and was a member of Israel’s hostage negotiation delegation.