Major General Wassef Erekat: What happened was like an invitation not to keep any Israeli prisoner alive in the future 
 Samer Anabtawi: What happened is an attempt by Netanyahu and his army to promote an imaginary victory inside Israel and abroad 
 Dr. Raed Nairat: An escalation before reaching a decision on the prisoner deal gives Netanyahu an excuse to defend his position 
 Adnan Al-Sabah: The massacres that the occupation promotes as achievements are in fact crimes that besiege it globally as a war criminal. 

In a major escalation in which the Israeli occupation forces committed a massacre in the Nuseirat camp that claimed the lives of more than 210 martyrs and about 400 wounded, using all of its security system, the occupation announced that it had recovered four detainees alive, but that event would, according to writers and experts, change the course of dealing with the detainees. In the future, while the occupation Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, wants to send many messages through him.

Writers, political analysts and military experts believe, in separate interviews with Al-Quds, that the Israeli occupation’s announcement of the recovery of four detainees held by the resistance in Gaza is not a victory after eight months of war. Rather, what happened was the commission of massacres, which reinforces the presence of the occupation leaders on the blacklists of the perpetrators. Crimes, while they confirm that Israel's risk to the lives of its prisoners may expose them to death in the future.

The military and strategic expert, retired Major General Wassef Erekat, confirms that what happened is like an invitation not to keep any Israeli prisoner alive in the future.

Erekat explains that the resistance fighters could have killed the prisoners, especially after the massacres in which dozens of citizens were martyred, double numbers of wounded occurred, and there were losses among the ranks of the Israeli army, but it usually hides its losses, stressing that these massacres place the occupation army on the list of perpetrators of massacres.

Erekat believes that what happened was not a military operation, but rather massacres in which all types of weapons were used, pointing out that the entire occupation security system moved to recover the prisoners, and that the size of the participating forces proves that the Israeli army did not achieve a tangible achievement, and that international security services may have participated in the operation.

He points out that the actions of the Israeli occupation army put the occupation prisoners in danger, and it was possible to negotiate their release instead of committing massacres, pointing out that the occupation does not protect the lives of its prisoners, explaining that there are 130 Israeli prisoners remaining, and what happened will increase the determination of the resistance. To continue the battle.

For his part, the writer and political analyst Dr. confirms: Raed Nairat said that the recent massacres can be explained from two aspects: The first is the escalation before reaching a decision on the prisoner deal, as both parties seek to demonstrate their strength. Second, the escalation was to cover a major operation represented by the release of four Israeli detainees, which will have different implications, most notably Benny Gantz’s postponement of the conference regarding talk of his resignation, and giving Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the ruling right an excuse to defend their position that military pressure leads to the release of detainees. Although this happened eight months after the war.

Nairat points out that the occupation army directly announced the recovery of the detainees to promote this as a political achievement, instead of waiting for an official spokesman.
Regarding the possibility of how things will turn out, Nairat stresses that this is a war whose outcome is difficult to predict, as there are more variables than constants.
Meanwhile, Nairat points out that the occupation’s announcement of the recovery of the four detainees is not expected to have much impact on the resistance, especially since the resistance’s detainees can achieve its goals.

In turn, writer and political analyst Samer Anabtawi believes that the escalation and announcement of the recovery of four Israeli detainees comes within Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s efforts to deliver several messages. The first message is that Netanyahu can release detainees by force, not through negotiations, which reinforces his decision to continue the war instead of negotiating with the resistance.

The second message, according to Anabtawi, is that this comes as a form of pressure on the resistance to accept the Israeli and American proposals regarding concluding a prisoner deal, and the third message relates to Israeli internal affairs, as this announcement gives the appearance of victory to Netanyahu and gives Benny Gantz an excuse to withdraw his resignation and remain in the war council, and the message The fourth aims to target the popular incubator of the resistance with massacres to pressure it to change its positions, while the fifth message is directed to the United States to demonstrate Israel’s ability to recover detainees by force.

Anabtawi clarifies that what happened is not a real victory, but rather an attempt to promote an imaginary victory at home and abroad, especially since Netanyahu is not seeking to end the war. For him, war means protecting the far-right government and the settlement project, and protecting himself from prosecution, indicating that Netanyahu wants to develop the war and open a new front in the north.

Anabtawi stresses that what happened will not affect the resistance, but rather will lead to a hardening of its positions and its continuation of clearly achieving its goals, indicating that the battle is still open to all possibilities.

As for the writer and political analyst Adnan Al-Sabah, he stresses that what happened may represent an achievement for Israel, but he emphasizes that there is no absolute failure or absolute victory in any battle in the world.

He points out that achieving this achievement after eight months raises questions about how long the Israeli army needs to achieve “more victories.”

He explains that the massacres that took place are a kind of negotiation by fire between the occupation and the resistance, stressing that the crimes committed by the occupation and promoted as achievements are in fact crimes that trap it as a murderer and criminal in the eyes of the world.
Al-Sabah points out that Israel committed massacres to achieve a small achievement for itself, but these massacres will not affect the resistance, especially since Gaza is now completely destroyed, and such events are expected from an army that has all the capabilities.