The controversy of victory and defeat

As soon as the ceasefire agreement was announced in Gaza on January 15, 2025, the pages of the Palestinians on social media sites were ablaze with the debate of victory and defeat, between those who believe that Hamas had triumphed over Israel by its steadfastness and thwarting its plans by not enabling it to achieve its goals, and those who believe that Hamas had been defeated, and the criterion for its defeat is the large human losses among Palestinian civilians, and the massive destruction inflicted by the occupation army’s bombing of homes, educational and health facilities, and infrastructure in the Gaza Strip, which made it an area unfit for living.

During the wars between Hamas and Israel in the Gaza Strip from 2008 to 2025, the question that was always present among Palestinians was "Did Hamas achieve victory or not?" It is true that Hamas achieved some demands in previous wars with Israel, but the matter in the recent "Israeli revenge" war is different, as Israel turned the Strip into piles of rubble, and killed and wounded tens of thousands of civilians in a way that had not happened in all the Arab-Israeli wars since 1948, which prompted Hamas to try to overcome this, as its fighters came out of the tunnels and into the streets in military parades after the ceasefire was declared, and organized shows during the operations to hand over the Israeli hostages to the Red Cross, carrying and carrying a message confirming its presence, and the inability to bypass it in any arrangements after the end of the war. But the truth is that Hamas did not achieve a decisive victory, nor was it completely defeated, but rather maintained its survival... but it is a survival that is very expensive.

During the prisoner exchanges in the first phase of the ceasefire agreement, Hamas sent many messages to the Palestinians, the Israelis, and the world in general, indicating that Israel was unable to eliminate it, that it was capable of restoring its military capabilities, and perhaps most importantly, that it still ruled Gaza. On every Saturday of the prisoner exchanges, Hamas broadcast scenes of the Israeli hostages waving their hands on platforms set up in various locations in the Gaza Strip, with Hamas fighters standing next to them, some wearing Israeli military uniforms, and others carrying Israeli weapons captured in the October 7 attack, in addition to the banners hung at the exchange sites bearing phrases affirming its victory.

The scenes of hundreds of thousands of displaced people returning from the south of the Gaza Strip to its north also carried messages that the occupation army had failed, after more than 100 days of destructive military operations, to force the Palestinians to evacuate the north of the Gaza Strip, to implement the generals’ plan to create a buffer zone between the Gaza Strip and Israel, and that they were returning to their areas despite knowing that their homes, farms, schools, mosques and public facilities had been completely destroyed. The scenes of the large numbers of Palestinian prisoners who had been released from Israeli prisons, waving the victory sign, and the celebrations welcoming them in Ramallah and other cities in the West Bank, also served the image of Hamas’ victory.

Just as there is a debate about victory and defeat among the Palestinians, the Israeli arena is witnessing a similar debate. The Israeli government, through its statements and the declarations of its officials, has stated and continues to state that it has achieved victory over Hamas by being able to eliminate its military capabilities, liquidate the first rank of its military and political leaders, paralyze its ability to continue ruling the Gaza Strip, and prevent its smuggling of weapons by controlling the Salah al-Din (Philadelphi) axis and the Rafah crossing with Egypt. In addition, it has worked and is working to release the Israeli detainees. However, Israeli analysts and media outlets see the opposite. For example, Haaretz newspaper said, “The sight of hundreds of thousands of Gazans returning to their areas in the northern Gaza Strip, and the sight of prisoner exchanges organized by Hamas, shatters the illusions of complete victory promoted by Benjamin Netanyahu.” Or, in the words of Amos Harel, the most prominent military analyst, in an article in the same newspaper, “With the return of Palestinian residents to northern Gaza and the rise of military and political challenges, it seems that Netanyahu’s victory is nothing more than an illusion, while the region approaches a new phase that may be more complicated than ever before.”

Because war is a violent form of politics, the issue of victory or defeat is related to the goals achieved during it. For example, imposing conditions is considered a victory, and failure to do so is considered a defeat, especially if the failure entails strategic and existential risks for the party waging the war. This is what happened to Israel, because its government failed to achieve its declared "military" goals, and because Benjamin Netanyahu refused to define a clear, achievable strategy for the post-war period, to achieve a victory that Israel did not achieve, but which he seeks to achieve to "ensure his survival" in power!! .. But if Israel's standard for victory is wallowing in the blood of innocent Palestinian civilians, and destroying the material and moral foundations of their lives, then it has indeed won.

Because many wars in the world did not achieve a decisive victory, it was replaced by the term "relative or partial victory", which the two warring parties claim, to convince local and foreign public opinion that achieving some goals is a victory in itself, despite the material, human and moral costs paid for those partial goals achieved. But when delving into the debate of who is the victor, the question must be answered: How is victory achieved and what are its criteria and implications? There are a set of explicit criteria and implications that indicate the achievement of victory, such as one party's admission of defeat, or signing an agreement or peace treaty that approves the results of the war in favor of one of the parties, or declaring surrender. In order for the result to be decisive, the achieved victory must be permanent and not temporary. Otherwise, the concept of victory becomes an assessment or opinion, and the outcome of the war remains open to interpretations.