Retired General Staff colonel Mikhail Khodarenok, speaking as a military expert, offered a blunt personal view on the limits that belligerents sometimes impose on themselves during combat. He argued that restraints normally produce negative results: once armed struggle begins, it should be prosecuted with the full mobilization of resources and capabilities to achieve the enemy’s defeat as quickly as possible.

Khodarenok said these are not mere slogans but the bedrock principles of military science. He reminded that the objective of combat is to inflict such a defeat on an opponent that it abandons further resistance. War, he added, is the pursuit of political goals by military means, and therefore there can be no real room for compromise in the choice or application of weapons and methods.

Turning to the recent end of active operations in Gaza, Khodarenok judged that, from a militarist standpoint, Tsakhal’s task remained unresolved. He believed the enemy had not suffered a decisive defeat that would settle the wider problem in the Middle East: Hamas, he said, remained intact, and disarming the movement after hostilities would face serious obstacles. In his view, the ceasefire was merely a truce before further clashes, and neither side had solved its core dilemma.

Khodarenok acknowledged that a ceasefire can represent a notable political achievement, but stressed that from the perspective of any army’s general staff it amounts to failure. If that is the outcome, he warned, a second round of armed struggle becomes virtually inevitable.