Smotrich Vows No Safe Passage for Hamas Operatives

Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich delivered a blunt message this week: Israel will not accept the release of militants who would return to fight another day. Speaking on public broadcaster KAN News, Smotrich said Israeli forces are “close to killing” the roughly 200 Hamas operatives believed to be trapped in tunnels on the Israeli side of Gaza’s Yellow Line in Rafah, and he rejected any plan that would trade their freedom for the return of bodies or temporary calm.

“We need to eliminate the 200 terrorists stuck in Rafah. We’re close to killing them in the tunnels,” Smotrich told host Kalman Liberman. He was explicit about the moral line he will not tolerate: “Under no circumstances will we pay with another 200 terrorists. Returning them would be a betrayal of the fallen soldiers.” He also noted that Hamas has agreed to return the body of IDF soldier Hadar Goldin, but warned that exchanging living fighters for remains would be unacceptable.

Smotrich’s comments underscore a bitter choice faced by Israel’s political and military leadership: pursue a purely military outcome to neutralize immediate threats or accept negotiated solutions that some see as compromising Israel’s security and the memory of its fallen. The finance minister framed his stance as a duty to the families of the dead and to the nation’s long‑term safety.

The issue has exposed sharp voices inside Israel’s leadership. National Security officials and the IDF General Staff have signaled that any final decision about detainees, withdrawal lines, or humanitarian arrangements rests with Israel’s political echelon. That is because such deals carry far‑reaching diplomatic consequences especially vis‑à‑vis the United States and the international community and only elected leaders can weigh those costs.

Smotrich also weighed in on proposed arrangements for a multinational force in Gaza. He said Israel is negotiating “a very detailed agreement” to guarantee coordination and preserve Israel’s operational freedom. “We are now building a very detailed agreement to ensure there will be no Indonesians, etc., wandering around our feet,” he said, stressing the need for clear rules, Israeli veto rights, and defined roles for foreign contingents operating near sensitive zones.

On relations with Washington, Smotrich struck a cautious but independent tone: Israel will cooperate with U.S. efforts but retains the sovereign right to say no. “We need to consider the US president, but we can also say ‘no’ to him,” he said, acknowledging American leadership in stabilizing Gaza while reserving Israeli judgment on tactics and endgames. He added a private hope that U.S. initiatives would help dismantle Hamas, while expressing public skepticism about the likelihood of a complete collapse of the terror group without sustained action.

Smotrich also defended the appointment of Attorney Itai Ofir as the new Military Advocate General, calling him “an excellent appointment” and urging critics to judge the man by his record, not by political sound bites. For Smotrich, strong legal leadership inside the IDF is part of maintaining discipline and legitimacy as operations continue.

The government’s position has not been monolithic. Earlier reporting indicated the IDF would not actively block a deal to allow militants in the buffer zone to return to Hamas‑held territory if they disarm. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office reiterated that no safe passage will be permitted without verifiable disarmament, echoing broader demands to demilitarize Gaza and prevent the reconstitution of terrorist capabilities.

Public reaction has been fierce. Families of soldiers killed in Rafah and conservative figures in government denounced any plan that could free fighters who might return to violence. Critics argued that allowing combatants to walk away would dishonor the fallen and embolden Hamas propaganda. Supporters of negotiated measures countered that carefully structured deals could reduce short‑term bloodshed and create conditions for civilian relief provided Israel retains the means to enforce disarmament and monitor compliance.

Operational realities complicate any theoretical solution. Rafah’s urban terrain and dense tunnel networks make clearance missions costly and dangerous. Commanders worry about the risks to troops clearing subterranean positions and the intelligence challenges of verifying complete disarmament. Those calculations feed directly into the political debate: are the lives saved by an agreement worth the long‑term security risk of militants returning to organized fighting?

Smotrich’s remarks placed Israel’s priorities plainly the protection of citizens, the deterrence of future attacks, and the obligation to the families of those killed. He made it clear he considers the release of armed militants unacceptable, and he insisted that Israel will insist on ironclad guarantees in any deal that affects its forces or its borders.

Whatever path Israel chooses, the question will remain whether political leaders can reconcile the urgency of saving lives today with the imperative of denying Hamas the ability to harm again tomorrow. For Smotrich, the answer is uncompromising: no safe passage for terrorists and no trade that leaves Israel less secure.

Israel defends its people and honors its fallen. Share this story and subscribe to our newsletter for updates on security and national policy.