Ceasefire (Now!)

Outsourcing to the International Community

His pleasantries are smooth like butter, but his heart is at war. His words are smooth like oil, but they are drawn swords.

PSALMS 55:22

You have deceived this people and Jerusalem, saying, 'You will have peace’ when the sword is at our throats.

JEREMIAH 4:10

An immediate ceasefire appears to be the most straight forward solution to any armed conflict. The logic is simple: People are killing each other — so why not just stop it? Perhaps Hamas committed violent acts against Jews, massacring over 1400 and kidnapping more than 230. They might have launched a few thousand rockets. But those events happened in the past. Not responding would prevent further suffering. Taking the high road might eventually lead to peace. Though this approach may sound appealing, there are several reasons why, on deeper inspection, it is ineffective.

A) A Net Victory for Terror

Unconditional ceasefires send the message that violence is tolerated, inviting more severe atrocities in the future.1 Moreover, terror attacks are calculated to gain publicity, making a ceasefire without decisive action against them a tacit victory. Furthermore, these ceasefires jeopardize Israeli security by leaving dangerous enemies intact.

B) Ceasefire as a Tactical Pause

The underlying hope is that unconditional ceasefires will pave the way to enduring peace. But do ceasefires without completing military objectives lead to such peace? Let’s consult the historical record

Ceasefires between Israel and Hamas are a fragile affair, with a short list including the ceasefires of June 2008, January 2009, November 2012, August 2014, June 2021, and May 2023. On each of these occasions, Hamas broke the ceasefire. Given this impressive list of ceasefires made and subsequently broken, we see that ceasefires with Hamas, Hezbollah, and similar organizations do not achieve the intended outcome of fostering long-term peace.

Israel’s interest in ceasefires clearly stems from a desire to protect its citizens from further harm. But what might motivate Israel’s enemies to clamor for a ceasefire? Rafael Eitan, an Israeli general who served in the 1982 Lebanon War, offered the following insight:2

We again saw the well-known Middle Eastern tactic that has recurred in every battle and war. The moment an Arab country receives a heavy blow, the world wakes up and forces us to enter a ceasefire in order that we not achieve our objective.

Such ceasefires are not sincere attempts at peace, but rather a tool used by the enemy from a position of weakness to stop Israeli advances. Eitan further suggests that these hostile groups weaponize the “international community” to pressure Israel into agreeing to a ceasefire.

Let’s imagine that terrorist groups propose ceasefires when they are at a disadvantage in order to ensure their survival. What follows next? Will the terrorists abandon their aspirations of Israel’s destruction, lay down their arms, and begin to build their local economy? Will they turn Gaza, Jenin, Lebanon, or Yemen into peaceful oases? Once again, the historical record provides sharp insight into the outcomes of unconditional ceasefires when the underlying issues are not addressed.

C) Time to Regroup: Terror Groups and Ceasefires

Israel’s enemies utilize ceasefires as opportunities to regroup. So, ceasefires without achieving military objectives are not recipes for peace, but for wars of attrition. The weaker side, be it Hamas or Hezbollah (but the same was true of Hamas’ and Hezbollah’s key terrorist predecessor, the PLO — Palestine3 Liberation Organization — and all other skilled terrorist groups), uses ceasefires to prevent its destruction and to regroup.4 Its aim is to emerge more powerful in the future and harm Israel.

At the very least, it seeks to gradually damage Israel, sow terror in its communities, and tarnish Israel’s public image, weakening the country. Israel’s enemies, in their various guises, have infinite patience.5 As long as they survive, they maintain the hope that they can cripple Israel and ultimately annihilate it: either by wearing down Israel’s collective resolve or by holding on long enough for geopolitics to shift.6

D) The Terrorist’s Playbook

A theme that we will return to is that Hamas, Hezbollah and their ilk are best understood not as localized phenomena, but as examples in the wider global trend of terrorist organizations. While Western media tends to focus on Islamist terrorism, we have no shortage of other modern terrorist groups to consider. One crucial example of a hardened terrorist group that was ultimately defeated is the Tamil Tigers. For nearly thirty years, until their decisive defeat in 2009 by the Sri Lankan military, the Tamil Tigers perpetrated incessant acts of terrorism against the Sri Lankan people in a bid to create an independent Tamil ethnic state within Sri Lanka.

During the Sri Lankan Civil War (1983-2009), the Tigers requested ceasefires several times, often using the “international community” as leverage. The Tigers invariably7 used the ceasefires as opportunities to rearm, consolidate their power, and weaken Sri Lanka. We should view Hamas and Hezbollah’s requests for ceasefires through this lens. They may be cruel, but they are not stupid. Terrorism is a political strategy, and we should expect terrorist groups to implement the strategy to the fullest.8 Ceasefires are an important weapon in any skilled terrorist’s arsenal.9

E) Cultural Precedent: Hudna

To better understand how Islamist terror groups employ ceasefires, it’s important to consider some cultural context.10 When Islamist military groups declare a ceasefire, they use the term “hudna,” roughly translated as a truce or a period of calm, modeled on the medieval “Treaty of Hudaybiyyah.”11

The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, intended to last ten years, held for only two, ultimately leading to the surrender of the originally more powerful party. This treaty served as precedent for Anwar Sadat’s 1979 peace treaty with Israel.12 On several occasions, Yasser Arafat, leader of the PLO, also compared his participation in the Oslo accords13 with Israel to the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah.14 The implication of these comparisons is that, from a terrorist perspective, peace agreements are regarded as temporary measures. Ceasefires are no different; they serve as strategic pauses, allowing time for the weaker side to regroup and ultimately gain the upper hand.15

Hamas leaders have routinely offered hudnas. Notably, in 2004, Hamas leader Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi offered Israel a ten-year hudna in return for:

A complete Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria.
The right of return for all Palestinian refugees.
The establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza.

However, he emphasized that this hudna would not indicate Hamas’ recognition of Israel. Instead, he offered the hudna as it would be “difficult to liberate all our land at this stage.”16 The phrase “all of our land” refers to the entire territory of Israel.17 Given this historical context, a hudna is a tool of war, used to pause the battle to regroup and eventually destroy one’s enemies.18

Having contextualized ceasefires strategically and culturally, let’s explore the Rebbe’s explicit commentary on historical ceasefires:

Ceasefire: A Prelude to the Yom Kippur War

In 1970, after a three-year war with Israel known as the War of Attrition, Egypt proposed a ceasefire with Israel. The Rebbe offered the following insight into Egypt’s motivation for the ceasefire:19

[Egyptian President Nasser’s] sudden request for a ceasefire is not motivated by a desire for peace, as any intelligent person would understand. A peace treaty can be discussed even during war, [so Egypt’s insistence on a ceasefire raises suspicions about their true intentions]. It is evident that Egypt wants a ceasefire since they cannot rebuild their fortifications and rearm while Israel is bombing. Nasser’s aim is to use the ceasefire as a means for future war, [not to engage in sincere peace negotiations].

The moment a ceasefire is signed, Egypt will immediately begin rebuilding its fortifications along the Suez Canal. Furthermore, a ceasefire will render all of the money spent [during the war of attrition] and soldiers’ lives sacrificed in vain, since Egypt will simply regroup and launch another attack against Israel in the future. How can we justify the money we spent and the soldiers’ lives we sacrificed? And how can we justify the future expenditures?

Moreover, during World War II, when the defeated side20 requested a ceasefire before entering into peace negotiations, allied military experts unanimously rejected the proposal. They explained that a ceasefire would be exploited [by the defeated nations] for rearmament. The experts also argued that a ceasefire would lower the odds of achieving a lasting peace.

In fact, Nasser immediately violated the terms of the ceasefire, taking advantage of it to fortify Egyptian positions and rearm, significantly increasing Egypt’s military threat. This paved the way for Nasser’s successor Anwar Sadat to launch the lethal Yom Kippur War in 1973.21

In a 1970 letter to IDF’s head of Southern Command and future prime minister Ariel Sharon, the Rebbe had more to say on the ceasefire with Egypt — comments again relevant to Israel’s contemporary enemies:22

With each passing day, our opponents become stronger and fortify their positions further. Despite the formal protests [from Israel and the United States,] the enemy uses each day to intensify their power and import the most advanced modern weaponry. It is clear that the United States will not go to war with the Soviet Union over [potential Egyptian aggression against Israel, considering Egypt’s status as a Soviet client state at the time].

Regarding the outcry over Egypt’s failure to honor its promises, no one genuinely believed they would refrain from exploiting the ceasefire. This sentiment was shared by members of the government in Israel, the United States, and the Soviet Union, given Egypt’s history [of breaking promises three years ago during the Six-Day War] and fourteen years prior [during the 1956 Sinai War], as well as on several other occasions. Arguments will continue to accumulate, but ultimately, the decision will be made to maintain the current status quo.

Consequently, it is apparent that during the peace negotiations, after the opposing side has entrenched [and fortified their military positions], Israel will find itself at a disadvantage. The security situation will have completely changed between the day the ceasefire was implemented and the conclusion of the negotiations regarding the demands and terms [of the peace treaty].

I hope that the other side will make a foolish move, as they did at the start of the Six-Day War, which will necessitate the cancellation of the ceasefire. In such a scenario, G‑d will once again work miracles, enabling the swift mobilization of all forces after the ceasefire ends. Defense will be renewed through an attack, the only effective means of doing so, and all forces will be fully mobilized, not in the half-hearted manner seen until now, but in a true defense. Only then is there hope for a lasting ceasefire and finally achieving peace. The current situation, however, leads directly to the renewal of war, G‑d forbid, under far worse conditions than those at the start of the ceasefire.

I have elaborated on this matter in response to your comment that my writings about the canal are no longer relevant. I fear that this issue will soon become pertinent once again. While I hope to be proven wrong in my assessment, based on the prevailing attitudes, it unfortunately seems unlikely.

Three years before Egypt’s fateful violation of the ceasefire which began the Yom Kippur War, the Rebbe saw the “writing on the wall.” At the end of a 1970 talk addressing Israel’s ill-advised ceasefire with Egypt, the Rebbe broke down crying, citing the verse,23 “Why have I come, yet there is no one? I have called out, yet no one answers.” This captures the Rebbe’s sense of urgency over Israel’s precarious security situation and his sadness over the fact that, despite his clear vision on the matter, no one seemed to listen. Now, more than fifty years later, we see retrospectively that failing to follow the Rebbe’s prescription has created enduring sorrow.24

Summary

We have learned that there are at least five compelling reasons for skepticism about the effectiveness of unconditional ceasefires without completing military objectives:

Ceasefires demonstrate a tolerance for violence.
Ceasefires allow terrorist groups to survive, regroup, and rearm.
Ceasefires are a classic insurgent strategy used in modern warfare to weaken states, irrespective of cultural context.
In Hamas’ and Hezbollah’s cultural context, ceasefires have a clear precedent as an implement of war.
Ceasefires both dishonor the memory of the fallen and squander the funds spent on defense.

If this is the case, then:

Unconditional ceasefires with hostile militant groups are not in Israel’s interest, until the hostile militant group ceases to pose a credible threat.
Those calling for a ceasefire are either unintentionally or intentionally seeking to strengthen Israel’s enemies.

In light of the above, unconditional ceasefires without achieving military objectives perpetuate the cycle of violence by allowing terrorist groups and regimes to survive and fight another day. If we aim to end the cycle of violence and allow all people in the region to lead prosperous, happy, terror-free lives, then a ceasefire, no matter how initially attractive it may seem, is not the answer. But what if we modified the ceasefire? What if, instead of an unconditional ceasefire, the international community or the U.N. would monitor and enforce the ceasefire?

Exercises:

Comment Below: How has your view on ceasefires changed after learning about the history of their use?
Comment Below: If ceasefires without addressing underlying issues are ineffective, what would addressing "root causes" actually require? Is this a realistic alternative, and what would genuine root cause resolution look like in practice?

Outsourcing to the International Community

Footnotes

Consider that Hamas has openly threatened to repeat attacks like October 7 in the future. See Hamas official vows to 'repeat' Oct 7 attack repeatedly to teach Israel a lesson; Hamas Official: We Will Repeat October 7 Attacks Until Israel Is Annihilated; ‘Oct. 7 was just a rehearsal,' warns Sinwar.

Eitan, R., Goldstein, D. (1985). Raful: A Soldier's Story. Maariv. p. 213; cited in B’Rega HaEmet, p. 303, footnote 12. See also Shalom Shalom V’Ein Shalom, pp. 266-268.

A note on the use of the word “Palestinian”: Historically, there was no such thing as a “Palestinian people.” After quelling the Bar Kochba revolt, the Roman Emperor Hadrian renamed Judea “Syria Palestina.” The term “Palestine” seems to originally refer to the biblical Philistines, a non-indigenous people who settled the coast of ancient Israel. As such, the contemporary Palestinians are a fictitious construct in that they do not link to a historical “Palestinian people.” Palestinian identity was first constructed by the antisemitic Islamist leader Haj Amin Al Husseini in the early 20th century. It took on greater traction with the emergence of the PLO in 1963 and then became progressively weaponized by various factions aiming to weaken or destroy Israel. That said, the Rebbe does explicitly use the term “Palestinian” in numerous instances. The term does not convey historical legitimacy. Rather, it indicates a contemporary group of people with common heritage and interests. Consider the following sources: Letter to Rabbi Immanuel Jakobovits, 3rd Light of Chanukah 5741 (1980) (see Appendix); Karasi V’Ein Oneh, Vol. 1, p. 46, Yechidus with Yonah Cohen; pp. 216-217, Motzaei Shabbos Vayeitzei 5738 (1977); Vol. 2, p. 414, Yechidus with Rav Efraim Yalles, Av Beis Din of Philadelphia, Second Day of Chol HaMoed Pesach 5742 (1982); p. 427, Yechidus with Moshe Katzav, 10 Shvat 5752 (1992); Sichos Kodesh 5739, Vol. 1, p. 102, 13 Tishrei (1978). The Rebbe also explicitly uses the term “Palestine” in reference to a possible Palestinian state in a letter to Peter Kalms, 13 Shvat 5743 (1983). See also Sichos Kodesh 5730, Vol. 1, p. 629, Purim (1970);Toras Menachem 5730, Vol. 2, p. 396; Audio of Sichah. In the sichah there, the Rebbe says: “The Land of Israel which is called ‘The Holy Land’ in English, or ‘Palestine,’ as the Arabs call it.”

On the PLO using ceasefires to regroup, see Shalom Shalom V’Ein Shalom, p. 171. In August 1981, Israel agreed to a ceasefire with the PLO. The PLO used the opportunity to enhance its fighting capabilities and violated the ceasefire agreement innumerable times. This allowed the PLO to strengthen itself for the First Lebanon War, which began in June 1982, where it again violated ceasefire agreements countless times, a point we will explore at greater length later in this work.

See Sefer HaSichos 5746, Vol. 1, p. 721; Toras Menachem — Hisvaaduyos 5746, Vol. 1, p. 613; Karasi V’Ein Oneh, Vol. 2, p. 363, Chayei Sarah 5746 (1985). As the Rebbe put it in the context of Israel’s “peace” deal with Egypt: Egypt made the strategic decision to receive everything it wanted—territory, oil wells— without sacrificing a single soldier! They know that achieving their ultimate ends will take time, but they realize that they should arm themselves with patience, and, ultimately, they will receive everything they want.

See Karasi V’Ein Oneh, Vol. 1, p. 38, Matos Maasei 5730; p. 41, Eikev 5730 (1970).

Tamil Tigers used truce to rearm, says former commander.

For an early articulation of terrorist strategy, much of which still holds true today, see Trinquier, R. (1964). Modern Warfare: A French View of Counterinsurgency.

Consider also the Irish terrorist group, the Irish Republican Army (IRA), and the Colombian terrorist group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC).

10.

Interfaith Relations in the Quranic Tradition. For further applications in our context, see Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance; From Yassin to Sinwar: Hamas’ Leaders Sell Lies of Peace while they Prepare for War. For a thesis arguing that the hudna doctrine can lead to a lasting peace, seeWinning the Strategic Narrative in the Israeli-Palestinian Protracted Conflict. While this work is optimistic, it does not align with the way in which Hamas has thus far applied the concept of hudna.

11.

For discussion of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah in the context of Israel’s conflicts with Islamic nations, see Arnon-Ohana, Y. (2013). Line of Furrow and Fire: The Conflict for the Land of Israel 1860-2010. Achiasaf Ltd. pp. 17, 200-201, 289 [Hebrew].

12.

Anwar Sadat was the Egyptian President who initiated the Yom Kippur War against Israel. He then exacted heavy concessions from Israel in the Camp David Accords, which dealt a serious blow to Israel’s economy, national security and morale. This will be discussed extensively in Part 2. On weaponizing ceasefires, see Shalom Shalom V’Ein Shalom, p. 208.

13.

The Oslo Accords were an agreement between Israel and the PLO ostensibly intended to engender a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinian population. In fact, the Oslo Accords contributed to greater tension, culminating to untold violence and death for all. For a tragic, yet excellent retrospective of the Oslo Accords 30 years later, see Bloomberg, Y. (2023). Oslo trap: From dreaming of peace to a bloodbath (I. Peleg & D. Bruckner, Eds.). Sela Meir Publishing [Hebrew]

14.

See Karsh, E. (2016). The Oslo Disaster. p. 12.

15.

See Tepas, M. E. (2009). A Look at Traditional Islam's General Discord with a Permanent System of Global Cooperation. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 16(2), 698-700. See also Goodman, M. (2017). Malkod 67. pp. 141-142. There, Micah Goodman makes the incredible argument that given this cultural context, from a pragmatic perspective, Israel should accept that no agreement with the Palestinians will ever be final, but should instead be viewed as inherently temporary. He then draws the conclusion that this fact is a good thing and will ultimately allow for an ethical, realistic resolution to the conflict. For more on this point in Hamas and Hezbollah’s logic, see A New Existential War — Part I: Israel’s Perception of the Enemy’s Goals. There, we read:

To simplify the concept of Al-Muqawama [literally “resistance” a central tenet of Hamas and Hezbollah’s ideology and strategy] somewhat, it can be viewed as the inverse of Clausewitz’s well-known description of war as “the continuation of politics by other means.” The Al-Muqawama idea sees politics as the continuation of war by other means. Thus, negotiation is viewed not as a means to bring about the end of a war, but simply as a pause that serves its continuation at a more opportune time under more favorable conditions.

16.

However, Hamas leaders have frequently offered similar hudnas with similar conditions. For many examples, see Between Hudna and Crackdown: Assessing the Record of Hamas Ceasefires.

17.

See Article 2 of the Hamas Charter; Hamas in 2017: The document in full.

18.

For extensive analysis of hudna and the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah in the context of Hamas, see Hamas’s Concept of a Long-term Ceasefire: A Viable Alternative to Full Peace?. It’s important to note that not all iterations of Islam understand the concept of hudna and the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah in this way. However, the PLO and Hamas, Israel’s most constant adversaries, have used this reasoning in their conflict with Israel, and it is something that we must take seriously.

19.

Sichos Kodesh 5730, Vol 2, pp. 480ff.; Toras Menachem 5730, Vol. 4, p. 160; Karasi V’Ein Oneh, Vol. 1, pp. 38-40, Matos-Maasei 5730 (1970); p. 272, Tzav 5738 (1978).

20.

At different points in World War II, Germany and Japan asked for conditional ceasefires that would allow them to mainatin their governin structure. The Allies rejected all such offers, demanding unconditional surrender.

21.

See Sichos Kodesh 5734, Vol. 1, p. 119; Karasi V’Ein Oneh, Vol. 1, p. 70, Noach 5734 (1973).

22.

Igros Kodesh, Vol. 26, pp. 450-452, Letter #9,953, 18 Menachem Av 5730 (1970).

23.

Isaiah 50:2. See Sichos Kodesh 5730, Vol. 2, p. 460-4;Toras Menachem 5730, Vol. 4, p. 155, footnote 98; Karasi V’Ein Oneh, Vol. 1, p. 44, Eikev 5730 (1970). Notably, this stark verse became the title of the most comprehensive and influential collection of the Rebbe’s sichos on Israel’s security, entitled “Karasi V’Ein Oneh” (“I have called out, but no one answers”).

24.

The Rebbe explained that failing to take a decisive stand would lead to a situation of “bechiyah l'doros”: literally, “crying for generations,” or enduring suffering that weak decisions would bring on generations to come.

See Karasi V’Ein Oneh, Vol. 1, p. 245, Motzaei Shabbos Mishpatim 5738 (1978); p. 257, Purim 5738 (1978); Vol. 2, p. 134, Metzora 5741 (1981); pp. 373, 379, Motzaei Zos Chanukah 5746 (1985).

Rabbi Elisha Pearl is a writer and researcher at the Sichos In English institute. He has lectured and written extensively on Jewish Law, Philosophy, and Mysticism, and holds Rabbinic ordination from Rabbi Zalman Nechemia Goldberg and Yeshiva University, where he also did graduate studies in philosophy and psychology.

Join the Discussion

78 Comments

Newest

Oldest

Raul Rabinovici Petach Tikva November 30, 2025

In my humble opinion, the State of Israel is not at all suited for an “Israeli green card” model; that is, granting citizenship or residency in exchange for the service of workers or soldiers, such as mercenaries or migrant laborers. This concept goes against all the principles of Judaism, the Torah, and all the Sages of Judaism, and is never mentioned as an option for defending or developing the Land of Israel.
A good and blessed week!
Wishing you good health and only good news! Reply

Sarah December 4, 2025

in response to Raul Rabinovici:

B"H, Dear Raul, with Israeli green card, I meant some kind of residence card for some time.
This does not mean that Israel should keep millions of foreigners (I mean the Arab population of Judea Samaria and Gaza) with such a card.
These people should get nationality from other Arab countries and the best solution to aim at is the population exchange with Jordan and other countries.
I take opportunity to make an important point here: the aim is to create a new reality and not to fit our plans and minds in the reality that others try to create for us according to their interests. For this reason one should never reject a very right strategy that would bring real peace because currently is not easy to see how to realize it. Think and you will find how. Reply

Sarah November 23, 2025

B"H, About your 2nd question: since 1948, Jews are evolving from the Diaspora mindset to the Statehood mindset, without reaching yet. The Rebbe speaks, but nobody hears. Removing root causes maybe means think and feel like "States" do. Liberate your historical land and make a State, assure full security throughout this State, move out the strangers that harm your State, and give a 5 years green card to the strangers that do not harm your State. Then make peace with your neighbours. This is what States do. It needs a spiritual change of the jews to do what States do. Balance Gevurah and Hessed. This change would open the way to M. Reply

Arno (Aaron ben Josef) Gorgels Potsdam November 24, 2025

in response to Sarah:

I agree almost 100%. There is the point of the seven years property exchange and re-earning. Reply

David Harold Chester Petach Tikva, Israel November 24, 2025

in response to Sarah:

The rate of alyiah from the US has significantly increased over the past two years. Sarah's comment is incorrect and we look forward to greater numbers of new olim from many of the countries that have begun to show their dislike for the Jews. Reply

Sarah November 24, 2025

in response to Arno (Aaron ben Josef) Gorgels:

Dear Arno, could you please explain what you mean? Reply

Arno (Aaron ben Josef) Gorgels Potsdam November 24, 2025

in response to Sarah :

The principle that God owns the land and Israelites are "tenants" is explicitly stated in:
Leviticus 25:23 Parashat Behar:

The land must not be sold permanently, because the land is mine and you are but foreigners and my tenants. Reply

Arno Potsdam Germany November 26, 2025

in response to Sarah :

Dear Sarah, to be clear: Understanding the Torah at this point, G"d has many ways to grant tenantship to Israelites in His land which is His property and for which it is His decision to judge whether Jews are ready for tenanship and how, to be confirmed every 7 years. HaShems Word in Torah is His measure. Reply

Sarah November 30, 2025

in response to Arno :

B"H
Dear Arno, firstly, the verse that " the land is mine " is a spiritual truth that holds for all the Planet and applies to every human and every Land in and out of any State. Therefore it is not fitting in the context of our discussion (it does not answer the questions we set here). Secondly, the Leviticus 25:23 Parashat Behar, concerns laws between Jews within their own State. It is also not fitting in the context of our discussion.
I take the opportunity to comment, that because believers (in any faith) sometimes misinterpret the Holy Texts, this is why Hashem had to give rise to the existence of non believers, which fix some issues (Rav Kook knew that). Reply

Arno (Aaron Ben Josef) Gorgels Potsdam Germany November 30, 2025

in response to Sarah :

B"H
Dear Sarah, my clarification stands firmly: The land Israel is His, like everything is His. HaShem decides when and how the land Israel within its promised borders is given to Israelites. This includes force or wisdom. Or better: wisdom upon force. This is the proper discussion, leading to the Third Temple building. Reply

Arno (Aaron Ben Josef) Gorgels Potsdam Germany November 30, 2025

in response to Sarah :

B"H
Dear Sarah,

Your insight about Rav Kook's hope touches something deeper: perhaps the conflicts we see in the Middle East reflect a cosmic misalignment—a failure to recognize that the divine works through multiple valid expressions simultaneously.

If we understand that different faith traditions and perspectives each perceive genuine aspects of divine purpose—rather than competing claims to exclusive truth—then durable peace becomes possible.

This requires not just political compromise, but spiritual humility: recognizing that God's work includes Jewish, Christian, Muslim, and secular contributions to Tikkun Olam, each valid in their own way.

Do you believe this mutual recognition of divine legitimacy in different traditions is achievable in practice?
I do Reply

Sarah November 30, 2025

in response to Arno (Aaron Ben Josef) Gorgels:

B"H
Dear Arno, certainly this is a good comment. Reply

Sarah Chile November 30, 2025

in response to Arno (Aaron Ben Josef) Gorgels:

B"H
Dear Arno, thank you very much. I think that it is a normal part of the spiritual evolution of the planet and not a cosmic misalignement, if many people cannot recognize that "the divine works through multiple expressions". (I took out the "valid"). I think also that the "mutual recognition of divine legitimacy in different traditions" is achievable in the future, and it may be a precursor to the coming of M. If the Muslims reach or near that point, Islam as we know it must vanish because it inherently requests the destruction of non Muslims as a rule. Many other inner improvements are needed as well. I think that various groups of Souls may be in a different " school year " or study to learn a different topic that they must learn. In this lesson I think that we discuss probably what the Jews must learn to achieve the next steps towards Tikkun Olam. Reply

Arno (Aaron Ben Josef) Gorgels Potsdam Germany December 2, 2025

in response to Sarah :

B"H
Dear Sarah, Shalom
Thank you.
May it be Your will, Lord our G"d and G"d of our fathers, that the Beit HaMikdash be speedily rebuilt in our days, and grant us our portion in Your Torah. Moshiach now!

I fully agree to your phrase ending "... the coming of M"

Bezrat HaShem, much more is to be said and understood thru events, experience and understanding. May G"d bless Israel. With Strength and Wisdom. Gevurah v Chesed Reply

Arno (Aaron Ben Josef) Gorgels Potsdam Germany December 3, 2025

in response to Sarah :

Dear Sarah,

B"H,
Is the following kabbalistic analysis of creational process in line with Rav Isaac Luria of help?:

Ein Sof—infinite chaotic all-possibility—operates through Tzimtzum (divine self-limitation) to create ordered existence. As you've noted: "The Interpretation of Ein Sof is a chaotic all-possibility that through Tzimtzum through confirmed (Tzum) order (Tzim) is locally disturbed and leads locally to the development of the galaxy.
Crucially, nothing is lost in this process. The original chaos remains "completely present within the primordial vacuum" through holographic information preservation—the infinite potential is contained and organized without being diminished. Reply

Arno (Aaron Ben Josef) Gorgels Potsdam Germany December 4, 2025

in response to Sarah :

Dear Sarah, in the absense of comments, may I continue the fascinating kabbalistic view, congruent with unconfirmed resp. experimentally unconfirmable contemporary science:

B"H
Just as Ein Sof must maintain distance from its own manifestation through Tzimtzum to allow creation to exist, so too must religions maintain their distinct identities. The "distance" between traditions is not a bug—it's the structural requirement for creation itself.
As you note in your framework: "creation borrows existence through this mechanism of infinity (infinite set of all possibilities), distance awareness of a perfect and completed limited order (subset) and acceptance thereof."

Ein Sof = infinite set of all possibilities
The created order = perfect and completed limited order (subset)
The distance between them = the necessary gap that allows creation to exist

This distance is not meant to be eliminated but accepted and honored. Reply

Sarah November 24, 2025

in response to David Harold Chester:

Dear David, with "Diaspora mindset" I meant not the Jews in Diaspora, but that the Israeli Jews are not thinking like the people who have a State. Deep in the unconscious the Jewish Soul is still in Diaspora and the State of Israel plays a role of a new Ghetto. Why ? Because there are Arabs in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, because it is dangerous to take a walk there, because Israel has not assured its historical borders and heritage, because of Oct 7. Other States would act very differently. It is not a help to the Arab children to let them think that steeling the land of the Jews is correct. The international law tells us that the "Juden" occupy Judea. Like saying French occupy France. As a consequence of the lies, also the Arabs suffer. They deserve the land(s) that are heritage of their ancestors but nobody (of the other States) wants to have them in these lands because they want to eliminate Israel from the map. Reply

Guy Samuel Israel November 20, 2025

Addressing "root causes" means, first and foremost, understanding 2 things;
1. Who we are and our connection to this land
2. Who our enemies are

It's about time for Jews to be strong, loud and proud. Too many of us are weak, scared of offending others by speaking our truth. We must be united with our messaging - that means to liberal Jews that dare speak of a Palestinian State, and those like Neturei Karta who go out of their way to shame us. Reply

glynis Greenpoint November 25, 2025

in response to Guy Samuel:

I agree Reply

Earl Scott Chambers Daegu, South Korea November 19, 2025

Ceasefire is just another word for, “Wait! Let our military re-arm.” Reply

Arnold Gorgels Potsdam November 18, 2025

"Moshiach now" is ♾️ more than "ceasefire now" Reply

Raul Rabinovici Petach Tikva November 17, 2025

3. I emphasize: "There will be no civil war while the enemy is at the gates." The people of Israel must be together, united; this is more important than another piece of the Land of Israel. In my humble opinion, the later prophets during the First Temple period also emphasized that the people of Israel must be unique—a commandment and decree from God.
It may also be that from a practical standpoint, the situation in the Land of Israel today is vastly different from what it was before the establishment of the state, and even from thirty years ago. Perhaps the "Tower and Stockade"² policy is no longer suitable for our times, for all sorts of reasons, including the internet. It could be that in our era, the policy of settlement in Judea and Samaria must be far more sophisticated, with aggressive public relations and government support. It may be that the settlement leaders are right when they say that "illegal" Jewish settlement hinders the Jewish settlement enterprise in the long run. Reply

David Harold Chester Petach Tikva, Israel November 18, 2025

in response to Raul Rabinovici:

Thanks Raul. It is only by the maintenance of a strong military defense force that Israel can ensure peace in this land and generally in the Middle East region.This means that a considerable effort and continuous spending of our national budget is necessary to keep our IDF active and effective as it has found in the past to be necessary. . Reply

Raul Rabinovici Petach Tikva November 19, 2025

in response to David Harold Chester:

I agree with you that the State of Israel needs a strong army, a very strong one.
However, I disagree with you that this is the only thing. In my humble opinion, there are other factors that influence the strength of the State of Israel, both in the Middle East and throughout the world: A. Education: quality education for all, including those in the periphery and children who cannot afford private tutors. B. Aliyah to the Land of Israel: the more Jews there are in the Land of Israel, the stronger the State of Israel becomes. C. An end to division, an end to baseless hatred. A government is chosen at the ballot box, not in the street; by the entire nation, and not just by the loudest voices within it. These factors, also have a direct impact on military strength. For example: quality education leads to military-technological developments . Aliyah increases the high-quality manpower in the IDF. And national unity is the foundation for the resilience of the home front. I thank you! Reply

glynis Greenpoint November 19, 2025

in response to Raul Rabinovici:

I agree but Israel must make it clear to the rest of the world that it will protect all its people from danger in the best way it can Reply

Raul Rabinovici Petach Tikva November 19, 2025

in response to glynis:

In my humble opinion, this is self-evident: it is a most basic role of the State of Israel, for all its citizens, Jews and Arabs alike.
But there is a question within the question: What is the nature of the relationship between the State of Israel and Diaspora Jewry? Our Sages said, "Kol Yisrael Arevim Zeh LaZeh" (All of Israel are responsible for one another). The question is, what are the obligations and rights of the State of Israel towards Diaspora Jewry, and what are the rights and obligations of Diaspora Jewry towards the State of Israel?
I did an initial search on Google about this question, including AI. I see that in Hebrew, there is a lot of discourse on this topic. I wonder what Diaspora Jews think about this?
Wishing you good health and only good news Reply

Raul Rabinovici Petach Tikva November 17, 2025

1. Thank you so much for the course! Yishar Koach!¹
For me personally, the course is important for at least two reasons:
A. The knowledge and the interpretation I am gaining about Israel's political situation.
B. Information on the position of the Chabad movement regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict. It could be that the course is also beneficial for Chabad followers themselves.
In Israel, everything is connected to everything else—the present, the past, the future. Therefore, I will refer to a news item I heard today on Reshet Bet radio: confrontations between protestors and police in Samaria, due to the evacuation of illegal structures built by settlers. In my humble opinion, the situation is complex; it's not black or white, but rather many shades of gray. On the one hand, it is known that Minister Ben Gvir was a member of the 'Hilltop Youth' movements in the 1990s, and today he is a government minister. Also, their slogan, "A Jew does not evict a Jew," is important!

2.. The struggle for the Land of Israel is of the utmost importance for the future of the State of Israel.
On the other hand, the slogan "A Jew does not raise a hand against a Jew" is also critically important! We remember the "Altalena" affair in 1948, and the position of Menachem Begin, of blessed memory. He said [from an article in the HaMashkif newspaper, June 23, 1948]:
"And I call to my brothers in the National Military Organization (the Irgun): do not open fire. I command you: hold onto your weapons—every man to his weapon everywhere, in Jerusalem, in Tel Aviv, and everywhere. But we will not open fire. There will be no civil war while the enemy is at the gates. But if they raise a hand against any one of us—their fate is sealed. We will go all the way. And whoever does not immediately release our commanders and our soldiers—his fate is sealed. And we demand the immediate release of our commanders and our soldiers." Reply

David Harold Chester Petach Tikva, Israel. November 18, 2025

in response to Raul Rabinovici:

What Raul is implying is that after an illegal settlement has been established, our policing forces should not fight against it, to reduce its existence to nothing. It implies that the Arabs who have been allowed to live in the occupied territories should not be made to feel unwanted (because they were also granted a different place to live at the same time, as were the Hebrews) but that they are hindering the true state of our country as promised to Abraham as being some of the Land of Canaan. Reply

Zvi MEXICO CITY November 16, 2025

The level of the course is equivalent to an undergraduate course, understanding that it is directed to a general audience. This should be emphasized so that everyone will decide if to participate or not. Reply

Sarah K. Chile November 16, 2025

B"H, Dear all, thank you for this wonderful and extremely needed lecture ! Yes, yes, yes ! My answer to your first question is: I learned many new things that I did not knew !!! and I wish you can give a full history of modern Israel in some lecture and what Rebbe ever said on that. However, I had the same opinion regarding ceasefires as the Rebbe, already before reading this lecture. I request that you write articles in worlds newspapers on that matter. Best regards, Sarah. Reply

Scott Goldman Laughlin November 14, 2025

Never liked ceasefires when dealing with evil-wickedness of Hamas Hebrew word "Chomos" meaning violence where just as you articulated so well that is just tactics to regroup and reload. Basically, IDF and Israel has defeated Hamas and the seven-front war, Thank G-d, but now it remains to be seen if POTUS 47 plan will come to fruition or IDF along with PM have to finish the job and eradicate Hamas for good which to me if this war was back in ancient times say like during Yeshuah ben Nun would have been done swiftly and timely to annihilate. Would not tolerate an enemy to make falsehood peace only to come back and do more violence and killing. Reply

Raul Rabinovici Petach Tikva November 13, 2025

• A change in the situation in the Land of Israel can come about only through education for peace and coexistence between Israel and the Arabs in the Land of Israel. This is a process that will take generations, if it can happen at all. This process of peace education is made even more difficult by the support for war from Arab and Muslim countries, each with its own interests—countries interested in the continuation of the war between Israel and the Arabs in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, as well as between Israel and other Arab states, some of which are neighbors, like Syria and Lebanon, and others more distant, like Iraq and Yemen.
• The situation in the Middle East, concerning the state of war between Israel and several Arab nations, as well as the Arabs in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, is completely different from the situation in Europe during and at the end of World War II. In Europe, Germany was isolated; all the countries of Europe were against it. In the Middle East, Israel is isolate Reply

Herja Josiahssen November 12, 2025

1. I’m not surprised at most of the tactical implications, due to reading biographies on war and Chinese military classics, since a ceasefire is basically a social/political strategic retreat instead of a physical one. What I was surprised to learn was that there’s already such a history of ceasefires being abused in so many different places by so many different people. I saw them as dangerous before, but super dangerous now.
2. Addressing the root causes would require actually changing the heart of everyone in the opposing camp to be a truly good person that respects Hashem. This can only happen if His work is done in their hearts when they hear His truth, and they’re brought into subjection to Him because they want to be. Can He do it? Yes.... But. That will only happen when Moshiach comes. For now, it’s likely that only death will suffice to stop radical terrorists, and the rest is working patiently and diplomatically with the non-radical civilians who just want to live in peace. Reply

Shosana Ireland November 12, 2025

Torah shows that ceasefire can have implications for the future and unborn generations, therefore the enemy ought to be wiped out unless there it is accepted that who is the enemy now might not be an enemy in the future. Therefore with the blessings, wisdom and rich heritage given by G-d to His people this ought to be applied when considering any ceasefire proposals. Reply

glynis Greenpoint November 17, 2025

in response to Shosana:

Amen Reply

Abe Benjamin Migdal HaEmek November 11, 2025

The present ‘ceasefire’ orchestrated by President Trump is an excellent example of The Rabbi’s teachings. Plus it is so blatantly not in Israel’s interests that I am shocked that Israel agreed to it.

The fact that Witkoff and Kushner were involved in the wheeling and dealing should have been an eye opener for Bibi. Both these Jewish gentlemen have business dealings with Quatar, Saudi Arabia etc. admittedly it opens the doors to the most influential sheikhs — but then what about their personal financial interests ?

Trump’s 20 point plan includes the likes of rabidly and openly anti Israel ; TURKEY.
The Hamas financiers and hosts of their billionaire leaders ; QUATAR.
The waiting on the sidelines to attack Israel, letting in ammunition, missiles, tunnel building equipment, free passage of terrorists etc ; EGYPT.
The joke of an organization UNRWA who let their schools, hospitals etc to be used by Hamas as a camouflage.
We in Israel can only depend on ourselves and the One above. Reply

Dave Marcus November 11, 2025

I was in full agreement with the Rebbe's POV even before I read them. Ceasefires, without surrender, disarmament and tangible consequences when violated only serve the side of the terrorists. Reply

glynis Greenpoint November 17, 2025

in response to Dave Marcus:

Totally agree Reply

Jonathan Davis Montréal November 11, 2025

i. ceasefires propositions, combined with crafted media narratives, seem like a last hope military strategy "For the Defeated"
ii. Sound Historical Education and Engagement ? A mutual willingness to "Grow Together", strictly enforced amongst local Stakeholders ? Reply

Hanna November 11, 2025

Ideally one should look for total security. This will never happen, though, however, because the other party (with assistance of some international actors) pressuring us to accept the proposed ceasefire, as the experience shows, (Hamas, Hezbollah) are not interested in this.
So, we need to see the immediate humanitarian concerns that we can take care of at the moment (in the present conflict, with Hamas (freedom of all hostages and return of the bodies of our fellow fallen). We knew from, the beginning that total security will not be achieved by this ceasefire deal, that Hamas will refuse to disarm. But we have a new starting point (after achieving one goal, easing the humanitarian concern, freeing our hostages) from where we can better make our international partners understand that Hamas and Hezbollah will not disarm, and we need to act with a fist to disarm them forcefully.
Acting this way, we will put the international partners on our side this time (US EU some Muslim/Arabnations) Reply

Vesna Belgrade November 11, 2025

Thank you Rabbi Pearl, for the examination about ceasefires. It's informative, it gives more proofs for what can be understood from current contents in medias (I don't know about military strategy, but I do about media and how they do or don't reflect what's going on.)
If you ask me, it's very important to be aware that for those (us) who are not under the bombs, or in the battle field, it is much easier to make plans.
Although, of course, prophets can see better even than those on the spot.
Israeli people also needed to have peace, to be able to even process what happened, since hamas' genocidal attack that happened two years ago was something different.It had to do with new nazis malcombination of "jihadists" and "anarchists", with strong impact of mafia methods, goals and cruelty, and using of all kind of worst new, audiovisual idolatrous practices, which can recently be regularly seen in EU films, arts etc.
It was aimed much bigger than Israel: thank G-d, they didn't succeed! Reply

Renee Szporn November 11, 2025

I never really understood that during a ceasefire, the enemy could regroup to cause more harm. I guess that I am very naive that way. What has impressed me more is how timeless the Rebbe's advice is. Reply

Ruth November 11, 2025

Thanks to this class, I now know with even more certainty, that ceasefires benefit only the weaker side, in this case it benefits the terrorists. The solution needs to be that there are huge negative consequences for the terrorists every time they attack. Those consequences should be the permanent loss of the land, forever. Gaza should belong to Israel now as punishment for Oct 7. The people there should be relocated and/or deported. If further attacks occur, then Israel should take even more land, permanently, in Judea and Samaria. Maybe if these people see the map changing and that they’re in danger of losing all the land, they will finally stop their hopeless cause to get all the land. Wars are won by winning the land. If you keep giving it back to them, you’ll never win. Gaza was already given to Israel by G-d. It’s time to take it back from the people that would destroy us.
“And unto the Great Sea toward the going down of the Sun, shall be your border”
-Joshua (1:4) Reply

Anna Cleveland November 11, 2025

in response to Ruth:

Of course! The answer is world domination and the obliteration of all who disagree with that. We're have we heard that before.
שמור וזכור Reply

Ruth November 12, 2025

in response to Anna :

G-d never gave Israel “the world”. Israel is unique in the world in that there was never any attempt by Israel in history to achieve “world domination”. You want to see world domination? Look no further than Islam. Your comment is ignorant, inflammatory and divisive. Reply

A) A Net Victory for Terror

B) Ceasefire as a Tactical Pause

C) Time to Regroup: Terror Groups and Ceasefires

D) The Terrorist’s Playbook

E) Cultural Precedent: Hudna

Ceasefire: A Prelude to the Yom Kippur War

Summary

Exercises:

You may also be interested in...

Join the Discussion