Israel should try and work out a cease-fire and a framework deal with Hamas in Gaza. True, Hamas is a murderous, radical Islamist, terrorist organization that is a sworn enemy of Israel and rejects Israel's very existence on ideological and religious grounds. But Hamas is the one in charge in Gaza.
To ignore that fact is to ignore the reality. So Hamas is where we should set our sights, just as the PLO – also a terrorist organization – is the ruling entity in the Palestinian Authority, and as such Israel maintains ties with it and coordinates with it on matters of security.
Hamas is a governing body; it rules the state of Gaza. As a governing body, we demand that it demonstrate responsibility; attack it when terrorist attacks are carried out against us (even if they are perpetrated by other groups); and exchange prisoners. Why? Because we need to conduct ourselves pragmatically. Ignoring reality does not policy make. The question of a deal with Hamas isn't "whom we talk to," it's whether or not making the deal serves Israel's interests. If the answer is yes, there is nothing wrong with talking to Hamas.
What kind of deal are we talking about? Not conceding territory or uprooting Israeli communities, or doing anything that would damage Israeli sovereignty. It would be a deal that would fix the security situation along the Gaza border and restore calm. If that's feasible (doubtful) it would be irresponsible on Israel's part not to do so. But in order to know whether it's feasible, Israel needs to try for an agreement.
The alternative to that is war, and we see war as the last option. A war would end with a cease-fire. We have an obligation to skip the bloodshed, destruction, and suffering war entails and move directly to a cease-fire, if possible.
Israel should insist on a total cease-fire, which includes an absolute stop to arson terrorism, attacks to the border fence and the "marches of return." In exchange, Israel will be generous and open-handed when it comes to economic issues, developing Gaza, and anything else that can make life easier for the population there.
The main person behind the escalation and pushing for war between Hamas and Israel is Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. He is starving out the people of Gaza, cutting off their electricity, doing everything he can to make them suffer, and using every possible tactic to stave off discussion about his stepping down as PA leader. His strategy is designed to lead to war in the hope that if Gaza is damaged enough, he will be able to retake power there.
There are some Israeli politicians and analysts who reject the idea of negotiating with Hamas, arguing that if we strengthen Hamas by recognizing it, we will weaken Abbas. Is holding up Abbas, a radical hater of Israel, a bona fide Holocaust denier, who consistently spurns even the most far-reaching peace proposals, worth risking the lives of IDF soldiers and the residents of Gaza-adjacent communities? In my opinion, this is a ridiculous approach.
Only from a position of strength can Israel reach an agreement with Hamas. The policy of ignoring and containing arson terrorism has seriously hurt Israel's deterrence and will make it harder for us to negotiate a deal. It could be that there is no alternative other than a military strike against Hamas. But it would be appropriate if we tried to avoid that by making a valiant effort to work things out. It's in the interests of Zionism. Years of quiet along the Gaza border will give Israel a chance to develop and bolster Jewish communities in the western Negev.
