BySARAH BEN-NUN

JUNE 3, 2026 16:21

Updated: JUNE 3, 2026 17:16

Bereaved families joined former military leaders and security specialists to examine the IDF approach to its October 7 inquiries on Tuesday at a panel held during the Israel Bar Association conference in Eilat. The discussion centered on openness, responsibility, and public confidence in the armed forces.

Participants explored the rising friction around the military internal reviews of the October 7 shortcomings. Families sought details about the fate of their relatives while the army aimed to protect candid operational reviews and the public wanted clarity on how the Hamas assault developed.

Eyal Eshel, father of Sgt. Roni Eshel, an IDF observer killed at the Nahal Oz base on October 7, noted that families encountered significant frustration due to absent details and partial responses from defense officials.

"Our stomachs are full - the rage, the frustration, the grief, the bereavement that took all of us to other places," Eshel said. "Roni entered the Nahal Oz command center, and already then the concealment of information and the cutting of corners began."

Families not given full picture of base danger

Eshel added that families received no complete account of the risks confronting troops at the base.

"No one in the defense establishment told any of the families that this entire enclave was an extermination zone - they hid this information from us," he said. "We understood that they were lying to these girls, but also to us."

The Nahal Oz base stands as a key emblem of October 7 shortcomings, especially given prior alerts from female observers and the severe casualties endured there amid the Hamas attack.

Attorney Talik Gvili, mother of St.-Sgt.-Maj. Ran "Rani" Gvili, a Yasam police officer killed at Alumim on October 7 whose body was taken to Gaza and later recovered in January, said she sought answers through IDF probes yet departed unconvinced.

"I am not only a mother, I am also a citizen who grew up her whole life with the belief that we have the strongest army in the world," she said. "But apparently at some point, a loose process developed among army officers or command, instead of giving strength to those who are going in to defend. It became a culture of 'when do we go home.'"

Gvili described the numerous lapses on October 7 as difficult to reconcile.

"There was such a large sequence of failures that happened that day," she said. "I hear that the fence was open, that they broke into so many places, and that there were no satellites that saw what was happening."

On the inquiries into her son's death, Gvili remarked: "I came to the investigations about Rani, and they simply spun me around. I am standing there and saying to them: I do not believe you. And if you do not correct this investigation, I am going to the press."

She expressed doubt that the military could fully account for its actions internally.

"We are naive if we think that someone inside the army will come and say, 'I failed.' It will not happen," she said. "We are naive if we think someone inside the army will say, 'I was wrong.' It will not happen."

Criticism of IDF may weaken military, researcher says

Brig.-Gen. (res.) Guy Hazut, a senior researcher at the Institute for National Security Studies and former head of the ground forces operational learning system during the war, recognized the magnitude of the failure yet cautioned that some critiques could undermine rather than strengthen the army.

"The motivation of some of the IDF's critics is dangerous," Hazut said. "They are not coming to repair - they are coming to destroy. Their motives are hatred, revenge, and a desire for all responsibility to fall on the army. In my eyes, these are dangerous people, because if they dismantle the IDF, we have nothing else."

Hazut called October 7 "the gravest failure in the history of Zionism," yet urged that public discussion also acknowledge the IDF ongoing central role in national security.

"The central problem is organizational culture," he said. "The IDF lacks a culture in which people say what they truly think. The courage to express an opinion and the ability to maintain a real culture of investigation have been damaged over the years. As long as this culture does not change, we will continue to be in trouble."

Dr. Ariel Heimann of INSS noted that the public debate on trust in the IDF requires careful consideration, as the situation appears more nuanced than a simple "crisis of trust."

"When looking at the question of trust in the IDF, we need to remember that the studies show a more complex picture," Heimann said. "Since 2022, surveys point to roughly 85% of the public expressing trust in the IDF, even if trust in the senior command is lower."

Heimann observed continued broad confidence in combat troops and the IDF mission despite criticism directed at senior leadership.

Col. (res.) Avi Halabi, head of the military defense system's representation unit for October 7 events, stated he lost faith in the army on October 7 yet entered the review process to gain deeper insight.

"I lost trust in my army on October 7," Halabi said. "I looked for a way to understand better how it happened, so one of the things I did was go and lead this system."

Halabi reported meeting officers who admitted errors and stressed that responsibility for October 7 should not be viewed narrowly.

Col. (res.) Orly Yaron, a former president of a military court, said October 7 revealed an army that ignored its own observers.

"I saw and still see a body that is not connected to its eyes," Yaron said. "It took young women, placed them in the role of its eyes in a place it itself defined as dangerous, and when they told it what they saw, it did not listen to them. So why did you put them there?"

Yaron backed releasing the probes publicly while recognizing the value of confidentiality to promote honest disclosure.

"The investigation is confidential so that we can learn from it and so that people will tell the whole truth," she said.

"But the commanders here did not arrive in that situation. They already arrived with lawyers, and lawyers by nature advise what is best for their clients. If suspicion of a cover-up has arisen, we need to examine it thoroughly."