The Jerusalem Post, on West Bank, 27 October 2026

8.8out of 10Serious

Israeli forces likely to after Election Day, officers assess

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.7 findings

According to assessments by officers in the IDF Central Command, Israeli forces will withdraw from Hebron after the elections because the operation has run its course and is generating tensions that serve as "fuel" for incitement and copycat terrorist attacks.

The officers explained that military activity over the past 24 hours has been pointless and is undermining the legitimacy of IDF operations in the area, particularly given the failure to locate weapons or terrorists in the neighborhood.As previously reported, Walla revealed on Monday that a disagreement had emerged between IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir, Central Command chief Maj.-Gen. Avi Bluth, and 98th Division commander Brig.-Gen. Meni Liberty on one side, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz on the other, over whether to continue the operation in Hebron.As part of the operation, IDF forces evacuated hundreds of Palestinian families from the neighborhood where the terrorists responsible for Friday's deadly attack at a temporary IDF checkpoint in Hebron had originated.In addition, IDF forces took control of buildings and searched hundreds of structures but failed to locate weapons, military equipment, ammunition, explosives laboratories, or weapons manufacturing facilities.Senior IDF officials call for withdrawal from HebronConsequently, senior IDF officials insisted on withdrawing from the neighborhood, arguing that the operation had achieved all it could.

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article describes the Hebron operation as evacuations, taking control of buildings and searches, and never says Israeli bulldozers demolished homes and factories, including those of people with no claimed link to the attack. A reader believes the operation was a search that came up empty, not one that also destroyed property.

How we know

Left out here: Leaves out what changes the picture

The article never says the two attackers were shot dead at the scene. Alongside the officers' talk of failing to locate terrorists in the neighbourhood, a reader can believe the attackers or their cell were still being hunted there.

How we know

However, the prime minister and defense minister insisted that IDF forces remain in place.Security officials explained on Tuesday morning that Operation "Roar of Judah" in Hebron represents "the difference between strategic security thinking and routine security thinking, even when the latter is carried out professionally and effectively by the IDF."The officials said a similar dispute had arisen before the takeover of the refugee camps in Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nur Shams, between Defense Minister Israel Katz, representing the political leadership, and senior IDF commanders.Ultimately, the various operations went ahead, , the takeover of the camps, and seizure of weapons, extensive destruction of physical infrastructure, including homes, and the widening of roads through narrow streets.Security officials say IDF presence prevents PA from gaining footholdSecurity officials further argued in favor of the continued IDF presence in the camps, preventing residents from returning, and denying the Palestinian Authority a foothold in the camps, maintaining that the PA is neither willing nor capable of combating Palestinian terrorism.

Authorities are also examining whether the network received instructions from abroad, including from Hamas operatives in Turkey.According to security officials, . However, they argued that the small quantity of weapons discovered so far indicates that the operation has not yet exhausted its potential.

Read the original article on jpost.com (opens in a new tab)
What we found (7)

The Jerusalem Post reports the Hebron operation almost entirely through Israeli officers and officials, and calls the forced removal of Palestinian residents an evacuation even as officials say they want to keep them from returning. It writes killings in the camps as the elimination of terrorists and states an unsourced Hamas network as established fact. It never says Hebron is under occupation.

  1. Uses the occupation's words

    Serious

    “involving the evacuation of Palestinian residents”

    Why this matters
    The outlet repeats "evacuation" for the removal of residents from the Jenin, Tulkarm and Nur Shams camps, in a sentence that ends with homes destroyed.
    The impression it gives
    Camp residents were temporarily moved out, as a protective step.
    The context
    The same passage says officials want to keep preventing residents from returning, which is expulsion, carried out in territory the ICJ has found Israel occupies unlawfully.

    How we know

    • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)

    Show it in the article

  2. Writes the death out

    Serious

    “the elimination of terrorists”

    Why this matters
    The outlet writes killings in the Jenin, Tulkarm and Nur Shams camps as "the elimination of terrorists", in its own voice.
    The impression it gives
    People were removed as a threat, and everyone killed was a terrorist.
    The context
    These were killings by Israeli occupation forces. The article never uses the word killed, and gives no basis beyond the security establishment for calling all the dead terrorists.

    How we know

    • On the recordThe International Court of Justice's July 2024 advisory opinion found Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem unlawful.icj-cij.org (opens in a new tab)

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    The raids on the camps involved forcing out residents, killing people the army described as terrorists, seizing weapons and destroying homes.

  3. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “The investigation has also revealed that a substantial Hamas network operating in Hebron was uncovered during the operation and is run by local operatives.”

    Why this matters
    The outlet states as fact, with no source named, that a substantial Hamas network was uncovered.
    The impression it gives
    The operation has been shown to have exposed a large Hamas network, which justifies it.
    The context
    This is the security services' claim. The article itself says the searches found no weapons or equipment, and other outlets report the army claiming links to Hamas, not proving them.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Security officials claim the operation uncovered a substantial Hamas network in Hebron, though the searches found no weapons or weapons facilities.

  4. Hedges the documented record

    Serious

    “withdraw from Hebron”

    Why this matters
    The headline and article report a military operation and a possible withdrawal from Hebron without ever saying Hebron is in the occupied West Bank.
    The impression it gives
    Israeli forces operate in Hebron as in their own territory, and a withdrawal would end their presence.
    The context
    Hebron is in the occupied West Bank, and the ICJ found the occupation unlawful. Other coverage of the same operation says so plainly.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Israeli occupation forces are likely to pull back from the Hebron neighbourhood they seized in the occupied West Bank after Election Day, officers assess.

  5. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “the decision to evacuate residents from hundreds of buildings is unprecedented”

    Why this matters
    The outlet quotes officers, security officials and ministers throughout, and no Palestinian resident or official is heard about their own removal.
    The impression it gives
    The story is a debate inside the Israeli security establishment about whether the operation is still useful.
    The context
    Residents and Hebron's mayor described the operation as collective punishment, and families did not know why their homes were taken or destroyed.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  6. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article describes the Hebron operation as evacuations, taking control of buildings and searches, and never says Israeli bulldozers demolished homes and factories, including those of people with no claimed link to the attack. A reader believes the operation was a search that came up empty, not one that also destroyed property.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

  7. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article never says the two attackers were shot dead at the scene. Alongside the officers' talk of failing to locate terrorists in the neighbourhood, a reader can believe the attackers or their cell were still being hunted there.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from The Jerusalem Post

  1. 27 OctJalud families still unable to return to burned homes despite High Court order3.0
  2. 27 OctNew settlement outposts opening in Hebron Hills in response to Yehuda Junction attack9.1
  3. 27 OctPalestinians protest against military demolitions in West Bank as Israelis vote8.0
  4. 27 OctIDF imposes West Bank closures, reinforces troops to prevent Election Day violence7.3
  5. 26 OctHebron business demolitions carried out without prior hearing, state tells High Court6.0

Everything we scored from The Jerusalem Post