Ynet News (English), on West Bank, 26 October 2026

Ynet tells the Hebron operation as a management dispute between Netanyahu and his army chief, and borrows the occupation's vocabulary to do it: Palestinian homes are "unauthorized structures" with no mention of permits, and the two men who shot the soldiers are "terrorists" on officials' word. The article never calls the West Bank occupied, although the ICJ ruled the occupation unlawful in July 2024. It also never tells the reader that Netanyahu ordered a siege of Hebron as collective punishment and that hundreds of Palestinians have already been expelled from their homes, both reported elsewhere on the same event, and it quotes no Palestinian.

8.8

Serious

out of 10

What we found

  1. Uses the occupation's words

    Serious

    “the demolition of unauthorized structures”

    What the words do
    Ynet adopts the occupation's legal label for Palestinian buildings in its own voice, so the demolitions read as the removal of things that should not have been there.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That soldiers are clearing illegal buildings, and that the owners were at fault.
    What is actually the case
    The article gives no permit context at all, and other coverage of this operation describes Israeli forces raiding family homes after Netanyahu declared "We will act to destroy this place" of the neighbourhood the gunmen were said to come from. The word permit never appears.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Troops are demolishing Palestinian buildings that Israel says were built without permits, which Palestinians in the occupied West Bank are almost never granted.

  2. Labels people on one side's word

    Serious

    “the two terrorists who carried out the deadly attack”

    What the words do
    Ynet identifies the two men as "terrorists" while passing on Israeli officials' argument, with nothing in the article beyond that argument to support the label.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That the label is established fact rather than the wording of the political leadership whose case for prolonging the operation the sentence is reporting.
    What is actually the case
    Other coverage of the same shooting calls them gunmen and attackers. The article offers no source for the word terrorists other than the officials making the case for continuing the operation.

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Officials argue that the two gunmen who shot the soldiers were armed with automatic weapons and large quantities of ammunition, making further searches necessary.

  3. Hedges the documented record

    Serious

    “the West Bank city”

    What the words do
    Across the whole article Ynet never once writes occupied: Hebron is "the West Bank city", and the operation, the demolitions and the expulsions are described with no reference to the legal status of the territory they happen in.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That the Israeli military is operating on ordinary ground, where its searches, demolitions and removals of residents are a domestic security matter.
    What is actually the case
    The ICJ ruled in July 2024 that Israel's occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem is unlawful. Other outlets covering this same operation write "the occupied West Bank" as a matter of course.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    The operation in Hebron, in the occupied West Bank, followed a shooting at a military checkpoint at the city's entrance in which two Israeli soldiers were killed.

  4. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Serious

    What is missing

    The article never tells the reader that Netanyahu ordered a siege of Hebron and a full lockdown of the West Bank as collective punishment, that hundreds of Palestinians have already been expelled from their homes, or that B'Tselem warned of acts that could constitute war crimes. Without this a reader takes the dispute to be about the pace of a routine search operation.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

  5. Uses the occupation's words

    Minor

    “keeping Palestinian residents away from their homes for extended periods”

    What the words do
    The phrase turns expulsion into a matter of duration, and frames the only problem with it as a legal difficulty for the army.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That Palestinians are temporarily being held back from their houses while soldiers work, an inconvenience with a legal wrinkle.
    What is actually the case
    Other coverage of the same operation reports hundreds of Palestinians expelled from their homes, ordered as collective punishment after Netanyahu said the army would destroy the neighbourhood the gunmen came from.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  6. One side gets the space

    Minor

    “creates a psychological impact among Palestinians”

    What the words do
    The only account of what the operation does to Hebron's Palestinians is given by Israeli security officials, as a desired "psychological impact"; no Palestinian is quoted anywhere in the article.
    What a reader comes away believing
    That the effect on a city of 250,000 people is a measurable military benefit, described by the people who designed it.
    What is actually the case
    Hebron's mayor Yousef Jaabari was speaking publicly about the same operation, calling the city a disaster zone under full Israeli siege.

    How we know

    Show it in the article

  7. Leaves out what changes the picture

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article credits the earlier northern West Bank camp operations with "a significant decline in terrorist activity" and says nothing of their effect on the people living there. A reader believes those operations were a clean success.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

Every underline is part of a finding. Press one to see why.

Not just Iran: Netanyahu defies IDF chief over continuing Hebron operation

The military operation in Hebron, launched after a deadly shooting attack near killed two IDF soldiers, has become another point of contention between the military leadership and Israel's political leadership, just a day before Tuesday's election. While troops from the IDF's 98th Division continue intensive operations involving searches for weapons, arrests of suspects, the evacuation of Palestinian residents and , military officials believe that the limited operational results so far warrant reassessing whether the operation should continue in its current form.

According to sources familiar with the discussions, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir presented his position during a meeting with the political leadership, attended by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz, arguing that the time had come to end the operation. Netanyahu and Katz, however, rejected that assessment and instructed the military to continue. Ultimately, the chief of staff's recommendation was not accepted, and the decision was made to keep the operation underway.

The IDF has pointed, among other concerns, to the legal difficulties involved in , particularly when the operation is not producing significant military gains. So far, troops have made arrests and located a limited number of weapons, but have not uncovered unusual weaponry or large weapons stockpiles.

The political leadership, however, presents a different assessment. Officials argue that were armed with automatic weapons and substantial quantities of ammunition, making it necessary for the IDF to continue searching for additional weapons in the area. They also maintain that prolonging the operation will strengthen deterrence. Security officials explain that the very presence of large IDF forces operating inside Hebron , particularly because the troops have entered a major Palestinian city rather than refugee camps, as they did during previous operations in Jenin, Nur Shams and Tulkarem.

The current disagreement recalls an IDF operation in the Qalandiya refugee camp in August. At the time, the military defined its objectives as targeting terrorist operatives and infrastructure. Katz also pushed for a large-scale operation and again raised the possibility of taking control of another refugee camp, similar to the operations carried out in Jenin, Tulkarem and Nur Shams.

IDF officials said the military had operational plans for every refugee camp but had not mobilized forces to carry them out because there was no operational necessity. There was also tension over contingency planning for a scenario known in the military as a "turning of the guns," involving a possible armed escalation in which Palestinian security forces turn their weapons against Israel. Katz presented the IDF's extensive and aggressive plan for such a scenario, although intelligence assessments at the time did not indicate that an escalation of that kind was imminent in the West Bank.

It is important to note that the prolonged military operations in refugee camps in the northern West Bank, which Katz was among those pushing for and which were conducted under Central Command chief Maj. Gen. Avi Bluth, led to a significant decline in terrorist activity in the area, according to Israeli security assessments.

However, the Qalandiya operation ended after just two days and, based on the information available so far, did not produce significant operational results. Now, in Hebron, the question is once again whether continuing the operation is likely to yield further results or whether it has already achieved its main objectives.

But the debate over the Hebron operation is unfolding against a broader and more complicated security backdrop. The IDF is currently also focused on preventing the next attack, particularly attacks carried out by lone assailants inspired by previous incidents. Security officials are concerned about copycat attacks that could develop following exposure to incitement on social media and military activity on the ground. Central Command is therefore concentrating its efforts on identifying threats early, thwarting potential attackers and preventing an escalation that could emerge from several directions.

The IDF stresses that such conditions require precise, targeted counterterrorism operations, accompanied by constant assessments of their operational value and their consequences on the ground. The concern is that an escalation could develop rapidly, making it necessary to consider not only existing threats but also the reactions military operations themselves could provoke.

Against this backdrop, the Hebron operation illustrates the tension between the political leadership's demand to continue military activity in pursuit of deterrence and additional weapons discoveries, and the IDF's position that the operational benefits must be weighed against the consequences of prolonging the operation for the local Palestinian population.

Read the original article on ynetnews.com (opens in a new tab)

How other outlets reported it

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Ynet News (English)

  1. 25 OctIsrael's fate will be decided in the West Bank, not just at the ballot box0.0
  2. 25 OctIsrael fears copycat attacks ahead of election after deadly West Bank terror shooting9.7
  3. 25 OctIsrael fears copycat attacks ahead of election after deadly West Bank terror shooting9.8
  4. 23 OctIDF and Shin Bet launch counterterrorism operation in Hebron ...9.1
  5. 23 OctHelmet camera footage shows Israeli forces battling terrorists near ...9.4

Everything we scored from Ynet News (English)