Heritage Minister Amichai Eliyahu (Otzma Yehudit) said on Thursday that former coordinator of hostage negotiations Maj.-Gen. (res.) Nitzan Alon was responsible for those who were kidnapped and murdered during the October 7 Hamas massacre.
The far-right minister made the remarks on the 1,000-day mark after the massacre, during an Army Radio interview.
“He’s responsible for people [being] kidnapped,” Eliyahu had said, and argued that the former hostage coordinator held responsibility “due to an approach that placed the terrorists on the border fence.”
“If we had followed Nitzan Alon, we would now have Hamas on the fences facing the communities,” Eliyahu added.
Throughout the two years that Alon was the lead coordinator for returning the Israeli hostages held by Hamas, there were times when he supported proposed hostage deals. However, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and members of his government did not agree to those terms.
Alon: 'Some other different decisions and negotiations could have returned them alive'
The Otzma Yehudit Party, led by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, had repeatedly pushed against the hostage deals. In January 2025, Otzma Yehudit left the coalition over disagreements on a ceasefire deal.
Eliyahu was among the ministers to submit his resignation to Netanyahu.
Eliyahu’s remarks against Alon came after he had said on Wednesday that the Israel-Hamas War could have ended a year earlier. By prolonging the war, he said, many soldiers and up to 40 hostages may have died unnecessarily.
Another far-right party to oppose the hostage deal was the Religious Zionist Party, led by Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.
Smotrich took credit for returning the hostages this week, in remarks that led to outrage from bereaved family members and victims of the attacks.
Alon had also criticized Smotrich’s remarks, saying: “Even when we talk about having returned all of the hostages, about 40 hostages who were taken alive were killed and murdered, and some of them by our own power, others by their abductors, and some could not survive the conditions [of captivity].”
“Some other different decisions and negotiations could have returned them alive. That is definitive, and we should not forget it,” he added.
Alon rejected the idea that Netanyahu, Smotrich, and the cabinet should be credited for their insistence on returning all of the hostages instead of taking partial deals.
Yashar Party leader Gadi Eisenkot, a leading rival candidate against Netanyahu in the upcoming elections, slammed Eliyahu’s statements. He argued that the government was attempting to evade responsibility for the massacre and its role in the attacks.
“One thousand days since the gravest failure in the history of the State of Israel. A minister in the government of failure dares to smear and lie, falsely accusing of the massacre someone who was not in office that morning, but immediately reported to assist,” Eisenkot stated.
Eisenkot also praised Alon, saying that he was a hero of Israel and a person who contributed to the rescue of the hostages “in stark contrast to an irresponsible minister and his party colleagues who opposed deals to save hostages.”
“He [Alon] fought for the lives of the hostages, and has a decisive contribution to their return.”
Eisenkot noted that Eliyahu’s remarks were “not a slip of the tongue: it is the messaging sheet of the October 7 government.”
No formal investigation of the Oct. 7 government yet, Eiesenkot blames Netanyahu
Eisenkot then listed Netanyahu and members of the cabinet as being responsible for the massacre. Among those on the list were Smotrich, Ben-Gvir, Justice Minister Yariv Levin, and Transportation Minister Miri Regev.
Netanyahu is among the only major officials who have not resigned after the October 7 massacre.
The political echelon has repeatedly blocked a state inquiry into the events surrounding the attacks, despite polls showing huge public support for this type of investigation.
At 1,000 days after the massacre, no probe to investigate the government’s role in the attacks has yet been established. There remains an ongoing dispute over what kind of investigation should be conducted and who should lead it.
The coalition has been advancing a contentious bill that seeks to promote a new political investigative framework that diverges from the traditional independent state commission of inquiry mechanism, which is overseen by the Supreme Court.
Netanyahu also released a 55-page document in February that outlined answers he gave to State Comptroller Matanyahu Englman as part of the investigation into the October 7 Hamas attack.
The prime minister’s answers point to failures among officials in the security establishment and appear to deflect his role in the outcome of the attacks. Opposition leader Yair Lapid has accused Netanyahu of manipulating and selectively editing the documents to evade responsibility.
Yonah Jeremy Bob contributed to this report.