A profound chapter in Israel’s national trauma reached a painful conclusion on Monday: the remains of St.-Sgt. Ran Gvili, the last Israeli held in Gaza after the October 7, 2023 attack, were returned to Israeli soil. After 843 days, the state can say that there are no more Israelis in captivity.
Gvili’s story comprises both courage and heartbreak. A 24-year-old police officer who put on his uniform on that horrific morning while on medical leave, he joined the defense of Kibbutz Alumim and was killed while fighting to protect others. That he ran toward danger and became the last to come home should echo throughout Israeli society.
Gvili’s return is rightly mourned and honored. Families gathered in Hostages Square. The symbolic clock counting the days since October 7 has been turned off. Yet closure brings its own burden: a country that has endured this scale of loss still needs to fathom how and why Israel was so catastrophically unprepared.
Government and military leaders also framed Gvili’s return as a statement of national duty. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he told the family, “We will bring Ran home,” and added, “We will bring them all home.”
IDF Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir said, “We kept our promise to leave no one behind,” calling it a moment the country “is excited about,” because Ran returned “to be buried in Israel.”
Across the political spectrum, voices have called for a state commission of inquiry into the gross failures of October 7. Many of those calls reflect anguish more than politics. Families who lost loved ones, freed hostages, reservists, and civilians want answers about intelligence failures, operational decisions, strategic assumptions, and the broader policy environment that left communities exposed.
At the same time, concerns raised by opponents of a sweeping inquiry deserve a fair hearing. Israel remains in a volatile security environment, and public hearings can affect operational freedom, intelligence sources, and national cohesion. Some also fear that an inquiry will turn into a political battlefield and deepen internal chasms and rifts at a time when unity still carries strategic value.
Israel can hold both truths at once. Accountability strengthens deterrence when it produces reforms that the public trusts. National resolve also benefits from responsible timing, careful handling of sensitive material, and broad buy-in that prevents the process from being dismissed as partisan.
Independent authority necessary for complete trust in October 7 investigation
The government has floated review mechanisms of its own. Internal IDF and security reviews can produce initial lessons and immediate changes, and they should continue. Yet many Israelis will view any framework controlled by elected leaders as incomplete unless it includes independent authority, meaningful transparency, and a clear mandate to examine every relevant level of decision-making, political and professional alike.
That point matters because trust is the currency of national healing. Many bereaved families have rejected processes that appear narrow or pre-scripted. Others fear a divisive inquiry that turns their grief into ammunition. A credible framework has to respect both instincts: the demand for truth and the need to protect families from being dragged into political trench warfare.
A serious commission should also avoid the simplistic story Israelis already know all too well, the one that assigns blame to a single person or a single institution. October 7 exposed failures across all sectors: intelligence, operational readiness, policy, civilian preparedness, and the national culture of warning signs dismissed over time.
The goal should be practical: reforms that change how Israel fights, defends borders, protects communities, coordinates between agencies, and prepares civilians. That includes doctrine, budgets, training, early warning, home-front readiness, and decision-making structures in emergencies. It also includes mechanisms for oversight that function during crises, not only afterward.
Israel is at a crossroads. The return of all the hostages symbolized by Gvili’s repatriation should launch a new phase of civic responsibility. Leaders from coalition and opposition can agree on a framework that earns broad legitimacy: a commission anchored in law, staffed by respected figures from across society, empowered to access classified material, and structured to report in stages, beginning with urgent lessons while protecting sensitive information.
Ran Gvili is home. Israel owes him – and itself – a process that delivers answers the public can trust and changes that will improve security. It can pursue accountability while preserving unity and operational strength and do so with seriousness, humility, and a shared commitment to ensure that such a day never recurs.