60% of Israelis say Israel is not using enough force in Gaza
Executive summary
A recent claim that “60% of Israelis say Israel is not using enough force in Gaza” is not directly found in the supplied documents; available sources do not mention a specific 60% figure or a public poll with that headline (available sources do not mention the 60% poll). Reporting in the supplied files shows an Israeli political leadership debating continued operations, a public atmosphere shaped by hostages and security fears, and government moves toward a phased withdrawal tied to an international stabilization force — all factors that help explain why public opinion might tilt toward harsher measures even if a precise 60% number is not documented here [1] [2] [3].
1. The political backdrop: hostages and the second phase negotiations
Israeli leaders are publicly focused on security outcomes tied to hostages and a second phase of a ceasefire plan that includes demilitarizing Gaza and an international force; Prime Minister Netanyahu told reporters the second phase “could begin as soon as the end of the month,” framing disarmament and withdrawal as central political goals [1] [2]. Those political signals — repeated in Reuters, AP and PBS coverage — create a domestic narrative in which many Israelis may perceive force as necessary until clear guarantees on hostages and demilitarization are delivered [1] [2] [4].
2. Military posture and public perception: troops still on the ground
Multiple sources note Israeli forces remain in control of more than half of Gaza and senior military figures describe holding forward lines; IDF Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir spoke of “operational control” and a defensive “yellow line,” statements likely to reinforce public views that military pressure remains necessary to prevent renewed threats [5] [6]. Those visible troop presences and ongoing raids reported in live coverage feed a security-first frame that can push public sentiment toward wanting continued or increased force [7] [8].
3. Humanitarian, legal and international pressure that cut the other way
At the same time, human-rights organizations and U.N. actions cited in the supplied material underline sharp international concern about Israel’s conduct and the need for stabilization and humanitarian access. The U.N. Security Council authorized an international stabilization force and tied Israeli withdrawal to demilitarization milestones, signaling diplomatic limits on unilateral military expansion and offering an institutional alternative to “more force” [3]. That international framework constrains policy options and complicates any domestic majority call straightforwardly for escalation [3].
4. Why specific poll figures matter — and why we don’t have them here
A percentage claim such as “60%” requires a named poll, methodology and date. The supplied search results include detailed political and military reporting but do not present a public-opinion poll showing 60% of Israelis favoring more force; therefore the precise statistic cannot be verified from these sources (available sources do not mention the 60% poll). Without the poll’s sponsor, sample, wording and timing, such a figure can be misleading because public views vary sharply with recent events (hostage releases, casualties, diplomatic moves) that the sources document [9] [8].
5. Competing narratives in Israeli media and abroad
The supplied coverage reveals competing domestic and international narratives: Israeli officials and military leaders emphasize security and continued pressure until guarantees are obtained [10] [1] [5], while international actors and U.N. bodies advocate stabilization through a multinational force and phased Israeli withdrawal [3]. Independent outlets (e.g., The New York Times) document Hamas reasserting influence in parts of Gaza after Israeli pullbacks, a fact that bolsters arguments on both sides — for some, evidence that more force is needed; for others, proof that stabilization and institution-building, not further fighting, are the remedy [9] [6].
6. How to evaluate future claims about public opinion
To assess statements like “60% of Israelis…” seek the original poll: who conducted it, sample size, sampling dates, exact question wording, margin of error and whether the question offered trade-offs (e.g., more force vs. humanitarian costs). The supplied sources model responsible reporting by grounding political statements in official remarks and U.N. resolutions rather than unnamed public percentages [1] [3]. Absent such polling detail in these materials, treat the 60% figure as unverified by the supplied reporting (available sources do not mention the 60% poll).
Limitations: This analysis is constrained to the provided search results; other reputable polls or public-opinion reporting not included here may confirm or refute the 60% claim (available sources do not mention the 60% poll).