How to Save Lives in the Israel-Hamas War

In recent months, we’ve seen a disturbing reminder of a pattern that’s repeated itself for decades in Israel: terrorists launch an attack from Gaza, putting the lives of Israeli civilians at risk; to protect its citizens, Israel responds by killing both the terrorists and the innocent Palestinian bystanders who are being used as human shields; the wrongfully killed civilians in Palestine serve as martyrs who motivate more people to join the ranks of terrorists; the growth of terrorist groups and recent attacks on its own civilians drive Israel to double down on its counterterrorism efforts, committing to crack down even harder than they have in the past. This routine will not lead to de-escalation or stability.
  

With its current approach, Israeli airstrikes will never kill more terrorists than they recruit, rendering them insufficient as a long-term solution. At the same time, Hamas’ strategy is a long-term failure as well: its commitment to using terrorism and human shields (along with its absolutist rhetoric) guarantees continued military action and reinforces the belief that Palestine is too unreasonable to negotiate or cooperate with. To prevent violence down the road and minimize the violence occurring today, at least one party in this conflict needs to adjust. Considering that one side is a progressive, democratic, pro-Western ally, while the other is governed by an Iranian-backed fanatical jihadist regime, it seems much more realistic to hope that Israel can be persuaded to make necessary changes to how it handles this crisis than Gaza.
  

This article is not advocating for concessions to Hamas in the hope that it would satisfy them enough to refrain from initiating further attacks, nor am I arguing in favor of a complete ceasefire (which would establish an unacceptable precedent that hiding in densely populated areas leaves Hamas militants immune to the consequences of their atrocities). Broadly speaking, I want pragmatic improvements to methods of counterterrorism. My goal is to push for greater precision and focus on preventing collateral damage when Israel defends itself from terrorists (as it has a right and responsibility to do).
  

Before expanding on what that entails, I want to give credit where credit is due and acknowledge that the IDF does take under appreciated measures to avoid harming Palestinian civilians. This includes designating escape routes, announcing airstrikes in advance, airdropping leaflets to urge evacuation, and using “knock-bombs” to warn people to exit their homes. While such precautions are too generous for Hamas to reciprocate when it launches rockets at Israeli apartment buildings, they are evidently insufficient considering that the current military doctrine has still produced a heartbreaking 28,000 deaths thus far (as reported by sources in Palestine). Despite the IDF’s efforts, many are unconvinced that Israel cares about civilian casualties due to the amount of collateral damage that results from its counterterrorist operations. The widespread demand for ceasefires indicates a belief that Israel’s only choices are killing civilians or letting Hamas escape justice, but I believe that both of these outcomes can be prevented.
  

In short, my proposal is using specialized equipment that would allow the IDF to remain effective on the battlefield while making precision its top priority. The equipment I’m referring to is a modified variant of the laser-guided Hellfire missile called the R9X, which has its explosive payload removed. Instead of detonating on the target, hinged blades swing out right before impact, slicing the target to pieces (and crushing them with the 100-pound metal tube that was just dropped from 30,000 feet in the air). If this sounds particularly gruesome, I would argue that it’s deserved by the type of monsters who necessitate it through the use of human shields. Because the blades are only 18” long and remain attached to the body of the missile, the R9X has a remarkably contained lethal range of just 3 feet in diameter. That accomplishment warrants emphasis: this weapon causes no damage outside of a circle that’s only 3 feet across, while thoroughly dismembering everything inside.
  

While the R9X likely has not yet entered large-scale production, it’s far from an untested gimmick. The missile’s effectiveness has already been proven by the success of at least a half dozen airstrikes that the public was informed of (including a particularly outstanding display of precision where the R9X hit a terrorist in the passenger seat of a car without killing the driver or anyone in the back row). It can be launched from jets, helicopters, armored vehicles, and, crucially, cost-efficient drones like the MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper. The R9X should sound like a dream come true for those of us who want an alternative to dropping bombs in one of the world’s most densely populated cities.
  

This leads us to ask why the IDF hasn’t already put these sword-missiles into service. There are two explanations, both of which I hope can be overcome. First, Congress hasn’t approved their sale to Israel, nor has anyone in Congress firmly pushed for this to change. This lack of interest could result from the R9X’s status as an open secret, as the Department of Defense still hasn’t officially acknowledged the weapon’s existence (despite using it since 2017). The other possible reason is the prohibitive cost. Each Hellfire missile costs $150,000, and that’s without the essential conversion that makes it a kinetic weapon rather than an explosive one. By contrast, the largest and most expensive JDAM bomb weighs 2,000 pounds, and the F16 (Israel’s most numerous combat aircraft) can carry two of them in a single flight. These bombs only cost $36,000 each, and the F16 has a flight cost of no more than $27,000 per hour (with more conservative figures as low as $8,000 per hour). Added up, this means that delivering 4,000 pounds of ordnance might only be a fraction as expensive as a munition that would only take out a single combatant, depending on the expense of modifying standard missiles.
  

If the IDF puts the R9X into service, there is no question that they will end up spending more money for less firepower, but this sacrifice is worthwhile. Leveling buildings with JDAM to kill terrorists has hidden costs that arguably outweigh the money saved on a cheaper weapon; the loss of Gazan infrastructure needed for self-sufficiency, requiring further resources and support via Israeli aid; the loss of will to coexist regarding Hamas’ future recruits, whose motivation to take up arms comes from the destruction in Gaza; the loss of international support (which weakens with every home destroyed or civilian killed as collateral damage), not just from the West, but also regional governments who had previously been moving toward normalizing relations with Tel Aviv; less cynically and most significantly, the loss of priceless civilian lives.
  

The surgical precision of the R9X can address all these problems while still giving jihadists what they deserve. To highlight this point, recall the controversial airstrikes against the packed Jabalia refugee camp from October 31st through November 1st. Hamas hid its commanders among hundreds of innocents, hoping to either deter any kind of military action or provoke Israel into bombing the entire facility. Imagine the catastrophic blow to morale that Hamas would have faced if, rather than taking the bait, the IDF had decapitated the handful of terrorists in the target area over a matter of seconds without harming a single civilian. It would send a message too clear to obscure in propaganda: Israel will guarantee the deaths of jihadists, but Palestinians who don’t join terrorist organizations will not suffer. Without the capabilities of R9X missiles, the IDF instead proceeded to turn that airstrike into a test for which onlookers could stomach remaining loyal to Israel (a test that doubtlessly turned away some of its supporters and contributed to the radicalization of its opponents). As an option to avoid simply flattening buildings, the R9X would give Israel an opportunity to prove its dedication to preventing civilian casualties.
  

While more promising than any other, these missiles are, of course, not the only answer. Unfortunately, I can’t offer a single exhaustive solution to the most hopelessly tangled geopolitical catastrophe of our lifetime (certainly not in 1600 words), and exploring other possible measures to protect civilians deserves an article of its own. I can, however, point to a step that would help, and I can emphasize the necessity of change. No matter how thoroughly the IDF wipes out Hamas, there will eventually be another terrorist attack. As long as Israel creates martyrs and fails to address the grievances of civilians in Palestine, there will be motivations for Palestinians to use violence. For countless reasons, including its national security, the Israeli government needs to pursue ways of responding to the next terrorist attack with a steep reduction in collateral damage. Israel adapted to widespread bus bombings with a robust wall and checkpoint system, it adapted to tunnel-warfare with the CornerShot weapon chassis, and it adapted to rocket barrages with the Iron Dome interceptor system and the ongoing Iron Beam project. Now, the terrorist tactic of using human shields has once again made adaptation necessary to save lives. My vote is for innovative weapons like the R9X as substitutes for conventional ordnance.
  

Alex Lee ‘25 studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at alex.b.lee@wustl.edu