By John Q. Hosedrinker 
IDF Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi announced his resignation, effective March 6, 2025, citing responsibility for the October 7th military failures. Despite significant achievements, including the liberation of hostages and the weakening of Hamas and Hezbollah, Halevi acknowledged the October 7th shortcomings as a lasting burden. He highlighted the IDF’s successes across multiple fronts while emphasizing the ongoing need to achieve all war objectives, including the return of all hostages and improved security conditions. Following Halevi’s announcement, the head of Southern Command also resigned.
Read the original article here
The IDF Chief of Staff, Herzi Halevi, announced his resignation, effective March 6th, 2025. His decision follows the devastating events of October 7th and stems from his acceptance of responsibility for the military’s failures that day. He explicitly stated that the failings of the IDF on October 7th will haunt him for the rest of his life. This is a deeply personal admission of profound regret and speaks to the weight of the responsibility he carries.
The resignation wasn’t entirely unexpected. Many in the Israeli public, regardless of their assessment of Halevi’s overall performance, felt a change in leadership was necessary after the October 7th attack. Halevi himself had indicated earlier in the conflict that he would step down when the time was right, meaning he wouldn’t leave the army leaderless amidst heavy fighting. The timing, following the successful return of hostages and the significant blows dealt to Hamas and Hezbollah, allows for an orderly transition of command.
Halevi’s statement emphasized his commitment to completing ongoing inquiries into the October 7th events and strengthening the IDF’s preparedness for future challenges. His focus is on ensuring a smooth transfer of power, a testament to his dedication to the IDF even in the midst of his departure. His letter of resignation was submitted to both the Prime Minister and the Defense Minister, signaling the formal nature of this significant decision.
Simultaneously, the resignation of Maj. Gen. Yaron Finkelstein, head of the IDF Southern Command, was announced, highlighting the widespread impact of the October 7th failures within the military’s higher ranks. This suggests a broader acknowledgment within the IDF of systemic issues that contributed to the devastating attack. The coinciding resignations underscore the gravity of the situation and the need for accountability at the highest levels.
The IDF achieved significant military successes during the conflict, including weakening Hamas and Hezbollah, liberating hostages, and advancing other objectives. Halevi himself highlighted these accomplishments, crediting the IDF commanders and troops under his command for their bravery and effectiveness in a difficult and multifaceted war. Yet, the shadow of October 7th continues to loom large, outweighing even these considerable victories.
Despite the military’s successes, the October 7th attack remains a stark reminder of intelligence failures and a lack of preparedness. The sheer scale of the attack, and the loss of innocent lives, understandably fuels public anger and demands for accountability. It is this undeniable aspect that appears to have primarily led to Halevi’s decision, and that will undoubtedly continue to fuel ongoing inquiries and debates.
The decision raises broader questions about the Israeli military’s intelligence gathering and response capabilities. The fact that such a large-scale attack could have occurred despite Israel’s sophisticated intelligence network raises concerns about potential systemic failures and requires thorough investigation. The inquiries will play a crucial role in determining the extent of responsibility at various levels, and in preventing similar events in the future.
Many opinions circulate regarding the extent of Halevi’s responsibility and the appropriate response to the October 7th attack. Some believe that his resignation is an honorable act, accepting responsibility for the failures that occurred under his watch. Others argue that it’s insufficient and that further consequences are warranted. There are even those who believe that he should remain, given his experience and ongoing contributions. However, the consensus seems to be that his acknowledgement of responsibility and the subsequent resignation, while potentially controversial, represent an attempt at accountability.
Ultimately, Halevi’s resignation marks a significant moment in the aftermath of October 7th. While the military achieved significant victories during the conflict, the undeniable failures of that day and their lasting impact cannot be ignored. The resignation, alongside the ongoing inquiries, signify a commitment to acknowledging past mistakes and implementing changes to prevent future tragedies. The debate regarding the appropriate level of accountability will continue, but Halevi’s decision clearly underscores the profound and enduring consequences of the October 7th attack.