In brief
Israel’s forces ended a 10‑day operation in the West Bank city of Hebron on Monday, when they withdrew after evacuating families, demolishing homes and detaining suspects. The operation was launched after two Israelis were killed in a shooting that sparked a political debate ahead of the country’s parliamentary election. Residents began returning to their homes as the military left, marking a shift in control and raising questions about accountability and public safety.
On Monday, Nov. 2, Israeli troops withdrew from the occupied West Bank city of Hebron, ending a 10‑day military operation that had started after a shooting that killed two Israeli soldiers, Xinhua reported.
The operation, launched on Oct. 23, saw the evacuation of Palestinian families, widespread closures, house demolitions and the seizure of weapons, said an Israeli military spokesperson.
Israel Katz, the Defense Minister, made the decision to end the operation on Sunday night, even after the military had asked for an earlier conclusion, the agency said, a move that occurred on the eve of Israel’s parliamentary election.
According to the military spokesperson, forces seized four weapons, demolished the homes of the two Palestinian attackers and detained dozens of suspects during the operation.
"We seized four weapons, demolished the homes of the two Palestinian attackers and detained dozens of suspects during the operation," the spokesperson said.
Hebron’s governor confirmed that Israeli forces had withdrawn from the city, allowing displaced families to return, Al Jazeera reported a few hours after the event.
The 10‑day siege disrupted daily life for residents, with roads closed and the city’s public spaces locked down. The withdrawal left Hebron’s inhabitants cautious but hopeful as they began moving back into their homes.
Following the withdrawal, local authorities indicated that the city’s infrastructure would gradually be restored and that efforts would be made to provide basic services and security to the affected families.
The timing of the operation—just before the October 30 general election—heightened scrutiny on the Israeli government’s approach to security and its impact on civilian life. Critics questioned whether the military’s actions were proportionate and transparent, while supporters warned of the threat to Israeli soldiers' safety.
In the national context, the operation’s conduct and its abrupt conclusion were noted as part of a broader debate about public accountability and the balance between security and human rights. Legal experts noted that the removal of the troops from Hebron required a clear record of the operation’s objectives and compliance with international humanitarian law.
With the withdrawal now complete, discussions among local councils, NGOs, and international observers have begun about the next steps for rebuilding and ensuring that residents can safely resume their daily routines. The Israeli Defense Forces have announced that the town will remain monitored, and that any future military engagement will follow a defined command structure.
As residents step back into their homes, the situation in Hebron remains a focal point for international observers monitoring Israeli–Palestinian relations, while the domestic debate continues on how best to address security concerns without compromising civil liberties.
