“October 7th was like living through 53 9/11s in a single day”: José Lev Álvarez

This Tuesday marks two years since October 7, 2023 , the day the Islamist group Hamas launched a coordinated attack that left more than 1,200 Israelis dead and hundreds kidnapped. That dawn—marked by the emergence of armed militants, fires, and executions in communities near the border—opened a new phase of the war in Gaza and reconfigured Middle East security policy. “It was like experiencing 53 September 11 attacks in a single day ,” summarizes José Lev Álvarez , an analyst and former sergeant in the Israeli special forces, who believes that this event should remain the key to understanding everything that came next.

Lev Álvarez explains that what happened was not a classic military confrontation, but rather a planned attack against civilians: "They entered orphanages, burned babies, decapitated people, and kidnapped entire families." For him, the magnitude of the attack justifies the Israeli response in a context where Hamas uses hospitals, schools, and underground tunnels as human shields. "There are more than 500 kilometers of tunnels in Gaza. How do you wage a clean war on land where combatants dress as civilians and hide under hospitals?" he asks.

From his perspective, the real battlefield is also informative. He believes that a narrative has been imposed in Europe and America that reduces the conflict to context-free numbers , and he accuses political sectors of using the Palestinian issue to divert internal problems. "Media bias obscures the terrorist threat and presents Israel as the aggressor, when in reality it was the victim of genocide on October 7," he says.

Regarding the international "Sumud" flotilla , which recently sought to reach Gaza with humanitarian aid, Lev Álvarez asserts that it was more of a political act than a humanitarian mission. "Our naval teams searched boats without finding food or medicine, only cameras and activists. It was a media spectacle. Furthermore, the Gaza coast is mined; if a boat explodes, Israel ends up taking the blame." In his opinion, the goal was to provoke a reaction and maintain media attention.

The expert insists that most humanitarian aid does enter Gaza , but is controlled by Hamas: "Israel has allowed millions of tons of supplies, but up to 85% end up in tunnels or on the black market. What people see on social media are short clips, not the actual logistics chain."

Despite the diplomatic isolation he acknowledges in the current context, Lev Álvarez believes that Israel remains "the West's defense" against extremism. "It is the only democratic and stable country in a region surrounded by threats. Criticizing it is easy, but the day Europe or America suffer coordinated attacks, they will ask the Mossad for help."

For him, remembering October 7th isn't a matter of politics, but of historical memory: "It was a genocide against the Jewish people. To forget it would be to repeat the mistake of minimizing terror. Israel doesn't fight for ambition, it fights for survival."

When Hamas launched its most brutal attack against Israel, Israeli professor and political analyst Alberto Spektorowski did not hesitate to call it "one of the worst intelligence failures" in the country's modern history. However, he clarifies: error does not justify inaction. "For all of Israel, the logical response had to be disproportionate. Israeli security doctrine, from its inception, has always been based on a disproportionate response. And that's logical. Europe doesn't like it because we live on different planets: over there, they prefer to die than to cause harm."

Spektorowski describes the October 7 attack as a collective trauma that redefined Israel's perception of vulnerability. But, above all, as the moment that tested the foundations of the preemptive defense doctrine . In his view, failing to respond decisively would have meant surrendering to an organization that uses terror as a method and propaganda as a moral shield. "Hamas made human shields the basis of its strategy. It's impossible to combat that and simultaneously respect human rights. The only alternative for Israel was to surrender."

For the academic, the lack of understanding of Israel's response in the West is rooted more in ideology than ethics. "Europe and much of academia have adopted postcolonial theory : Israel is seen as a colonialist entity, and therefore, everything it does is considered genocide. According to that logic, Palestinians not only can resist, but they have a moral duty to do so. It's a dangerous and deeply biased narrative."

Regarding the "Sumud" flotilla , he agrees with Lev Álvarez that it was a political instrument rather than a humanitarian gesture. "It's completely propagandistic. There's not the slightest real interest in Palestinian human rights. What we have is an instrumentalization of suffering to diplomatically attack Israel." In his view, every such initiative seeks to erode Israeli legitimacy in international forums, without providing real solutions to the humanitarian crisis.

Regarding the prospects for peace, Spektorowski is blunt: “Negotiations are not being made to achieve peace, but rather temporary arrangements . What Trump is trying to impose with his proposal is a long-term settlement, but he hasn't yet realized that with Hamas, that's impossible. Hamas must be defeated and excluded from any future agreement if anyone truly believes in peace.”

Finally, he addresses the debate on the use of force and the criticism of "disproportionality." "Of course there is a double standard," he says. "What is demanded of Israel is not demanded of anyone else. This double standard stems from two factors: the post-colonial mentality and a new dose of antisemitism that has once again permeated Western politics. It's a combination that explains much of Israel's current isolation, but also the world's moral confusion in the face of terrorism."