Here are some excerpts from Harel's article, which I'm posting in the event readers can't penetrate the paywall.  On Israel and the ceasfire, Harel writes (my bolds):

Tuesday's announcement of the ceasefire was accompanied by the expected cries of woe from left and right. For every Israeli asking himself if Israel didn’t go too far in the destruction and suffering it inflicted on Gaza, there are two or three others who are convinced that the Israel Defense Forces should have hit harder, teaching Hamas a lesson it won’t soon forget. The somewhat disappointed sentiment is understandable, given the economic and military disparity between the two sides. However the sense is that the war did not end in victory or failure, but rather in a somewhat doleful tie.

Israel would have preferred to end hostilities three weeks ago, once the attack tunnels were neutralized. Since then, the sense of military achievement has been eroded, with justifiably mounting anger of (mainly) the residents of communities along the Gaza border, directed at military and civilian leaders. Last week a breakthrough was attained with the assassination of some Hamas military commanders. These assassinations, along with the widespread humanitarian disaster, appear to have hastened Hamas’ agreement to a ceasefire. The Islamic Jihad, more severely hit, was ready for a similar agreement a few weeks earlier.

On Hamas and the ceasefire, Harel writes:

Hamas’ acceptance of a cease-fire under conditions which are far from their original demands is not an indication of an Israeli victory, but of erosion in the organization’s willingness to continue fighting at present. The real test will come over the long run. The Second Lebanon War was poorly conducted on both the military and civilian level, yet the northern border is almost completely quiet after eight years, with Hezbollah refraining from challenging Israel for a variety of reasons. This time, even with better management of the confrontation on both levels, it is still difficult to estimate how long a quiet period might last.

And, on what to expect in the long-term, Harel believes that Israel is depending more than ever on a stable relationship with the Palestinian Authority, which under the ceasefire is supposed to take over security around, inter alia, the border crossings between Gaza and Egypt and Israel, respectively:

In the long run, maintaining quiet depends on how much Hamas’ willingness to confront the IDF has been diminished and on what outlet from the suffocating siege Israel and Egypt provide it. The situation prior to the war was intolerable for Gaza’s population. Israel must decide soon what it wants. One can mock the ambitious new plan prepared by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas; but what does Israel offer beyond a determined stand and national cohesion?

It is now clear that Israel views the Palestinian Authority differently now, as well as its unity deal with Hamas. Netanyahu's government even half-heartedly recognizes the need for the partner from Ramallah, who maintained stability in the West Bank despite the rage over the killings in Gaza, and is now willing to restrain Hamas and help with reconstruction. Any future solution will also require close coordination with Egypt.

Now I think the article I link to here by Haaretz diplomatic correspondent Barak Ravid gives folks a peak about how difficult it is to pigeon hole positions taken by Israelis into right- and left-wing positions.  Ravid, for example, is a frequent critic of Netanyahu from his left.  But consider the nature of how he's bashing Bibi now, i.e. basically that Bibi's a paper tiger who bellows and roars, but is afraid of his own shadow (my bold):

Netanyahu's conduct during the 50 days of fighting in Gaza highlighted the gap between his statements and promises and the reality. The prime minister, who was the most strident in his statement against Hamas, ended the confrontation with the organization in the weakest position. All he wanted was to achieve a cease-fire at just about any price. When the opportunity came, he simply grabbed it and ran.

The Egyptian cease-fire proposal that Israel accepted on Tuesday did not deliver a single achievement. The only thing that the prime minister's spokesmen could boast about on Tuesday was the denial of achievements to Hamas, such as the dissolution of its demands for a sea port, an airport and salary payments. But all those demands will be raised during the negotiations with Hamas that will resume in Cairo next week.

Michaels,

This appears to be another another spam comment here too from "supplement"