During the conflict in Gaza, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has frequently claimed that he only requires one more military action to finally overcome Hamas.
In April of the previous year, Netanyahu stated that Israel was just “a step from victory” provided it could take control of Rafah, a city in southern Gaza. This March, after Rafah had already faced extensive destruction and Hamas continued to resist, Netanyahu initiated a campaign that he asserted would ultimately secure victory for Israel. When that effort fell short, he launched a larger operation in May that, after three months, has been unable to remove the remaining remnants of Hamas, leaving many Palestinian civilians on the brink of starvation.
Currently, Netanyahu is planning another significant offensive after his cabinet voted on Friday to prepare for the capture of Gaza City, the largest urban center in the enclave. This followed his announcement on Thursday that Israel intends to conclusively defeat Hamas by taking full control of Gaza and then transferring oversight to “Arab forces that will govern it properly without threatening us.”
This new initiative, which may take weeks to commence, threatens to conclude like all his prior attempts: in a strategic impasse, with Hamas still barely holding on, Israeli hostages remaining in Hamas’s control, and Palestinian civilians mired in a nightmarish reality. Israel captured extensive portions of Gaza City in the early phases of the conflict, occupying some regions multiple times, only to give it all back under the mistaken belief that Hamas had been vanquished.
Netanyahu’s choice to escalate the campaign once more, despite mounting international calls to cease hostilities, contradicts the views of some of Israel’s military leaders. The army is exhausted after enduring what has become the longest high-intensity conflict in the nation’s history. Fewer reservists, who constitute the majority of Israel’s combat personnel, are reporting for duty. Officials have noted that the military’s inventory of munitions and spare parts is dwindling. Additionally, there has been an increase in suicide rates among discharged soldiers.
For the umpteenth time, Mr. Netanyahu has put his political interests first by opting to prolong the conflict. Disregarding senior military leaders, many of whom believe Hamas has suffered sufficient losses, the Israeli prime minister has prioritized the demands of his far-right coalition partners, who insist that the war must persist until Hamas is completely eradicated.
“Netanyahu has established an unattainable standard for success, and thus the operation cannot succeed,” remarked Thomas R. Nides, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel.
“The standard for success should be that Hamas can no longer attack Israel as it did on October 7, 2023 — and that has already been accomplished,” Mr. Nides stated. “What Netanyahu considers success — the total eradication of every single Hamas member — is simply unfeasible.”
In his address on Thursday regarding the occupation of all of Gaza, Mr. Netanyahu seemed to anticipate and attempt to mitigate such criticism by simultaneously asserting that Israel would not aim for long-term control of the territory. As a concession to international critics, he indicated that Israel would eventually relinquish Gaza to Arab partners, a decision that could trouble his coalition partners, who prefer Israel to annex the territory and populate it with Jewish settlers.
If Mr. Netanyahu is earnest about his intentions, his strategy could present a more optimistic outlook for the region — one where neither Hamas nor Israel claims authority over it. This would also be an unusual instance of Mr. Netanyahu publicly addressing the type of complex postwar planning that alienates a significant portion of his domestic support, yet is crucial for concluding the conflict.
At this point, Mr. Netanyahu’s perspective remains unacceptable to many in the Arab world.
This week, Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty stated that Egypt is open to the possibility of an international force to maintain peace in Gaza.
However, he emphasized that such a step must be part of a diplomatic process rather than a surge in hostilities, one that would result in the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Generally, analysts believe that Arab governments prefer to engage in Gaza only at the behest of the Palestinian Authority, the recognized Palestinian leadership in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, rather than in response to another lethal Israeli military operation.
Nevertheless, the Israeli cabinet announced on Friday that, besides capturing Gaza City, Israel intends to maintain “security control” over Gaza and will prevent the Palestinian Authority from governing it.
Suppose Mr. Netanyahu does not soften or abandon this plan. In that case, Israel’s renewed offensive will likely deter Arab leaders from engaging with Israel regarding Gaza’s future after the conflict, according to Palestinian analyst Ibrahim Dalalsha.
“It is both ironic and frustrating that Prime Minister Netanyahu now advocates for the reoccupation of Gaza with the intention of later 'handing it over' to Arab forces, as if this were a recent and strategic insight,” stated Mr. Dalalsha, director of the Horizon Center, a research organization based in Ramallah, West Bank.
“Netanyahu’s current viewpoint overlooks the fact that Arab leaders have already expressed their readiness to take a constructive role in Gaza’s future, but only through a negotiated cease-fire, a wider political resolution, and a request from the Palestinian Authority, rather than the Israeli government,” Mr. Dalalsha continued. “That chance was feasible — until Israel withdrew from negotiations unilaterally.”
It is also plausible that Israel may refrain from fully occupying Gaza or even initiating any new operation. Although the Israeli cabinet declared its intended course of action on Friday, it will require days or weeks to strategize such a significant operation and to mobilize enough reservists. During that time, the mission could potentially be canceled.
Israeli analysts suggested that the discussions surrounding occupation might be a tactic aimed at encouraging Hamas to surrender without resistance.
“I don’t envision him going all the way,” remarked Nadav Shtrauchler, a former advisor to Mr. Netanyahu, regarding the Israeli prime minister. “He desires a deal, and from his standpoint, every time he exerted increased military pressure on Hamas, it led to a more favorable option for a deal.”
Regardless of whether the operation moves forward, the mere possibility of it has already provided Mr. Netanyahu with some respite domestically. The far-right seems to have been appeased, at least momentarily, by Mr. Netanyahu’s commitment to occupy Gaza, even though it has caused distress among the families of hostages, who worry for the safety of their loved ones amid a full-scale Israeli assault.
Several weeks ago, it appeared that Mr. Netanyahu was poised to establish a ceasefire in Gaza after the Israeli Parliament concluded its summer recess in late July, as it is typically challenging for coalition members to topple the government while lawmakers are not convening. His choice to escalate the conflict rather than cease hostilities implies he aims to maintain his coalition's stability until Parliament reconvenes in the autumn.
Currently, “Netanyahu has the opportunity and flexibility to explore various options,” remarked Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. diplomat who participated in negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians during the 1990s.
“He keeps his right-wing supporters aligned, possibly brings Hamas back to negotiate, and asserts authority over a cautious military chief of staff,” Mr. Miller continued. “Usually, Netanyahu lacks a clear end strategy and has more than a few avenues for departure.”
0 Comments