Tel Aviv
—
Nearly two years into the war in Gaza, the Israeli security cabinet voted for yet another military expansion: the proposed takeover of Gaza City. The plan, which was initiated and pushed by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself, arguably reveals more about his domestic political maneuvering than evidence of any well-thought-out military strategy.
The plan was adopted despite the Israeli military leadership’s fierce objection and grave warnings it could both deepen the humanitarian crisis and endanger the remaining 50 hostages in Gaza., The major expansion of the war also comes against the backdrop of a fundamental erosion of support for Israel around the world, and a decline in internal public backing for the continuation of the war.
And yet, Netanyahu pushed his plan forward, as it has at least one unstated benefit: it gives him time to fight for his political survival. And with his current far-right coalition partners, that means prolonging the war. Time and again, Netanyahu’s allies, Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, have thwarted and aborted progress in ceasefire negotiations by threatening to collapse his government if the war were to end.
Netanyahu’s plan to besiege Gaza City actually falls short of what his coalition partners demand: Ben Gvir and Smotrich are pushing for a full occupation of the embattled enclave as a first step for rebuilding the Jewish settlements in Gaza and ultimately annexing the territory. It is also less than what Netanyahu himself had been selling ahead of the meeting.
In an interview on Thursday, Netanyahu told Fox News that Israel intends to take control of all of Gaza, as if he had made up his mind to fully occupy the territory.
Instead, the Israeli leader chose to promote a phased plan, focusing only on Gaza City for the time being, without taking over other camps nearby, where many of the 20 remaining Israeli hostages are believed to be held captive. Netanyahu also intentionally set a relatively loose deadline for the beginning of the operation – in two months – leaving the door open for another diplomatic push for a ceasefire hostage deal to reemerge and call the whole thing off.
Now, his right-wing partners are fuming at the decision, charging that the plan isn’t enough and that only escalating the war will suffice
A source close to Smotrich said, “The proposal led by Netanyahu and approved by the cabinet may sound good, but it is actually just more of the same. This decision is neither moral, nor ethical, nor Zionist.”
Netanyahu’s latest plan pleases neither his coalition partners nor Israel’s military leadership. During the marathon 10-hour cabinet meeting, Israeli military Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir presented the army’s stark opposition to the government’s reoccupation plans. Israel’s top general warned that a renewed military excursion would endanger both the remaining hostages and Israeli soldiers, cautioning that Gaza would become a trap that would further exhaust IDF forces already worn down by almost two years of continuous fighting, and deepen the Palestinian humanitarian crisis.
The military concerns echo the broad public Israeli sentiment: according to repeated opinion polls, a majority of Israelis support a ceasefire deal that would bring back the hostages and end the war. But Netanyahu’s current decision-making is disconnected from both military advice and popular will, driven instead, analysts and political opponents say, by the narrow imperative of his political survival.
The Gaza takeover plan also places Netanyahu and Israel in unprecedented international isolation. Despite the unwavering free hand that President Trump’s White House has given him in the Gaza war, the growing famine and starvation crisis has already diminished global legitimacy for Israel’s war, and the additional fallout from the latest cabinet’s decision was swift and unambiguous: Germany – Israel’s second most important strategic ally after the United States – announced it was suspending some of its military exports to Israel, setting the stage for other EU countries to further downgrade relations.
Netanyahu is pushing forward with a plan that satisfies no one: Israel’s allies abroad, its own military leadership, a public that wants the war to end on the one hand, and on the other, his hardline partners who are unhappy and think it does not go far enough.
The constituency it does serve is primarily Netanyahu himself: buying him more time to avoid the inevitable choice between a genuine ceasefire that could save the hostages or a full military escalation that satisfies his coalition. More than a strategic move, it represents yet another classical Netanyahu maneuver to prolong the war, while perpetuating harm and suffering for Gaza residents and Israeli hostages alike. All for his own political survival.
