Less than two months after agreeing to a phased ceasefire with Hamas, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recommenced military operations in the Gaza Strip. On March 18, the Israeli Air Force launched strikes on designated military sites, resulting in the deaths of over 400 Palestinians, including more than 300 women and children, as reported by the Hamas-controlled Ministry of Health in Gaza.
This escalation marked one of the most severe episodes of violence in the ongoing conflict. The temporary truce had facilitated the release of 30 hostages captured by Hamas during its unprecedented assault on Israel on 7 October 2023, as well as the repatriation of eight deceased captives. More recently, the Israeli government proposed another ceasefire arrangement, contingent upon the return of 11 additional hostages and 16 bodies. Nevertheless, the prospect of sustained peace remains elusive. Since the events of October 7 which led to the deaths of approximately 1,250 Israelis, Netanyahu’s strategic objectives have remained twofold: the liberation of all Israeli hostages and the complete dismantling of Hamas. However, these objectives are inherently contradictory.
Hamas refuses to participate in any peace initiative that implies its eradication. As long as Israel remains committed to Hamas’s destruction, the group’s leadership has a significant incentive to retain hostages as a deterrent against targeted Israeli military operations. This strategic deadlock implies that even if ceasefire negotiations resume, both parties are likely to engage in delaying tactics. Hamas may withhold hostages to prolong its leverage, while Israel may resist implementing phases of any agreement that allow Hamas to maintain its governance capabilities. Consequently, any tentative agreements are vulnerable to collapse before their completion. Netanyahu, meanwhile, has grown more confident in the efficacy of military action, citing its strategic impact on regional adversaries such as Iran and Hezbollah.
Under the Trump administration— unlike the more cautious Biden administration— Israel appears to enjoy greater latitude in its military operations. This was symbolized by Netanyahu’s expedited visit to Washington to meet President Trump, signaling the value he places on their political alignment.
Emboldened by this geopolitical support, Israeli military leadership has proposed extensive plans, including a potential reoccupation of Gaza. Concurrently, Netanyahu’s far-right coalition partners have revived proposals advocating for the large-scale displacement of Gaza’s population. However, it remains uncertain whether Netanyahu will fully embrace these extreme positions, particularly in light of the unpredictability of Trump’s political posture and the logistical burden such operations would impose on the Israeli military. As a result, Netanyahu is likely to pursue a strategy of calculated ambiguity continuing military operations while preserving political cohesion among his allies.
Although the Trump Administration has withdrawn from overt discussions about demographic engineering in Gaza, certain far-right Israeli politicians continue to advocate for large-scale population transfers under the guise of “voluntary emigration.” In practical terms, however, such proposals would necessitate significant coercion and military pressure to achieve their objectives.
Initially, there was a national consensus within Israel on the necessity of eliminating Hamas. Yet the impracticality of simultaneously achieving the release of hostages and the destruction of Hamas soon became apparent. According to data compiled by The New York Times, between October 2023 and early March 2025, 41 hostages perished while in captivity— some due to inadequate conditions, while others were inadvertently killed during Israeli military incursions. Survivors reported inhumane conditions, including confinement in tunnels with minimal sustenance, medical neglect, and, in some cases, torture. Israel’s failure to prioritize its objectives has led to the partial fulfillment of both.
Although numerous senior Hamas figures have been killed, including Gaza’s leader, Yahya Sinwar, the organization continues to function and wield power. Its remaining leaders utilize hostages, primarily soldiers, as strategic assets to shield themselves from targeted assassinations. For Netanyahu, only two outcomes are acceptable: either Hamas’s unconditional capitulation or the removal of its leadership from Gaza, or the continuation of military operations until such an outcome is realized.
Following Trump’s return to the presidency, expectations that the USA might pressure Israel into a long-term ceasefire have diminished. While the Trump Administration did initially encourage a truce in January, its approach has since become inconsistent. Recent US proposals have failed to generate meaningful progress, and Trump himself has oscillated between indifference and implausible suggestions—such as a US-led redevelopment of Gaza as a tourist destination. The Administration has not confronted the core contradiction of the peace process: Israel’s demand for Hamas’s disbandment and Hamas’s refusal to relinquish its ideological mission.
Meanwhile, regional developments have lessened Israel’s perceived need for a negotiated settlement. Hamas’s operational capabilities have been significantly degraded, and Israel has achieved military advantages across multiple fronts. Hezbollah, for instance, was compelled to accept a ceasefire under humiliating terms, and Iran suffered setbacks following military exchanges with Israel. Moreover, Israel seized parts of southern Syria after the fall of the Assad regime in December.
These successes have emboldened Netanyahu, who now responds more aggressively to perceived threats, as evidenced by a March airstrike on a Hezbollah facility in Beirut. While the Biden Administration had sought to moderate Israeli actions following October 7, its influence waned after Israeli forces entered Rafah in May 2024, an act met with American disapproval and a subsequent suspension of military aid. Trump’s presidency has removed this restraint. His broader geopolitical views— including support for territorial acquisition by force— have further encouraged aggressive Israeli policies. During a February meeting, Trump questioned why Israel had not already expanded its control over Syrian territory following Assad’s fall, a notion Netanyahu later discussed with his cabinet.
Israel now finds itself in a dominant position. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) have proposed a comprehensive plan to fully reoccupy Gaza, mobilize reserves, and relocate northern Gazans to the south, thereby consolidating control over the entire territory. The IDF’s new Chief of Staff, Eyal Zamir, appears amenable to the idea of establishing a long-term Israeli military presence in Gaza, a departure from the stance of his predecessor, Herzi Halevi, who resigned in March 2025.
Although the Trump Administration has withdrawn from overt discussions about demographic engineering in Gaza, certain far-right Israeli politicians continue to advocate for large-scale population transfers under the guise of “voluntary emigration.” In practical terms, however, such proposals would necessitate significant coercion and military pressure to achieve their objectives.
