Netanyahu’s Gaza City Plan: High-Stakes Risk
Netanyahu’s Gaza Gamble: Annexation, Trump, and a High-Stakes Strategy
Table of Contents
The ongoing conflict in Gaza presents a complex web of strategic calculations for Israeli prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Beyond the immediate goals of dismantling Hamas and securing the release of hostages, a more enterprising – and controversial - agenda may be taking shape: the potential annexation of Gaza and the realization of a revised “riviera Plan,” spearheaded by Israel rather than the United States. This analysis delves into the motivations behind Netanyahu’s actions, the delicate balancing act with international actors, and the bleak outlook for Palestinians in the region.
Is Annexation on the Table? The Dual Strategy
The question isn’t simply whether Netanyahu is pursuing a military victory, but what that victory looks like. Is the relentless pressure on Hamas a genuine attempt to force surrender and hostage release, or a calculated move to create a pretext for annexation? Increasingly, evidence suggests its a combination of both.
Netanyahu appears to be betting on multiple outcomes. Reoccupying and perhaps emptying Gaza City would appease his right-wing base and solidify his governing coalition. Conversely, a complete collapse of Hamas, leading to unconditional surrender, would allow him to claim a historic triumph, bolstering his political standing ahead of future elections. He envisions a narrative of comprehensively dismantling not only Hamas but also Hezbollah, rolling back Iranian influence, and even toppling the Assad regime in Syria – claims that, while potentially exaggerated, are designed to resonate with Israeli voters.
This strategy hinges on maintaining power, and the current operation serves both immediate military objectives and long-term political survival. The dream of annexation, fueled by elements within the Israeli right, is intertwined with a reimagined version of Donald Trump’s “Riviera Plan” – a large-scale advancement project for the region, but one controlled and profited from by Israeli entities, not American ones.
Central to Netanyahu’s strategy is managing the relationship with the United States,and specifically,with Donald Trump.Recognizing Trump’s aversion to backing losers, Netanyahu must project an image of consistent success and unwavering momentum.This has manifested in a recurring pattern of assuring Washington that “just one more stage” of operations is needed before a cessation of hostilities in Gaza.
From the initial push to invade rafah, to more recent focuses on Deir Al-Balah and now Gaza City, the narrative remains consistent: each target represents the “last true fortress” of Hamas, and its capture will inevitably lead to the group’s collapse. This tactic, while repeatedly employed, aims to maintain US support – or at least, avoid outright opposition - by presenting a continuous, albeit incremental, path towards victory.
However, even if the White House were to become disillusioned with Netanyahu’s approach, a significant shift in support for the Palestinians or a concerted effort to secure the release of hostages is unlikely.The US position remains complex, prioritizing its strategic alliance with Israel while publicly expressing concerns about civilian casualties and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.
A Bleak Future for Palestinians: No Winning moves
The current operation is a high-stakes gamble for Netanyahu,but nonetheless of the outcome,the Palestinians in gaza face a deeply uncertain future. the debate within Israel is narrowly focused on the intensity and duration of military action, with little to no consideration given to the long-term political or economic prospects for the Palestinian population.
Peace and security in the region remain distant fantasies.The focus is firmly on military objectives, and the possibility of a two-state solution or any meaningful progress towards Palestinian self-determination appears increasingly remote. The Palestinians are effectively denied any agency or possibility for a positive outcome, trapped in a cycle of conflict and occupation.
Chris Doyle is director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding in London.
X: @Doylech
Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not necessarily reflect arab News’ point of view.