No good options: Why Israel resumed military operations against Hamas

RU

Resumption of hostilities

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz have instructed the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to take decisive action against the terrorist organization Hamas in the Gaza Strip. This follows Hamas's repeated refusal to release our hostages, as well as its rejection of all of the proposals it has received from US Presidential Envoy Steve Witkoff and from the mediators,” reads a statement from Netanyahu’s office published late on the evening of March 18.

The missive explains that the goal of the operation, named “Courage and Sword,” is to secure the release of Israeli hostages still held by terrorists. “Israel will, from now on, act against Hamas with increasing military strength. The operational plan was presented by the IDF over the weekend and approved by the political leadership,” the Prime Minister’s office emphasized.

At the time of the statement's publication, Israeli planes had already begun striking targets in the Gaza Strip. Within 10 minutes, 80 objects were attacked. According to Palestinian sources, the death toll had exceeded 400 people, and it included women and children. At the same time, Israel reported that, according to preliminary estimates, about 200 Hamas activists, including some of the movement's leadership, had been eliminated.

Among the latter were Issam al-Dalis, head of the Gaza Executive Committee, whose duties are similar to those of a prime minister; Mahmoud Abu Watfa, deputy interior minister of the Hamas government in Gaza; Ahmed Omar al-Hatta, deputy justice minister; and Bahjat Hassan Abu Sultan, the director general of the movement’s Internal Security Service. There were also reports of the elimination of Najeh Abu Seif, an official representative of the Islamic Jihad movement.

“This is just the beginning,” said Benjamin Netanyahu in an evening address to the nation, adding that from now on, all “negotiations will take place only under fire.” He stated that Israel would continue fighting to ensure that Gaza no longer posed a threat to Israel, as well as to secure the return of Israeli hostages. Late on Tuesday, the Israeli Air Force struck Gaza again.

By Wednesday evening, it was reported that Israel had launched a ground operation, and that the Netzarim corridor had been retaken. A statement from the military’s press service noted that this was a targeted maneuver aimed at creating a partial buffer zone between the northern and southern parts of the Gaza Strip. Additionally, the number of Israeli forces had been increased in the Philadelphia Corridor, which separates Gaza from Egypt. Airstrikes continued as well.

In Israel, it is claimed that even as the ceasefire agreement remained in place, Hamas and Islamic Jihad were actively preparing to resume hostilities. In the meantime, Israeli intelligence identified hundreds of new targets and over 20,000 Hamas terrorists.

Hamas leaders deny that they were making any preparations for war, instead accusing Israel of “resuming aggression.” They hold the Jewish state responsible for violating the ceasefire agreement, and for any consequences that may follow — including the fate of the hostages remaining in Gaza. On Tuesday, Arab media reported that one of the hostages had died as a result of IDF strikes, and that several others had been injured. This has not been officially confirmed.

At the same time, Israeli Channel 12 reported that if even one hostage dies, Israel will annex part of the Gaza Strip, as it believes that for Hamas, the loss of territory is far worse than the death of people.

The deal and Israel's internal issues

The war in Gaza began after hundreds of Hamas militants infiltrated Israeli territory on October 7, 2023. More than a thousand people were killed over the course of the day, and about 250 were taken to the Gaza Strip. Among the dead and the hostages were citizens of both Israel and other countries. Four additional Israelis (two alive and two dead) had been held in Gaza since 2014-2015. Most of the hostages were released as part of deals with Hamas (in November 2023 and January-February 2025), while several others were rescued by the Israeli army or found dead. Three kidnapped individuals were accidentally killed by IDF fire while trying to escape captivity.

At the time of the resumption of hostilities this past Tuesday, 59 hostages remained in the Gaza Strip. According to Israeli media, only 24 of them are alive — 22 Israelis, plus one citizen of Thailand and another of Nepal. It was expected that they would be released as part of the second stage of the ceasefire deal in the region. In the third stage, Hamas was supposed to return all the bodies.

The three-stage ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas was brokered by the United States, Egypt, and Qatar. As of now, only the first stage of the deal has been completed, lasting the agreed-upon 42 days— from January 19 to March 1. During this period, 30 living hostages (25 Israelis and five Thai nationals), plus eight bodies, were returned from Gaza to Israel.

In exchange for its citizens, Israel released from its jails hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, including terrorists with blood on their hands who had been sentenced to life. Israeli forces withdrew from almost the entire Gaza Strip, except for the Philadelphia Corridor (which separates the strip from Egypt). Additionally, humanitarian aid supplies were increased, and Palestinians who were sick or injured were allowed to leave Gaza for treatment.

The withdrawal of Israeli forces from the Philadelphia Corridor was supposed to begin at the end of the first stage of the deal, but this did not happen. Nor did negotiations for the second stage of the deal begin. Preliminary discussions included not only the return of all living hostages to Israel, but also the declaration of a sustainable ceasefire.

From the outset, it was clear that discussions about the second stage would be very difficult. Israel feared that Hamas might set an excessively high “price” for the return of the remaining hostages — such as the release of terrorist figures, including one of Fatah’s leaders, Marwan Barghouti, the most popular politician among the Palestinian public.

However, the main problem became Hamas’s apparent desire to maintain power in the Gaza Strip, whether directly or as a de facto agent of influence. According to a plan adopted by the Arab League at Egypt's initiative, for the first six months after the war, Gaza was supposed to be governed by a committee of technocrats, who would be approved by all Palestinian forces. Afterward, the administration was to be gradually handed over to the Palestinian National Authority, which currently controls only the West Bank.

But Hamas had no intention of surrendering its weapons, nor were its leaders planning to leave Gaza. Throughout the first stage of the deal, Hamas and Islamic Jihad repeatedly demonstrated that they still held power in the strip. The only reason they were willing to step back was to receive international funds for the reconstruction of Gaza, which no one would have provided to terrorist organizations had they not agreed to observe the demands of the first phase.

Israeli authorities were not willing to tolerate Hamas's active role in Gaza. However, no proposed plan offered a panacea. The only solution to the problem seemed to be the continuation of the war and, in effect, the military occupation of the strip.

This is essentially what Netanyahu's coalition partners demanded. Back in January, when the deal began to be implemented, the leader of the far-right party “Jewish Power,” Itamar Ben-Gvir, left the ruling coalition in protest against Israel's withdrawal and the release of terrorists from prisons. The leader of a second far-right party, “Religious Zionism,” along with hardline finance minister Bezalel Smotrich, remained in the coalition but threatened to leave it if the second stage of the deal was implemented. However, not even Ben-Gvir made a permanent break with Netanyahu, instead retaining the option to return to the fold so long as the second stage did not go ahead. The ministerial positions formerly held by members of “Jewish Power” remained vacant — not without reason, as it turned out.

On March 18, “Jewish Power” welcomed the resumption of intense military action in Gaza. Within hours, it was announced that the party was rejoining the coalition, and all its ministers were reinstated. In response, the opposition party “Our Home Israel” stated that Netanyahu's sole objective in resuming military action was to bring Itamar Ben-Gvir back into the government and to thereby secure the approval of his budget. However, other motives for the prime minister's actions have also been suggested.

The resumption of active fighting in Gaza coincided with a difficult period in Israeli political life. Efforts by the government to push forward reforms to the judicial system, which had already divided the country before the war, were running into roadblocks. Likewise, conflicts between Netanyahu and the government's legal advisor, and also between the prime minister and a group of security officials, were continuing.

In recent months, a new defense minister and chief of staff have been appointed. On March 16, Netanyahu also announced plans to dismiss the head of the General Security Service (Shin Bet), Ronen Bar, who had previously been sidelined from negotiations with Hamas. This coincided with a Shin Bet investigation into the actions of officials in the prime minister's office following claims members of Netanyahu’s team had leaked secret documents and worked with individuals connected to Qatar, a state closely aligned with Hamas. Additionally, Shin Bet, in its report on the reasons for the “October 7 failure,” shifted the primary responsibility to the political bloc (while still acknowledging its own share of blame).

“Netanyahu is sacrificing the lives of hostages and soldiers because he fears protests against the removal of the head of Shin Bet. Soldiers on the front lines and hostages in Gaza are just pawns in his game for survival,” said Yair Golon, head of the opposition “Democrats” party.

In the opposition, there is growing talk that Netanyahu's actions are driven by a desire to cling to power. In the meantime, according to recent polls, Netanyahu's Likud party still demonstrates that it has a chance of maintaining its position as the largest faction in the Knesset while rallying a coalition large enough to form a government.

And yet, a recent poll commissioned by Channel 13 revealed that 61% of Israelis believe Netanyahu should resign due to the October 7 tragedy. 32% of respondents did not support this idea, and 7% refused to answer the question. Nearly 46% of respondents opposed the resignation of Shin Bet head Ronen Bar, while 34% supported it (about 20% had no opinion on the matter). However, according to a poll by Channel 12, 64% of respondents wanted Bar to resign, believing he was responsible for the failures of October 7 (but it would be a different matter if the resignation were motivated by political reasons).

On March 18, the day the operation in Gaza began, protests against Ronen Bar's resignation were scheduled. The resumption of military actions did not hinder them. The main demonstrations took place in Tel Aviv, and on Thursday, protesters gathered in Jerusalem. The protesters' frustration stemmed not only from the resignation of the head of Shin Bet, but also from the resumption of military actions, which they feared would further endanger the hostages.

“The worst fear of the families of the kidnapped and of the people of Israel has come true. The Israeli government has chosen to abandon those we love. We are in shock, angered, and deeply troubled by the deliberate disruption of the process that was supposed to bring our family members home from the horrific captivity of Hamas,” the Hostages Families Headquarters said in their statement.

Among the protesters were former hostages who had recently been freed. “The ongoing military actions put the kidnapped at even greater risk,” said Alexander Trufanov, who was released in mid-February. “I can't stop thinking about my friends still held there. I know they're suffering because of the decision to return to fighting.”

Yet not everyone shares the protesters’ view. “It's time for victory. We are strengthening the Israeli Defense Forces, the government, our heroic soldiers, and all security forces. The families of the fallen are with you. Destroy Hamas, bring back our kidnapped brothers, and claim victory. The time is right to act, and we will win,” read a statement from the Ha-Gvura forum, which represents families who have lost loved ones in the Gaza war. The forum had initially opposed the deal with Hamas.

Former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, despite having many disagreements with Netanyahu during the war, supported the resumption of military actions. “Throughout the war, I stressed that Hamas only understands force, and it is this military pressure that will bring change. This is what pushed Hamas to the negotiating table and led to agreements on the release of hostages. It’s also what led to its destruction as a military force,” Gallant explained.

Did Israel have a choice?

“The Israeli strikes on the Gaza Strip are primarily intended to break the stalemate that has developed following the deadlock in hostage release negotiations, a stalemate in which Hamas has been enjoying a de facto extension of the ceasefire, reorganizing its forces and strengthening its governance, without returning additional hostages or paying any other price,” wrote Meir Ben-Shabat, head of the Misgav Institute for National Security and Zionist Strategy in Jerusalem and a former head of the National Security Council, in his column on the Israel Hayom website on Tuesday. Ben-Shabat served for nearly thirty years in the Shin Bet and is now considered one of the possible candidates to replace Ronen Bar.

Ben-Shabat pointed out that Hamas holds a relatively favorable position in negotiations because it has many hostages, giving it leverage. He also did not rule out the possibility that Hamas would send “positive signals” to mediators about its readiness to continue discussing small deals in order to break Israel's offensive momentum.

“We must acknowledge that the challenge facing Israel is not easy, but the alternative is to surrender to Hamas' demands and leave it as the central power factor in Gaza,” adds Ben-Shabat. He also emphasizes that, with the Trump administration back in power, Israel's position is stronger than it was at the start of the war. Moreover, the balance of power in the region has shifted, and Hamas itself is no longer as strong, even if it retains certain advantages.

Ben-Shabat believes Hamas may show flexibility if the blockade of the Gaza Strip is tightened and military pressure is increased. The key question is the level of support for Israel's actions from the United States.

U.S. Support

So far, the U.S. has publicly approved of Israel's actions. “The Trump administration and the White House were consulted by the Israelis on their attacks in Gaza tonight,” said White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt in an interview with Fox News. “As President Trump has made it clear — Hamas, the Houthis, Iran, all those who seek to terrorize not just Israel, but also the United States of America, will see a price to pay. All hell will break loose,” she added, echoing President Donald Trump's words. Trump, for his part, has repeatedly promised to bring “hell” to Hamas militants if the hostage release process does not progress.

In recent weeks, Egypt and the U.S. have proposed various ideas aimed at maintaining the deal. When it became clear that there would be no negotiations on the second stage of the agreement, there was a proposal to extend the first stage. Specifically, U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff suggested releasing all hostages in exchange for extending the ceasefire until the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan and the Jewish holiday of Passover, which have meant maintaining the status quo until around April 20. Half of the hostages were to be released on the first day of the deal's implementation, and the second half on the last day. Hamas rejected this offer, demanding the transition to the second stage of the deal as outlined in January.

Israel seized on Hamas’s stubbornness, announcing on March 2 that it would halt humanitarian aid shipments to Gaza and close all checkpoints. Yet despite this move, mediators continued working toward finding compromises. The U.S. took a bold step by opening direct talks with Hamas — partly in an effort to secure the release of five hostages who also hold American citizenship. Sadly, only one of them, soldier Idan Alexander, is still alive.

The U.S. held these talks without informing Israel, though the news eventually leaked. According to sources close to Israeli journalist Ronen Bergman, an expert on intelligence matters, Netanyahu and his strategic planning minister, Ron Dermer, did everything they could to block direct communication between Washington and Hamas. Still, Bergman’s sources acknowledge that Hamas also missed an opportunity to engage with the Americans, as the group spent too much time haggling over minor details. As a result, the U.S. was left frustrated. “Hamas is making a very bad bet that time is on its side. It is not,” said Steve Witkoff, commenting on the ceasefire negotiations.

Witkoff also criticized Hamas’s refusal to compromise on Gaza’s future. On this issue, the U.S. and Israel are aligned: Hamas must lay down its arms and step aside from any role in the administration of Gaza. Some Arab countries, primarily the UAE and Saudi Arabia, also share this position.

On the negotiating front, the latest American proposal involved releasing some hostages in exchange for extending the ceasefire until Passover. The U.S. also promised to work toward a long-term resolution to the Gaza conflict. However, Hamas agreed to release only the Americans, while adding several additional conditions that the U.S. and Israel found unacceptable.

According to Israeli sources, just hours before the resumption of military action, Israel received updated information from mediators and the negotiating team stating that Hamas had refused to compromise. “The one who effectively leads Hamas, Mohammad Sinwar, is making it difficult to reach an agreement,” a source told i24NEWS.

According to Israeli media, the current IDF attack has three main objectives. The first goal is to create military pressure that will help break the deadlock in the negotiations over the release of hostages. The second goal is to make it clear that Israel does not differentiate between Hamas's military and political leadership and will not allow it to rebuild the Gaza Strip using funds obtained from looting humanitarian aid. The operation also serves as a signal to mediators, especially Egypt, that Israel opposes Hamas remaining in Gaza after the war in any capacity.

Finally, the third goal, in coordination with the U.S., is to exert strong military pressure on all remaining elements of the so-called “Shiite axis of resistance,” which also includes Iran and the Houthi movement Ansar Allah in Yemen.

Thus, the joint efforts of the U.S. and Israel aim simultaneously at securing the release of hostages, expelling Hamas from the Gaza Strip, punishing the Houthis for continuing to block shipping in the Red Sea, and applying pressure on Iran to bring it to the negotiating table for a new agreement that would limit Tehran’s nuclear program.

In fact, Israel simply synchronized its actions with the U.S., as the Israeli operation began a mere three days after Donald Trump declared war on the Houthis. It is worth noting that the “Ansar Allah” movement supported Hamas back in 2023 by starting to attack vessels in the Red Sea shortly after the events of October 7 and attempting to strike Israeli territory with drones and missiles. At times, they succeeded. In early 2024, the U.S. and the U.K. launched a military operation against the Houthis, but they were unable to put an end to their disruptive activities. “Ansar Allah” halted the attacks only after calm had returned to Gaza.

However, after Israel announced a blockade of the Gaza Strip in March, the Houthis threatened to resume hostilities. The U.S. resorted to strikes first, and then, immediately after Israel's strikes on Gaza, the Houthis launched rockets toward Israel for the first time in two months. The war of attrition continues, with Israel increasing military pressure while simultaneously not ruling out the option of returning to the negotiating table.

There is still a chance that new ceasefire agreements could be reached, and mediators are already working towards that goal. According to the Qatari newspaper Al-Arabi al-Jadid, Egypt presented a new ceasefire proposal for Gaza on Tuesday. The plan involves reopening the Rafah crossing to allow the wounded to leave Gaza and for humanitarian aid to enter. In exchange wounded Israeli hostages and the bodies of the deceased would be released. Specific details are expected to be discussed once both sides agree to start negotiations, but sources from Hamas mentioned on Thursday that the movement is open to any offer that includes the release of hostages so long as it moves the parties towards the second phase of the ceasefire agreement.

However, the proposals under discussion do not address the core issues. Israel still needs to bring back the hostages while also putting an end to Hamas’s rule in Gaza. Most experts agree that these goals cannot easily coexist. Furthermore, Israel's objectives are at odds with Hamas's plans, as the group has no intention of leaving Gaza. The leaders of Hamas are also well aware that once the hostages are returned, Israel is likely to strike again, making it unlikely that all hostages will ever be released.

At the moment, there does not appear to be a way out of this deadlock. But in the Middle East, situations can change overnight — whether it's the balance of power in the region or the internal dynamics of Gaza and Israel. That means the rules of the game could shift once again, just as they did after Donald Trump returned to the White House and gave Israel more freedom to act. After all, he could always change his mind.