Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has formalized an operation to occupy Gaza City, identified as Hamas' last stronghold in the Gaza Strip. Analyses suggest that this decision is influenced by complex international situations and internal political calculations. With this decision, Israel stands in direct opposition to the international community's recognition of Palestine as a state and the momentum toward a 'two-state solution.' Israel's diplomatic isolation is further deepening in a situation where even key allies, excluding the United States, are turning their backs.
Prime Minister Netanyahu stated during a press conference on the 10th (local time) that the occupation of Gaza City is "the best way to end the war the quickest," directing the military to carry out rapid operations. Gaza City is the largest urban area located in the northern part of the Gaza Strip. Before Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel in October 2023, it was the center of the most densely populated Palestinian population. The Israeli military currently controls about 75% of the total territory of the Gaza Strip. However, they have reported that Hamas leadership and key figures remain in Gaza City and have set a goal to fully occupy this area.
In contrast to Israel's actions, the international community is moving in the opposite direction. On the 10th, Australia and New Zealand announced that they would officially recognize Palestine as a state at the upcoming United Nations General Assembly next month. Major Western countries such as France, the United Kingdom, and Canada have decided to recognize Palestine as a state before this. All four countries in the intelligence alliance 'Five Eyes' (excluding the United States) have recognized Palestine as a state. Criticism of Israel's plans poured in during the emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council. Besides the United Kingdom and France, both Russia and China expressed concerns about Israel. Mirooslav Yenchy, the Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, warned that it would "trigger another catastrophe."
The fundamental background to this decision, which has provoked fierce backlash from the international community, is that the 'five principles for ending the war' proposed by Prime Minister Netanyahu directly reject the existing two-state solution. He set forth the principles for ending the war: ▲ Disarmament of Hamas ▲ Return of all hostages ▲ Demilitarization of the Gaza Strip ▲ Security control by Israel ▲ Establishment of an alternative civilian government, rather than Hamas or the Palestinian Authority (PA). The 'two-state solution' assumes that the only legitimate government of Palestine recognized by the international community, the PA, will govern the future Palestinian state. However, the PA is absent in Netanyahu's plan. Instead, it includes a provision to establish an 'alternative government' chosen directly by Israel, indicating a path that runs counter to the international community's conception.
Public sentiment within Israel is also concerning. There is significant division in the political arena regarding Prime Minister Netanyahu's plans. The left-wing camp expressed concern that the current operation to occupy Gaza City could jeopardize the lives of hostages still held by Hamas. In contrast, the right-wing camp criticized that specific details about the operation's execution are lacking and the plan is insufficient to completely defeat the resilient Hamas. In fact, the plan announced by Prime Minister Netanyahu is closer to being an 'empty proposal' without concrete details. The New York Times (NYT) pointed out that critical information, including the operation's start time, duration, differences from past occupations, and governing body of Gaza after the occupation, is all missing.
The fatigue of the Israeli military has reached its peak after nearly two years of war. The Israeli military has mobilized about 170,000 active-duty personnel and 460,000 reservists over the past 22 months. The increasing war expenses and staggering loss of life are significant burdens for the Netanyahu administration. In such circumstances, occupying and governing Gaza City without a specific exit strategy could lead to deeper military quagmires. NYT reported that "the Israeli military leadership opposed the occupation plan, citing concerns over hostage safety and troop burdens."
Some analysts believe that Prime Minister Netanyahu presented the occupation plan not for a clear military strategy but to solidify his political position in Israel and buy time to maintain his administration. NYT cited Middle Eastern columnist Nahum Barnea, stating that "it is unclear whether Netanyahu wants to negotiate for hostages or conquer Gaza," adding, "it seems even the Israeli military does not fully understand the meaning of 'seizing' Gaza City."