Has Israel begun its expanded offensive in Gaza City, or is it hype?
After several weeks of threats of a new large-scale offensive, strongly opposed by most of the international community, Israeli officials have made announcements daily saying the plan to occupy Gaza City has been “approved”; it has been approved by the Israel Defense Forces, by the security cabinet, by the defence minister.
Later on Thursday in an event with the Israeli military, the prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, also proffered his “approval”, while simultaneously ordering the beginning of immediate negotiations to release the remaining Israeli hostages in Gaza. How many times, one is tempted to ask, does one plan need approving?
As so often in dealing with Israeli officials, and Netanyahu in particular, filtering out what is true and what is not, and what is calculated misdirection, is a complicated business.
While Reuters reported a junior defence spokesperson as suggesting that the operation to take Gaza City had begun, quotes from that briefing paint a more complex picture, including a reference to the second phase of Operation Gideon’s Chariots, the Israeli military offensive that began in May.
Recent military activity in Gaza was depicted as being “preliminary” to any new offensive. For his part, Netanyahu’s office put out an opaque statement saying he had asked for planning timelines for an expanded Gaza City operation to be accelerated.
Given the profound divisions within Israeli society, with about 400,000 people demonstrating recently in favour of a ceasefire deal and release of the remaining 20 living hostages in Gaza, and continued contact between mediators and Israel and Hamas, unpacking the politics of what Netanyahu is up to is tricky.
On the one hand, far-right members of his coalition have threatened once again to walk away in the event of a ceasefire, demanding the conquest of all of Gaza and then Jewish settlement of the coastal strip. On the other is the fact that ceasefire talks are continuing.
This week Hamas said it had accepted a ceasefire proposal that would allow for the release of about 10 living hostages in the first phase of a 60-day pause, while senior Israeli officials – but not an official “delegation” – have met mediators even as Netanyahu has dragged his feet over giving Israel’s reply, reportedly delaying a cabinet meeting at which it would have been discussed.
All of which leaves big questions unanswered. While some Israeli and international analysts have speculated that the current moves on the ground amount to pressure on Hamas to improve any deal that might just be emerging, others – including Ronen Bergman, one of Israel’s most authoritative security analysts – suggest that Netanyahu would like to push on with fighting for years in order to delay his ongoing legal cases and ensure his continued political survival.
What most agree is that any major new campaign is likely to have serious consequences. For Israelis, including senior figures in the defence establishment, one concern is whether living hostages would survive, an issue motivating mass demonstrations.
Others point out that, to all intents and purposes, the deal to which Hamas has agreed is one Israel signalled its agreement to only weeks ago. Any offensive would be seen by the international community for what it is: the most cynical of moves that would lead to an even deeper humanitarian catastrophe – if that can even be imagined.
