Gaza and Netanyahu's Revenge Calculations

In light of the circulating news about the imminent reaching of a declaration of principles between the United States and Iran, a sense of betrayal and anger prevails within Israel, where it seems that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is experiencing one of the most difficult phases of his political career. Netanyahu, who has invested many years inciting against any understanding with Tehran, finds himself on a political path being shaped despite his opposition, amid increasing signs of his diminishing ability to influence American decisions.

At the same time, Israeli media reports indicate that U.S. President Donald Trump has prevented Israel from carrying out a large military operation in the Gaza Strip, while the Israeli army continues to expand its field control in the sector, bringing the areas under its control to about 70% of Gaza's area. With Israeli elections approaching in the coming months and Netanyahu's standing declining in some opinion polls, he appears to feel an urgent need to seek an achievement that compensates for the accumulated political and regional failures.

The situation is not limited to Gaza. The Israeli government continues pushing for dangerous settlement steps in the occupied West Bank, in an attempt to appease its right-wing base and redirect the internal discussion towards issues that serve its political agenda. However, Gaza remains the most fragile and least costly arena for Netanyahu, and the most usable in his internal political battles.

Against this backdrop, the ongoing discussions in Cairo between the Palestinian factions and mediators carry various indicators. Reports indicate positive atmospheres and progress on several issues related to arrangements for the post-war period, including governance, security, and reconstruction files. Although disagreement persists over the issue of weapons, what stands out from these discussions is the existence of a political ground that can be built upon if the necessary will is present among the different parties.

For Netanyahu, the danger does not lie in the clauses of the roadmap or in the details of the weapons file per se, but in the fact that any political progress means approaching a decisive moment regarding the future of the war. The war, which has turned into a tool for managing his internal and external crises, could become a burden if he is forced to transition to the post-war phase. Thus, any talk of political arrangements or new understandings is viewed in Israel not just from the perspective of ending Gaza's suffering, but from the perspective of its direct impact on Netanyahu's political future.

Netanyahu not only fears the failure of the war but also fears the success of any alternative to war. Because the success of a political track or new understandings in Gaza would automatically lead to difficult questions inside Israel: If such understandings can be reached now, why has the war continued for so long? Why have so many Palestinians and Israelis been killed? Why have the promises to eliminate Hamas or to forcibly return the captives not been fulfilled?

From here, the greatest challenge facing Netanyahu lies not only in the U.S.-Iran agreement or in the decline of his political status domestically, but also in the emergence of signals on the possibility of pushing towards a political path in Gaza. The progress spoken of by the parties involved in the Cairo discussions means gradually shifting from the logic of open war to discussing arrangements for the next day, and this is precisely the moment Netanyahu fears. Because any progress towards halting the war, or restructuring governance in the sector will mean opening an internal Israeli discussion about the validity of the long war and its unachieved objectives.

For him, ending the war without achieving what he called "total victory" does not constitute a political exit; rather, it may turn into an indictment that haunts him in the upcoming elections. Thus, it is not unlikely that he might attempt to obstruct any political path that does not align with his vision or resort to renewed escalation in Gaza to reshuffle the cards and impose new field realities.

Gaza has become more than just a battlefield for Netanyahu. It is the last card he still believes he can influence the course of events with, after regional files have begun to slip from his grasp. Following the evolving understandings with Iran, the rise in international pressures, and the decline in his ability to impose Israeli dictates on allies, Gaza remains the only arena through which he can claim that he still determines the course of events. Hence, Gaza gains its central position in all of Netanyahu's political and regional crises.

At the heart of the scene, Gaza does not merely appear as an open war zone, but as the arena where all of Netanyahu's crises intersect. From his failure to influence the U.S.-Iran understanding trajectory, to the decline of his political standing domestically and the approaching elections, to his inability to present the "total victory" image he promised the Israelis, all these crises converge in Gaza. And as Netanyahu's ability to influence major regional files diminishes, he becomes increasingly tempted to try to regain initiative in the arena where he still has considerable maneuverability. Since Iran has become out of his reach, and Lebanon is governed by more complex balances, Gaza remains the weakest link and the most likely to pay the price for his political and revenge calculations.

Therefore, any potential military escalation or prolongation of the war cannot be viewed in isolation from the political crisis Netanyahu is experiencing. The tighter his options become and the wider his isolation, the greater the risk that Gaza will turn into an arena for settling scores and compensating for failures.

While factions and mediators talk about opportunities that could open the door to ending the war and reconstruction, the most important question remains: Will Netanyahu allow the war to end if its continuation guarantees his political survival?

So far, the answer seems closer to a denial. Thus, Palestinians in Gaza continue to pay the highest price, not only as a result of the Israeli war but also due to Netanyahu's personal bets and his constant attempts to escape forward. Amid an unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe, there is an urgent need for courageous decisions that prioritize people's lives over narrow political calculations, paving the way for halting the genocide and ending the war, before Gaza entirely becomes a victim of an Israeli internal political impasse unrelated to it.