The ceasefire between Hamas and Israel that was agreed in January of this year was shattered on Tuesday when Israeli forces launched one of the most deadly attacks since the start of the conflict in October 2023, at a time when most of the population was sleeping. More than 400 Gazans, most of them women and children, were killed in the onslaught, according to the Gazan Ministry for Health. The timing of the attacks raised questions about Israeli motivations for such a flagrant breach of the ceasefire, as well as even more pressing questions as to what might happen next.
In a televised address on Tuesday Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu stated that the wave of air strikes was “only the beginning” and that future ceasefire negotiations would “only take place under fire”. He claimed that Israel had tried to negotiate with Hamas for the release of Israeli hostages still being held in Gaza, but Hamas rejected Israeli proposals every time. Netanyahu added that the fighting would continue until the achievement of all of Israel’s “war goals” – the release of the remaining hostages held in Gaza, the elimination of Hamas, and the promise that Gaza would no longer constitute a threat to Israel.
However, many within and outside Israel suspect that – once more – domestic calculations regarding his political survival and that of the government he leads swayed Netanyahu’s hand. On Wednesday, thousands of Israelis took to the streets to protest against the government, accusing it of continuing the war for political reasons.
Immediately following the resumption of the war, Netanyahu’s scheduled testimony in a corruption trial, now in its fifth year – in which he and his wife faces charges of illicit receipt of expensive gifts and violation of conflict of interest laws – was cancelled due to an “urgent security consultation”. Netanyahu faces charges of fraud, breach of trust and bribery in two additional corruption cases.
However, the domestic repercussions of the renewal of the war extend further. The far-right Otzma Yehudit party, which quit Netanyahu’s government when the January ceasefire was first agreed, rejoined the coalition, while its leader, Itamar Ben Gvir, resumed his former role as police minister. The immediate result of this was to ensure that Netanyahu’s government now has a clear majority to pass the 2025 budget which was previously under threat. Failure to pass the budget would trigger the automatic fall of Netanyahu’s government and fresh elections in Israel.
In any case, there has been widespread scepticism as to whether Netanyahu ever intended to go through with the second phase of the ceasefire agreement or, indeed, whether the ceasefire deal was viable in the first place. Under the agreement, negotiations on a second phase should have begun in early February, during which it was envisaged that a permanent ceasefire would be agreed; the remaining living hostages in Gaza would be released in exchange for the release of Palestinian prisoners; and Israeli forces would be completely withdrawn from Gaza.
Negotiations on the second phase have not started, while it seems increasingly clear that Netanyahu saw the first phase as little more than an opportunity for the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to regroup after 15 months of conflict in Gaza and latterly in Lebanon.
In addition, the re-emergence of Hamas in Gaza constituted a clear indication of Netanyahu’s failure to secure a key objective of the conflict – the organisation’s removal from Gaza. Hamas fighters figured prominently in the handover of Israeli hostages during the first phase of the ceasefire deal, while members of the Hamas-run civil administration in Gaza have gone back to work.
Speaking in January of this year, former US secretary of state Antony Blinken suggested that Hamas had recruited almost as many militants as it had lost over the course of the conflict, while a December 2024 report from the European Council for Foreign Relations estimated that some 25,000 Hamas militants were still alive and in hiding.
At the regional and international levels, Netanyahu’s room for manoeuvre has rarely been freer. The dismantling of Hizbullah in Lebanon, together with regime change in Syria has greatly diminished the influence of Iran in the region. The Iranian response to the resumption of the conflict was to issue a statement strongly condemning the Israeli attacks and attributing direct responsibility for “the continuation of genocide” in the occupied Palestinian territories to the United States. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, condemned the attacks “in the strongest terms”.
Elsewhere, there were similar expressions of concern combined with inaction. A spokesperson for the European Commission deplored the restart of hostilities, stating that the hostages should be released and asking Israel “to show restraint”. UK prime minister Keir Starmer expressed the view that the reported casualties “were appalling” while French and German leaders adopted the same tone. However, beyond these expressions of concern, there has been no indication of action, in the form of possible suspension of future arms sales, sanctions or otherwise.
The immediate consequences of the renewed assault on Gaza are clear – even greater loss of life, destruction of infrastructure beyond the catastrophic levels that have already been experienced, and a deepening of a humanitarian crisis that is already on a scale unimaginable to most outside observers.
Already, nearly 50,000 Gazans have been killed and more than 112,000 injured, according to the Hamas-linked Ministry for Health which estimates that 59 per cent of these are women and children. The UN puts that figure as high as 70 per cent.
According to the UN, nearly 60 per cent of buildings have been damaged or destroyed since October 2023, while 50 per cent of hospitals are closed or only partially functional. Ninety-one per cent of the population face high levels of acute insecurity, while 1.9 million people are in need of emergency shelter.
The humanitarian crisis has been exacerbated by the Israeli government announcement on March 2nd that all goods and supplies into Gaza would be stopped. Under the terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention, an occupying power is legally obliged to allow and facilitate humanitarian relief for civilians in need, while deliberate obstruction of aid is a violation of international law.
However, for Palestinians in Gaza, recourse to the finer points of international law seems to offer no prospect of respite, while we remain no closer now than ever to a viable plan for post-conflict Gaza. Or at least none beyond the deranged American (and Israeli) vision of a Gaza depopulated of Palestinians, and transformed by magical thinking into a tourist colony.
Dr Vincent Durac lectures in Middle East politics in the UCD school of politics and international relations
