Netanyahu’s Trap!

The already fragile ceasefire in Gaza was further shattered as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared that Israel had “resumed combat in full force” against Hamas in the Gaza Strip on March 18, during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. In the hours following Netanyahu’s announcement, Israeli airstrikes – which had already been routinely violating the ceasefire in recent weeks – killed more than 400 Palestinians, including a significant number of children. Later that day, Israeli forces launched a new ground offensive, reportedly killing at least 48 more Palestinians, according to local health workers.

Vowing to eradicate Hamas, Netanyahu described the renewed phase of state terrorism as “just the beginning”. Meanwhile, Israeli sources confirmed that the assault was conducted in “full coordination” with the United States. Also on Wednesday, Israel carried out an attack on a UN facility in central Gaza City, killing a foreign staffer and wounding five others. Jorge Moreira da Silva, Executive Director of the UN Office for Project Services, condemned the strike, stating: “Israel knew this was a UN compound where people were living and working. It is a well-known location.”

From the outset, Netanyahu’s office has justified the assault by accusing Hamas of preparing new attacks, refusing to release hostages, and rejecting all proposals put forward by US presidential envoy Steve Witkoff and other mediators. At the UN Security Council meeting on Gaza, convened just hours after the renewed Israeli offensive, the US envoy placed exclusive blame on Hamas for the collapse of the ceasefire. According to the Israeli government, approximately 59 Israeli captives remain in Gaza, with fewer than half believed to be still alive. Hamas, however, denied rejecting the US envoy’s proposal, accusing Netanyahu of deliberately resuming hostilities to sabotage the ceasefire agreement. The group characterized Israel’s actions as a “unilateral” annulment of the existing deal.

Arab countries, including Egypt and Qatar – both key mediators in the peace negotiations – have strongly condemned Israel’s latest military escalation. On March 20, the US State Department reaffirmed the “bridge proposal” put forward by the US President Donald Trump’s administration last week. It aims to extend the first phase of the ceasefire and hostage release agreement between Israel and Hamas, and remains on the table. Given this backdrop, the question arises: What is driving Netanyahu’s genocidal ambitions?


A zero-sum game?

Netanyahu appears to be maneuvering to reduce the original multiphase ceasefire agreement to just its first phase, securing the release of all Israeli hostages before resuming his military campaign in Gaza. Hamas, however, recognizes the trap. At present, neither the US nor mediators like Egypt and Qatar can offer Hamas any guarantees that if it releases all remaining hostages – both dead and alive – Israel will commit to entering the second phase of the agreement.

It is worth recalling that Israel had already delayed negotiations for the second phase, which was initially scheduled to begin 16 days after the agreement took effect. By the time phase one was set to conclude on March 1, Israel had refused to advance talks, effectively stalling the diplomatic process.

Since March 2, Israel has taken increasingly punitive measures against Gaza. According to the UN, it has blocked the entry of all lifesaving supplies, including food, medicine, fuel, and cooking gas, affecting 2.1 million people. It has also sealed off all crossing points and, on March 9, ordered a complete shutdown of Gaza’s electricity supply. The blackout has severely impacted desalination plants, which provide clean drinking water to some 600,000 people. Yet, despite these actions, Israel continues to evade accountability for its collective punishment of Gaza’s population.

What is Israel’s endgame for Gaza?

Israel appears to be accelerating efforts to implement what some critics describe as a plan to radically reshape Gaza’s demographic and political future. Netanyahu, frustrated by his failure to eliminate Hamas and achieve clear strategic objectives, is pampered by Trump’s proposal to “take over” and “own” the Gaza Strip. At present, Netanyahu is exploiting the geopolitical status— including high-level talks between Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin over Ukraine and the US military campaign against the Houthis in Yemen—which have diverted international attention away from Gaza. This distraction provides him with an opportunity to escalate the attacks with fewer diplomatic constraints.

However, Netanyahu’s thirst for blood is not only deepening the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza but also exacerbating regional tensions, pushing the Middle East toward prolonged instability. His actions risk triggering wider spillover effects, particularly in Lebanon and Syria, and further escalating an already volatile landscape. The pressing question remains: does Israel have a long-term strategy for Gaza, or is it merely waging a campaign of destruction with no viable political exit strategy? Another crucial consideration is, following their emergency summit in Cairo on March 4, how will the Arab League reconcile Egypt’s reconstruction plan with Israel’s relentless aggression?

The urgency of a concerted diplomatic and strategic effort to curb Israeli aggression and expansionism cannot be overstated. Without immediate intervention, the entire region will bear the long-term consequences of unchecked military escalation and political destabilization.

Serhan Afacan is associate professor at Marmara University’s Institute for Middle East Studies and president of Center for Iranian Studies (İRAM).

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

Oslo: Strangling The Dove

By Dr Khairi Janbek

When we do a recap of the Oslo Agreements, they were a series of accords between Israel and the PLO signed in 1993. It was a process meant to lead to a permanent settlement of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict within five year, including decisions on borders, refugees, security, Jerusalem and settlements.

But right from the start, voices were divided over the process, while for others, the whole idea had a built-in mechanism for failure from the start. The Palestinians started seeing that the Oslo Agreements were neither ending the establishment of Israeli settlements nor the end to occupation, while for the Israelis it didn’t seem to end their security concerns.

Indeed, it is pointless to think which comes first, the chicken or the egg, because two different fears and logistics persisted from the start.  But also, it is important to think about the circumstances which brought about the idea of launching the process, and which did put the PLO in a tough position for being perceived as supporting the wrong side which lost; Iraq.

The room for manoeuvre for the late Yasser Arafat was very tight as he stood to lose the legitimacy of the PLO.

What one is trying to say is that, right from the start, outside official circles, many on the Palestinian side were against Oslo probably as many as was the case on the Israeli side.

The gradual erosion of Oslo mainly through the continued Israeli actions kept feeding extremism on both sides.  Nevertheless, the concept was not revoked by any Israeli government because of its effect on Arab public opinion, pressure which is likely to block any peace initiative. Moreover, the international atmosphere was not conducive for such an initiative.

Having said that, one cannot claim that the international atmosphere is currently more indifferent to the abrogation of the Oslo, rather Israel seems to have more leeway in undertaking unilateral actions with more impunity.

Of course, it is not international law that can be counted on in this respect but rather, at least for the time being Donald Trump’s disapproval of the idea of annexing the West Bank by Israel. This is despite the fact that all the Israeli actions of dividing the West Bank from north to south first and currently from west to east, goes unnoticed. But the important thing has been till now, and don’t say the magic word, end of Oslo.

However, the recent development is that Israeli political parties, the partners in Netanyahu’s government are all pushing openly, for the abrogation of the Oslo agreements and cancelling out all the Israeli obligations towards it.

One can only say such an open declaration is a matter of principle by the Israeli government, because the changes on the ground are there for all to see. One supposes all parties are playing for time to see the end of the Palestinian national aspirations.

The columnist is a Jordanian writer based in Paris, France

Continue reading
How Trump Burned Western Friendships

By Jassem Al-Azzawi

Something remarkable is happening today in the corridors of western powers. America’s closest allies are no longer whispering their frustrations behind closed doors; they are now shouting them from the podiums of their parliaments and in press conferences. And US president Donald Trump is responding in kind. The transatlantic alliance, painstakingly built over eight decades, is now fracturing in a live broadcast.

The immediate cause is the American-Israeli war on Iran, launched on 28 February, 2026, without consulting NATO partners, United Nations, or even Washington’s closest friends. But the rift runs deeper than a single conflict; it reflects a strategy that is indifferent to its allies, or even openly contemptuous of them.

“The Americans clearly lack a strategy.”

The breaking point was starkly illustrated in the frank remarks made by German Chancellor Friedrich Merz to students in Marsberg, northwest Germany. Merz likened the conflict with Iran to past US failures in Afghanistan and Iraq.

“It’s clear the Americans don’t have a strategic plan,” he said, describing Washington’s approach as “ill-conceived.”

He went even further, suggesting that the US was being “humiliated” by Tehran’s negotiating tactics which is a stunning public accusation from a Chancellor who, until recently, was one of Washington’s most hawkish European allies.

Trump reacted furiously, writing on his TruthSocial platform that Merz “doesn’t know what he’s talking about” and threatening to reduce the number of US troops stationed in Germany, currently at 36,436. He then told the German chancellor to mind his own business:

“The Chancellor of Germany should spend more time ending the war between Russia and Ukraine, where he has been completely ineffective, and fixing his own battered country… rather than meddling in the affairs of those who are eliminating the Iranian nuclear threat.”

This verbal sparring is transcending all diplomatic norms and is shakening the foundations of the US-European axis.

Starmer: “I’m fed up,” he says publicly.

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer invested considerable political capital in cultivating a working relationship with Trump, but that investment has now proven costly. When asked about Trump’s threats to destroy Iran, Starmer told ITV:

“These are not words I would ever use, because I speak from our British values ​​and principles.”

The harshest language came when Starmer placed Trump alongside Vladimir Putin as partners in causing British economic hardship, telling Talking Points:

“I’m fed up with seeing families and businesses across the country struggling with fluctuating energy bills because of Putin’s or Trump’s actions around the world.”

On British military involvement, Starmer was unequivocal: “I will not change my mind, and I will not back down. It is not in our national interest to join this war, and we will not do so.” Trump rewarded this initial stance with a statement to The Sun newspaper: “Starmer has not been cooperative. The relationship is clearly not what it used to be,” he said.

Meanwhile, the International Monetary Fund underscored the scale of the material risks by lowering its 2026 growth forecast for Britain to 0.8 percent. This is a direct consequence of the energy shock Trump’s trade war has inflicted on British households.

Sanchez and Carney: Europe and Canada Draw a Line

Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has emerged as the most vocal European leader in his criticism of Trump and his uncompromising stance. After Trump threatened to sever all trade ties with Madrid following Spain’s refusal to allow US troops to use the Rota and Morón air bases, Sanchez did not back down. When the ceasefire was announced, his judgment was scathing:

“A ceasefire is always good news, but this temporary relief cannot make us forget the chaos, destruction, and lives lost. The Spanish government will not applaud those who set the world ablaze just because they have finally appeared with a bucket of water.”

For his part, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney offered a broader structural indictment, stating in a speech at the Lowy Institute in Sydney:

“Geostrategically, dominant powers are increasingly acting without restraint or respect for international norms and laws, while others bear the consequences.”

He described the war as “a failure of the international order,” adding that “the United States and Israel acted without engaging the United Nations or consulting allies, including Canada.”

The alarm bells were not only ringing abroad; Senate Democrats launched a fierce campaign to reclaim congressional authority over a war they deemed illegal, unauthorized, and a diplomatic disaster.

Senator Tim Kaine’s diagnosis was accurate: “There was no clear justification, no clear plan, and no effort to engage allies or Congress. When you make diplomacy impossible, you make war inevitable.”

Senator Chris Murphy was even more blunt.

“We have never seen a foreign conflict so publicly mismanaged. We have become a laughingstock around the world, while hurting Americans who are now paying billions more in fuel prices.” Senator Tammy Duckworth linked the current disaster to America’s post-World War II pattern, saying:

“Our duty is to ensure that our nation never again slides into an endless, self-serving war.” Despite this, all six war powers resolutions introduced by the Democrats failed due to Republican loyalty to Trump, even as the war cost the lives of 13 Americans in its first month and the price of a gallon of gasoline reached $4.30.

Time for reckoning has come…

Whether Trump’s antagonism toward allies is a strategic dismantling or simply the impulsiveness of a leader who confuses aggression with strength, the result is the same. He threatened to withdraw from NATO, imposed trade sanctions on Spain, threatened to withdraw troops from Germany, and pushed the “special relationship” with Britain to the brink of collapse. Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s warning also came to light.

Trump will “re-examine” Washington’s commitments to allies who did not support the war, as a declaration of “conditional friendship.”

America’s friends are being pushed away, its adversaries are watching, and the West, for the first time since 1945, is genuinely unsure whether it can rely on Washington.

Jassem Al-Azzawi is an Iraqi writer and journalist who contributed this article to the Arabic website, Al Rai Al Youm and appears in Crossfirearabia.com.

Continue reading

You Missed

An Egyptian House in a German Town

An Egyptian House in a German Town

Nakba Art

Nakba Art

Palestinian Population Tops 15.5 Million

Palestinian Population Tops 15.5 Million

‘All I Want is to Bury My Family in Dignity’  

‘All I Want is to Bury My Family in Dignity’  

Israeli Army: 18 Soldiers Dead, 910 Injured in Lebanon

Israeli Army: 18 Soldiers Dead, 910 Injured in Lebanon

Watch Out: Israel is Secretly Filling The West Bank With Settlements

Watch Out: Israel is Secretly Filling The West Bank With Settlements