Israeli Newspaper: Netanyahu's repeated threat to launch an operation in Rafah serves two goals

By Amos Harel

The fighting in the sector these days is on hold. The main battle takes place in the center of the sector, in the Hamad neighbourhood. The neighborhood built by Qatar in northwest Khan Yunis, which the Israeli army entered two weeks ago. Meanwhile, limited military incursions took place in the northern Gaza Strip, where hundreds of Hamas militants were killed. But so far, this does not seem to have much effect in breaking the movement's will to continue fighting, even if it is intended for small military frameworks. The fighting there is taking place in parallel with an Israeli defensive effort focused on the West Bank and the Line of Contact, against the backdrop of Ramadan, in addition to the great tension over arrangements for Muslims to enter to pray in Al-Aqsa Mosque.

Yesterday, the American news site Politico reported that the Biden administration is considering supporting an Israeli operation in the Rafah area, on the condition that it is a focused and limited operation, and that it refrains from occupying the entire city. This came after US President Joe Biden's public speech, in which he warned Israel of an inappropriate operation in Rafah, and demanded that it pledge not to harm more than a million Palestinian citizens, who are crowded with Rafah.

It is not certain that there is a way to effectively strike Hamas' capabilities in Rafah, without occupying it. In any case, and contrary to official Israeli statements, it seems that the army does not have the ability to carry out an operation in Rafah now, as evacuating the population requires many weeks, and as we previously mentioned, this requires large army forces, which must come from regular forces that are not currently deployed. In the south, the majority of the reserve forces were demobilized and returned to their homes.

The fundamental military achievement of the recent period remains in doubt. The assassination of Marwan Issa, the third figure in the hierarchy of the Hamas leadership in the Gaza Strip, who was apparently killed in an Israeli Air Force bombing of the Nuseirat camp at the weekend. Israeli intelligence has no confirmed information about it. Hence, the discussion on the subject is being conducted with caution.

The central change that occurred this week relates to humanitarian aid, which expanded significantly under American pressure. Under dictates from the United States, Israel allowed aid to be dropped in from the air, and currently, through a sea shipping corridor that could be launched next month, with the establishment of an American naval pier on the northern shore of the Strip. Brigadier General Hagari said this week in an interview with foreign correspondents that Israel intends to “flood the Strip with supplies.” On the other hand, Defense Minister Yoav Galant tried to push forward a step that would allow the intervention of the Palestinian Authority, or elements of “Fatah” in the Gaza Strip, in the process of receiving aid in the northern Gaza Strip, as “Hamas” control has become relatively weak. But the Prime Minister foils the move.

Negotiations on the kidnapped deal did not make significant progress this week. But it's not completely stopped. The Americans have missed the date they set at the beginning of the month of Ramadan on March 11, and they are blaming Hamas' stubbornness...but the Americans still have two tools they can use to put pressure on Hamas, through the Qatari and Egyptian mediators. Qatar hosts Hamas leadership abroad and pays money to the Strip; Egypt controls the Rafah crossing, as well as the tunnels dug under the border. Using these two points as leverage would likely reduce Hamas' opposition to a deal that could be reached during Ramadan.

Netanyahu's repeated threat to launch an operation in Rafah serves two purposes. A declared goal related to the kidnapped deal. The fear of the Egyptians, Americans, and Palestinians about the Israeli army storming Rafah may create a margin of flexibility in order to reach a deal. But at the same time, Netanyahu is trying to buy time, as the great preoccupation with the issue of a possible storming of Rafah distances the end of the war, and puts aside the public and political debate to investigate the shortcomings that allowed the October 7 “terrorist” attack.

Limited maneuver in Lebanon

Under the guise of a relative decline in battles in Gaza, Israel is increasing military pressure on Hezbollah in Lebanon. At the beginning of the week, Israel launched attacks on the Bekaa region, located 90 km from the border, and targeted a number of the party’s military sites. Israel is still moving below the threshold of all-out war, and is allowing Hezbollah to consider its response in a way that prevents a major confrontation from erupting. However, Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah's room for maneuver has begun to shrink. It is possible to estimate that in the discussions between him and the Iranians, the question has increasingly been raised: Is it not better for Hezbollah to dictate the course of events, rather than waiting for the Israeli decision to launch a war?

Political analyst at the Carnegie Institute, Michael Young, wrote on the website of Al-Ittihad newspaper, published in the Emirates, an article in which he said that the “terrorist” attack launched by “Hamas” on the cover settlements was disastrous for the Strip. In his opinion, if Israel continues the occupation of the Gaza Strip, Hamas will fail to achieve the goal of undermining normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia. Young believes that Sinwar was seeking to strengthen Hamas’ position in the competition with the Palestinian Authority, and to strengthen his own position in the internal struggle over the forces in Hamas leadership. 

Regarding Lebanon, Young wrote that Hassan Nasrallah's decision to join the battle, in part, led to harm to villages in southern Lebanon, and the killing of dozens of Lebanese citizens and hundreds of Hezbollah fighters. Is there any justification for this price? According to Young, Hezbollah is paying a high price in order to maintain the appearance of unity in the areas in the axis of resistance against Israel. Iran is the winner from this, but its Arab arms have been harmed. It has become clear that the unity of the squares is a strategic matter that poses a threat to Lebanon. According to Young: “There is no real goal, except a display of Iranian power, and Nasrallah realizes that. Both Hamas and Hezbollah have become prisoners of the confrontations they are waging. The only way out of this is to return to the status quo before the war. Then, Supporters of both organizations will ask: Are all these sacrifices justified?