Dr. Mohamed El-Tamawy: The escalation in Gaza has always been a tool for Israeli governments to reorder domestic priorities, but it has not achieved sustainable results.

Muhammad Hawash: This escalation comes as part of the Netanyahu government's efforts to appease the far-right parties calling for a return to fighting.

Muhammad Judeh: The Netanyahu government's policy of negotiating with fire aims to create a new reality on the ground that imposes negotiating conditions in its favor.

Talal Okal: The current escalation is part of Netanyahu's strategy to buy time, but it will not necessarily lead to a radical shift in the negotiating balance.

Yasser Manna: Israel is trying to evade the obligations of the first phase by pushing for a new agreement that goes beyond its obligations.

The latest Israeli escalation in the Gaza Strip comes after stalled negotiations that have stalled, without reaching the second phase of a prisoner exchange and ceasefire agreement. This attempt is aimed at imposing facts on the ground that will be reflected at the negotiating table.

Writers, political analysts, and experts who spoke to Al-Quds.com (interviews conducted before the return to the war of extermination early Tuesday) considered this escalation to be part of a strategy to prioritize Israel's domestic affairs, especially in light of the political and economic crises facing the Israeli occupation government, and its prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, in particular. This has prompted him to use military escalation as a means of diverting attention from his domestic failures.

They point out that the Israeli escalation aims to pressure Hamas to make concessions in the negotiations, and is an attempt by Israel to impose its own negotiating conditions, despite the fact that this strategy has not achieved sustainable results in the past.

The absence of a real political horizon for a comprehensive and just solution

Dr. Mohamed El-Tamawy, a researcher in political economy and international relations, says the recent escalation in the Gaza Strip represents a new chapter in the series of tensions plaguing the region, highlighting the complexity of the political and security landscape as a result of the absence of a genuine political horizon for a comprehensive and just solution to the Palestinian issue.

Al-Tamawi explains that the recurrence of these confrontations confirms that military solutions are no alternative to a political process based on international legitimacy resolutions. He emphasizes that the continuation of unilateral Israeli policies exacerbates tensions and threatens regional stability as a whole.

Al-Tamawi explains that the Israeli escalation is not merely a fleeting military strike, but rather reflects a deeper crisis within Israeli politics, particularly in light of the complex domestic situation facing Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Al-Tamawi points out that Netanyahu is facing an unprecedented domestic dilemma, as he can no longer escape the repercussions of his crises except by escalating military confrontations.

"Since assuming power, Netanyahu has been exporting domestic crises abroad, using security escalation as a means of escaping his failures, whether economic, social, or even legal," Tamawi says. "He continues to be dogged by corruption charges that threaten his political future."

Netanyahu faces growing public anger today.

Al-Tamawi explains that Netanyahu is currently facing growing public anger due to the deteriorating economy and the rising cost of living, which has prompted him to resort to the military option in an attempt to unite the domestic front around him, despite his awareness that this will not be a sustainable solution.

On the economic front, Tamawi asserts that Israel is experiencing one of its worst crises in decades, with economic growth falling to 1% in 2024, while the fiscal deficit rose to 7% of GDP due to massive military spending exceeding $35 billion.

Al-Tamawi points out that these massive expenditures have increased the burden on the Israeli economy, causing the public debt ratio to jump to 70%, up from 61% in 2023. This reflects the fragility of the financial situation amid the ongoing military escalation.

Al-Tamawi points out that Israel has lost its ability to attract foreign investment, which has declined by 60% due to political and security instability, along with rising unemployment rates, particularly among immigrants, which have reached 20% due to ongoing security unrest.

Al-Tamawi believes that economic failure is not the only challenge facing Netanyahu. Israeli society is experiencing unprecedented internal divisions, manifested in the massive demonstrations against him and his attempts to weaken the judiciary. These recurring political crises have led to public criticism from prominent military and economic officials, further isolating Netanyahu domestically.

Escalation to re-arrange internal priorities

Al-Tamawi explains that the current Israeli government relies on fragile alliances between the religious far right and extremist nationalist forces, which are pushing for further escalation, even at the expense of Israel's own stability.

Al-Tamawi asserts that escalation in Gaza has always been a tool for Israeli governments to reorder domestic priorities, but these strategies have not achieved sustainable results. He points to previous military operations, such as Operation Cast Lead in 2008-2009 and Operation Guardian of the Walls in 2021, which did not change the reality on the ground.

Al-Tamawi believes that Netanyahu is currently attempting to replicate this policy, but he faces a different reality. The escalation is no longer merely a military strike, but rather part of a broader crisis threatening Israel from within, with its economic and political power eroding and its international isolation growing.

He adds: "In this context, negotiations remain the inevitable option, but Israel is attempting to impose its conditions through military escalation, forgetting that force has never been a guarantee of lasting strategic gains."

Al-Tamawi points out that Cairo, with its historical experience in managing regional crises, understands that the solution lies in returning to the negotiating table with just solutions, not through reckless escalation. Continued confrontations will only lead to further Israeli retreat, at a time when neither Israel nor Gaza can bear the burden of prolonged conflicts.

The military threat as a permanent pressure card on the Palestinians

For his part, writer and political analyst Mohammed Hawash asserts that Israel is pursuing a gradual escalation in the Gaza Strip, exploiting the military threat as a constant pressure card against the Palestinians, international mediators, and Israeli public opinion, particularly right-wing factions within the government.

Hawash explains that this escalation comes as part of Benjamin Netanyahu's government's efforts to appease the extreme right-wing parties calling for a return to fighting. The government is seeking to reassure them that military operations against the Palestinians will continue, by tightening the blockade, cutting off electricity and water, and launching airstrikes targeting various areas of the Gaza Strip.

Hawash points out that this policy specifically targets resigned Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, with the aim of bringing him back into the governing coalition and ensuring the passage of the general budget before the end of this month.

Hawash explains that the Israeli right is seeking to expand the scope of the war on Gaza and impose a policy of forced displacement, a vision rejected by the United States, at least officially, as the United States publicly opposes such plans.

Israel holds Hamas responsible for stalled negotiations

Regarding the recent negotiations, Hawash explained that Israel holds Hamas responsible for the failure of the last round of talks, even though the movement has expressed its willingness to return to negotiations.

However, according to Hawash, Tel Aviv believes that the continuation of negotiations does not conflict with the continuation of sporadic military strikes in Gaza, with raids targeting various areas, including Khan Yunis, Rafah, Gaza, and the northern Gaza Strip.

Hawash asserts that the goal of this approach is to send a message to the Palestinians that the Israeli army is ready to resume fighting at any moment, that Hamas must make concessions in line with Israeli demands, and that those who want war, we will wage it, and those who want negotiations, we will conduct them.

However, Hawash explains that Tel Aviv's demands go far beyond the issue of a prisoner exchange and detainees, as they include other conditions that neither the movement nor the Palestinians can accept, most notably disarmament and full Israeli control, which is interpreted as an attempt to evacuate the Gaza Strip of its residents.

Hawash emphasizes that this Israeli vision is not acceptable to Palestinians, nor at the Arab or international levels. The idea of forced displacement is no longer up for discussion, even in international circles. Despite Israel's ongoing maneuvers to achieve negotiating gains, it continues to face enormous pressure from within and without.

Regarding the impact of the escalation on the negotiations, Hawash explained that repeated Israeli strikes alone are not enough to derail the negotiations, but they also impact the atmosphere surrounding them, both in terms of pressuring international mediators and influencing the morale of Palestinian citizens living under constant bombardment.

Hamas still adheres to its basic demands

Hawash points out that these Israeli pressures will not change Hamas's position, which remains committed to its basic demands and refuses to comply with Israeli demands it deems unrealistic or impossible to implement.

Hawash points out that the continued bombing and water and electricity cuts could have a dual effect. It could push some parties to pressure Hamas, but at the same time, it could force mediators to exert pressure on Israel, given that these practices complicate negotiations and weaken the chances of reaching an agreement.

Domestically, Hawash confirms the existence of divisions within Israel itself. Recent polls have shown that approximately 70% of Israelis support an immediate prisoner exchange deal, or at least a return to the first phase of the exchange process. Only 12% of Israelis support a return to fighting, reflecting a decline in popular support for the war.

Hawash explains that the Israeli army itself is not currently prepared to return to the large-scale fighting it experienced last year. Military estimates indicate that the army prefers to conduct limited operations, including airstrikes and sporadic attacks, rather than launching a large-scale ground offensive.

Hawash points out that Trump has backed down from the forced displacement of Palestinians, having previously been more open to Israeli proposals on the matter.

Hawash points out that the US administration is now increasingly inclined to adopt the Arab-Islamic Initiative, which was agreed upon by the Palestinians and Arab states and presented at the recent Arab-Islamic Summit.

Hawash explains that the United States has regional interests that go beyond its relationship with Israel, and seeks to end the war in Gaza to achieve greater stability in the region. Therefore, the ongoing negotiations are being primarily managed by Washington, which is seeking to reach a ceasefire conditional on the fulfillment of Israeli demands regarding the detainees, with discussions later on broader political and strategic issues.

Netanyahu upset by Boehler-Hamas negotiations

In turn, writer and political analyst Mohammed Joda asserts that the ongoing Israeli escalation in the Gaza Strip, particularly after the end of the first phase of the ceasefire agreement, has become part of Israel's daily policy aimed at pressuring Hamas to make concessions in negotiations, whether regarding extending the first phase of the agreement or releasing Israeli hostages held in Gaza.

Joudeh explains that the escalation in Israeli bombardment over the past week, which has resulted in dozens of Palestinian martyrs, comes as part of Israeli attempts to obstruct international mediation efforts, particularly those led by the United States.

Joudeh points out that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu expressed deep dismay at these negotiations, which were conducted by Adam Boehler, the official responsible for the prisoner issue in the Trump administration, with leaders from Hamas in the Qatari capital, Doha.

Joudeh points out that this move prompted the Israeli government to mobilize the Zionist lobby within the United States and enlist members of the Republican Party to pressure the Trump administration to halt these negotiations, which later led to Adam Boehler's removal from his position.

Joudeh emphasizes that Israel began evading implementation of the agreement from the moment it entered into force, but has recently intensified its military operations, carrying out intensive bombing operations, expanding the systematic killing of civilians, closing all crossings into the Strip, and preventing the entry of any humanitarian aid or goods to the besieged population.

Negotiation with fire policy

Joudeh explains that Israel did not stop there. The Israeli Ministry of Defense issued a decision to cut off electricity to Gaza as part of a policy of economic strangulation and military pressure to force Hamas to make concessions regarding extending the first phase of the agreement and releasing the Israeli hostages.

Joudeh points out that the coming days could witness increased Israeli escalation, potentially leading to a complete reversal of the ceasefire agreement. Netanyahu seeks to force Hamas to return to the negotiating table under the weight of military pressure, with the goal of achieving negotiating gains that benefit Israel.

Joudeh asserts that the current faltering negotiations between Hamas and Israel have led the latter to rely on escalation as its primary means of pressure. He explains that the Netanyahu government's policy of "negotiating with fire" aims to create a new reality on the ground that imposes negotiating conditions in Israel's favor.

Joudeh explains that Israel resorted to military escalation after negotiations reached a dead end, with the aim of pressuring Hamas to make concessions and also to influence international mediators and push them to exert further pressure on the movement to accept the settlements proposed by Israel.

The escalation reflects a severe internal crisis facing Netanyahu's government.

For his part, writer and political analyst Talal Okal says that the increasing Israeli escalation in the Gaza Strip reflects a severe internal crisis within Benjamin Netanyahu's government, which has begun to realize it has fallen into a "trap" set by Hamas, leaving it facing signs of political and military failure and defeat.

Okal explains that Netanyahu does not want to stop the war once and for all, and is therefore adopting a policy of procrastination and creating obstacles to negotiations, with the aim of returning them to square one and prolonging them for as long as possible. This is in an attempt to avoid answering questions related to the aftermath of the war and how to deal with Gaza in the future.

Okal points out that Netanyahu is attempting to maneuver between the pressure exerted on him by the US administration, which is demanding a ceasefire, and the internal pressures he faces within Israel. Based on this, he is resorting to provoking Hamas, hoping this will provide him with a pretext that will allow him to resume the war under the cover of military pressure on the negotiating process.

Hamas will not give up its essential conditions.

Despite these attempts, Okal asserts that military pressure has not yet achieved its goals, as Hamas has refused to back down from its basic negotiating conditions, and Israel has failed to impose new conditions on it.

Okal believes that Hamas may show tactical flexibility in some aspects of the negotiations, but it will not compromise on its core conditions, which it considers the basis for any future agreement.

Awkal points out that Israel's attempts to subdue Hamas through military pressure will not achieve significant success, especially given the movement's continued adherence to its demands despite Israeli escalation.

Okal asserts that the ongoing escalation is merely part of Netanyahu's strategy to buy time, but it will not necessarily lead to a radical shift in the negotiating balance, especially given the steadfastness of the Palestinian position and its refusal to make substantive concessions to Israel.

Establishing a new field equation

Writer, political analyst, and expert on Israeli affairs, Yasser Manna, believes that Israel is pursuing a policy of slow, calculated escalation in the Gaza Strip. This strategy carries dimensions that transcend circumstantial and temporary dimensions, aiming to establish a new equation on the ground.

Manaa explains that this policy resembles the Israeli approach used in both southern Lebanon and the West Bank, where Tel Aviv seeks to establish the concept of "freedom of military action" in Gaza, giving it broad latitude to carry out repeated military operations without committing to a permanent ceasefire.

Manna points out that this strategy represents a shift in the way the conflict is managed, such that escalation is not merely a temporary reaction, but rather a tool for adjusting the rules of the game in accordance with Israeli interests.

Manaa points out that the current Israeli escalation serves direct tactical objectives, including exerting pressure on Palestinian factions to push them to accept an extension of the first phase of existing agreements and prevent a transition to advanced negotiation stages.

Escalation to prevent the entry of humanitarian and relief aid

Manaa explains that Israel is also using escalation as a tool to prevent the entry of humanitarian and relief aid into the Gaza Strip, with the aim of simultaneously strengthening its political and humanitarian leverage, making the living conditions in Gaza a bargaining chip for the Israeli government.

Manaa points out that negotiations are still ongoing, but the main disagreement revolves around moving to the second phase of the agreement, which includes a full Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and a comprehensive ceasefire.

Manaa points out that, in contrast, Israel is attempting to evade the requirements of this phase by pushing for a new agreement that goes beyond its obligations. This makes the Israeli escalation a threatening message that the failure of negotiations could lead to the return of the military option, or what is known as "negotiations by fire."

Manaa says, "Any Israeli escalation, if it occurs, will not take the form of a large-scale confrontation as was the case in the first months of the war. Rather, it will be limited to limited military operations aimed at achieving negotiating gains without slipping into an open confrontation."

The United States does not want a comprehensive military escalation.

Manaa explains that the reason for this is that the United States does not want a comprehensive military escalation in Gaza, as it conflicts with its regional projects, most notably the normalization efforts between Israel and Arab states. This imposes restrictions on Tel Aviv's handling of the military situation.

Manaa asserts that Israel is not seeking to ignite a large-scale war at this stage, but rather is relying on sporadic military operations to impose a new equation in Gaza, enabling it to intervene on the ground whenever it wishes, while maintaining ongoing pressure on the Palestinian resistance to prevent significant negotiating gains. Conversely, Palestinian factions are aware of these tactics and therefore remain committed to their basic demands in any future agreement, despite Israel's attempts to impose new rules of engagement.