Far-right factions scarier than Trump... Israel breaks ceasefire to defend regime [AK Radio]

Israeli Far-Right Pressures Coalition to Resume War During Ceasefire
Trump Shifts Stance in Support of Israel

Israel has resumed its attacks on Hamas after two months. The ceasefire agreement, which was difficult to achieve last January through U.S. mediation, has been nullified, leading to the resumption of airstrikes as well as ground troop assaults. Even though a United Nations staff member was killed in an Israeli attack, Israel continues its offensive unabated.

Israel blames Hamas for the resumption of attacks, accusing them of stalling by neither releasing Israeli hostages nor engaging in negotiations. The ceasefire agreement brokered by the U.S. last January was structured in three phased steps: the first phase involved an initial exchange of hostages between both sides, the second phase entailed the exchange of remaining hostages and the complete withdrawal of Israeli troops, and the third phase focused on the joint reconstruction of the Gaza Strip.

While the first phase of the ceasefire proceeded relatively smoothly, disagreements began to surface during the transition to the second phase. Hamas demanded that Israel lift its blockade on humanitarian aid supplies from international relief organizations, arguing that Gaza was on the brink of collapse. Conversely, Israel insisted that the hostage exchange must come first. The Israeli government expressed concerns that Hamas might exploit the aid to stall and then break the ceasefire again. Ultimately, mutual distrust between the two sides led to the collapse of the ceasefire.

However, the international community has been reluctant to accept Israel’s explanation at face value. Despite disagreements during negotiations, the ceasefire period for the first phase could have been extended to continue dialogue, yet Israel broke the ceasefire first and resumed attacks, raising questions.

Analysts suggest that internal political issues within Israel played a role in the decision to restart the war instead of seeking peaceful solutions. The current Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is a coalition rather than a single-party government dominated by the Likud party. This coalition includes far-right parties such as Otzma Yehudit and the Religious Zionist Party, and if any of these parties withdraw from the coalition, Netanyahu’s administration could collapse, creating an unstable political situation.

On the 19th (local time), residents evacuating due to the resumption of Israeli military airstrikes on the Gaza Strip. Photo by EPA and Yonhap News.

Notably, these far-right parties declared during the ceasefire agreement in January that they would leave the coalition if the government did not resume the war. If the government collapses, Netanyahu could face a severe personal crisis. He is currently undergoing three to four trials on charges including bribery, fraud, and corruption, and if not under wartime martial law, he would likely be subject to immediate arrest and investigation.

During the war, legal responsibilities could be deferred, but as the ceasefire continued, courts increasingly demanded his appearance. From Netanyahu’s perspective, if the war ended, he would face not only political demise but also legal jeopardy. This analysis lends credibility to the view that he broke the ceasefire and restarted the war to avoid these political problems.

However, there has been no backlash from the United States. The ceasefire agreement was originally reached on January 19, the day before Donald Trump’s inauguration. Trump had actively intervened before taking office by dispatching envoys to facilitate the ceasefire, which was considered his first diplomatic achievement. Therefore, it was expected that Trump would strongly oppose Israel’s breaking of the ceasefire.

Contrary to expectations, the Trump administration reportedly approved Israel’s resumption of combat. The U.S. government has not officially expressed opposition or protest and has continued to supply weapons to Israel, implicitly supporting the Gaza Strip conflict.

This shift in stance is analyzed to be linked to Trump’s Middle East peace plan. Last month, Trump announced a plan to relocate all Gaza Strip residents to neighboring countries and build luxury hotels there to transform the area into a tourist city. This is not merely a concept but a plan that may be actively pursued, requiring the relocation of Gaza residents, the elimination of Hamas, and subsequent development. Therefore, it is believed that the Trump administration’s easy approval of Israel’s war resumption is connected to this Middle East vision.

EPA·Yonhap News

Opposition to Israel’s resumption of attacks was expected within the U.S., but in reality, there has been little dissent from either the Republican or Democratic parties. This is related to the rapid changes in the Middle East’s power dynamics following the end of the Syrian civil war. The Assad regime in Syria, which was pro-Russian and pro-Iranian, had supported Hamas and Hezbollah. However, with the end of the Syrian civil war, this regime collapsed and was replaced by a pro-Western government. This has led the U.S. to reconsider its Middle East exit strategy pursued during the Biden administration.

Currently, Russia’s influence in the Middle East has weakened due to the war in Ukraine, and China is expanding its presence in the region. From the U.S. perspective, re-engaging in the Middle East is necessary as part of its China containment policy to manage its allies. Additionally, weakening Hamas and Hezbollah through Israel could ultimately pressure Iran, which backs these groups, to return to nuclear negotiations with the U.S.

Through this process, the U.S. aims to reshape and stabilize the Middle East in a way favorable to itself, ultimately lowering oil prices. A drop in energy prices is expected to help resolve the inflation issues facing the U.S., and unlike during the Biden administration, voices advocating renewed U.S. involvement in the Middle East are emerging across the American political spectrum.

Israel’s resumption of attacks on Hamas can be seen as a convergence of Netanyahu’s personal issues and U.S. national interests. However, it is uncertain whether the situation will unfold solely according to U.S. desires. The greatest concern of the international community is the potential for escalation in the Middle East. If Israel continues to increase civilian casualties in the Gaza Strip, there is a risk that anti-Israel religious forces in the region could unite, as they did during the Fourth Middle East War. Currently, most Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia, side with Israel or the U.S., but as Islamic leaders, they cannot ignore pressure from domestic religious groups if civilian casualties in Gaza rise.

If a large-scale religious movement encompassing the entire Islamic world arises, Arab monarchies may be unable to manage domestic political unrest and could shift to an anti-American stance. In such a case, the U.S. could face confrontation with the entire Middle East. Due to these concerns, there is speculation that criticism of Trump’s current Middle East plan may emerge within the Republican Party.

Israel’s resumption of attacks on Hamas is expected to have a significant impact on the Middle East situation. How long Israel will continue its attacks, to what extent the U.S. will tolerate them, and how other Middle Eastern countries will respond will greatly influence the course of events. Therefore, this issue requires ongoing global attention, and international efforts for peace and stability in the Middle East are more important than ever.