Gaza under siege, again: Israel's escalation strategy unravels a humanitarian catastrophe

The renewed Israeli bombardment of Gaza did not start in a vacuum. It’s part of an orchestrated military strategy that comes with a political message, and a humanitarian cost that is spiralling beyond containment. 

Within less than 24 hours, more than 400 Palestinians have been killed in one of the deadliest attacks since the beginning of the 16-month war, signalling a sharp turn in Israel’s negotiation posture and its battlefield tactics.

This sudden military escalation followed senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan’s public denouncement of Israel’s shift in negotiation. According to Hamdan, the previous proposal by US hostage negotiator Adam Boehler was abruptly replaced by that of US envoy Steven Witkoff.

The new offer, Hamdan argues, undermines the foundations of the second phase of the previous ceasefire agreement and strips it of its core principles including the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza, as well as the removal of debris to aid reconstruction efforts.

The immediacy and intensity of Israel’s military response clearly signal that negotiations will now be conducted through force rather than dialogue.

Targeted assassinations as a political weapon

The recent strikes represent calculated attacks designed to cripple both the political and military leadership of Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

Those killed include Yasser Harb, a member of Hamas’s political bureau; Abu Ubaida al-Jamasi, another key Hamas leader; Abu Hamza, spokesperson for the Al-Quds Brigades (Islamic Jihad’s armed wing); and Mahmoud  Abu Watfa, a senior official in the Hamas-run Ministry of Interior. 

Fires rage in the aftermath of Israeli airstrikes in Gaza (AFP).
Fires rage in the aftermath of Israeli airstrikes in Gaza (AFP).

These strikes are reminiscent of the decapitation strikes strategy used by Israel against Hezbollah, aimed at fragmenting command structures and instilling leadership paralysis.

The underlying intention is clear: to create an atmosphere of fear, while weakening Hamas governance capacity pressuring the group into making substantial concessions—notably releasing hostages without reciprocal prisoner exchanges—an established red line for Hamas.

Negotiation through coercion

This escalation is a tactical manoeuvre aimed at shaping negotiation outcomes through military force.

The strategy reflects a broader pattern of Israeli diplomacy: shaping the outcome of talks through battlefield dynamics rather than mutual understanding. This methodology deeply complicates the political landscape, driving Hamas further into a defensive posture and potentially derailing the possibility of a comprehensive truce.

Simultaneously, the humanitarian devastation—mass civilian deaths, displacement in Beit Hanoun and Khan Younis, and destruction of critical infrastructure—intensifies psychological pressure, aiming to coerce Hamas leadership into submission. Yet history suggests this approach may only reinforce resistance and fuel prolonged violence.

International and domestic implications

The United State's role in this escalation cannot be overlooked. Confirmed White House statements indicate prior consultation, echoing past US-Israeli coordinated strategies against Hezbollah, which involved targeted, high-intensity strikes to alter strategic realities.

Such coordination signals Washington’s endorsement of a sustained offensive if Hamas refuses Israel’s terms. 

The operation’s nature—synchronised, high-profile assassinations—suggests this is not a brief campaign but potentially a prolonged military engagement.

The political objective aligns with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Donald Trump’s previously expressed intentions to dismantle Hamas’s political infrastructure and re-engineer Gaza’s post-war landscape. Behind the scenes, discussions around Gaza’s future governance, regional investment plans, and even forced population transfers have been increasingly floated—signalling that this is not just a war, but a prelude to strategic reconfiguration.

This escalation has also had significant domestic political implications within Israel, notably facilitating the return of far-right politician Itamar Ben-Gvir as Minister of National Security—a move Prime Minister Netanyahu considers strategically essential.

Ben-Gvir, known for his hardline, ultranationalist views, advocates aggressive security policies, increased settlement expansion, and harsher measures against Palestinian populations. His reinstatement is not merely a symbolic gesture but a strategic manoeuvre enabling Netanyahu to secure critical political support necessary for the approval of Israel’s national budget by March 31, 2025.

Netanyahu’s escalation thus serves a dual purpose: military dominance abroad and political survival at home. The return of Ben-Gvir to a position of considerable influence signals potentially dire consequences for Palestinians, likely leading to intensified settlement activities, heightened security crackdowns, and further erosion of Palestinian civil and political rights—further complicating the already fragile regional dynamics.

Humanitarian collapse

While political manoeuvring and military strategies unfold, Gaza’s humanitarian condition has plummeted to catastrophic levels.

As of March 2, 2025, no food has entered the enclave, deepening fears of famine. Ramadan, traditionally a period of spiritual reflection, has transformed into one of starvation and sorrow.

Markets are nearly empty, and the few remaining goods have tripled in price. With no employment opportunities since the war began, people are left with no means of income.

Survivors live in makeshift tents amid overflowing sewage, as infrastructure crumbles under relentless attacks. Israel has consistently obstructed reconstruction efforts, exacerbating suffering.

With no electricity or clean water for over 18 months, Gaza’s health sector faces imminent collapse, risking mass deaths from starvation and disease.

Last-minute mediation

In an attempt to contain the crisis, Egypt has invited a Hamas delegation to Cairo, hoping to salvage the ceasefire negotiations and prevent further escalation. However, given the current momentum of the Israeli campaign and its stated objectives, the prospects for a swift resolution remain slim.

Still, political observers believe that within a week of continuous attacks, conditions may ripen for a new round of compromise talks. Both parties might seek a midpoint agreement involving the exchange of hostages and prisoners. Yet any such understanding will likely be temporary and fragile, with the potential for renewed warfare always looming just beneath the surface.

The latest developments in Gaza highlight a deeply troubling shift in the conduct of war and diplomacy. Israel appears to be using escalation not only as a military tool but as the primary language of negotiation. Through devastating strikes, targeted assassinations, and humanitarian suffocation, it is attempting to rewrite the terms of engagement imposing its will not through dialogue but through destruction.

What remains to be seen is whether this strategy will produce a lasting solution or whether it will merely deepen the cycle of violence, resistance, and suffering. Either way, the message is clear: in today’s Gaza, diplomacy is being conducted through the barrel of a gun, and the cost is being paid in civilian lives.