With Blank Check From Trump, Netanyahu Escalates On All Fronts - Risking U.S. Interests In The Middle East.
Netanyahu’s Escalation Strategy and the Implications for Regional Stability.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu believes he has all the political cover he needs from Donald Trump to act unilaterally across Israel and the Middle East.
This has paved the way for renewed escalation in Gaza, where Israeli military operations purportedly target Hamas fighters but have resulted in exceptionally high civilian casualties (hundreds of women and children killed in one week - with footage of bombs dropping on refugee tents: a clear war crime).
(side note: and just today, The Israeli army has - in a targeted airstrike against his vehicle - killed journalist Hossam Shabat, a 24-year-old reporter for Al Jazeera Mubasher and contributor to, in an airstrike targeting his vehicle in northern Gaza.)
Simultaneously, there is growing talk of a full-scale ground operation—despite such action running counter to the terms of a ceasefire agreement Netanyahu himself had previously endorsed.
From the outset, that ceasefire agreement was flawed, especially for leaving Hamas in control (as we have argued before).
Yet, Netanyahu agreed to it, and back in January we have predicted that domestic political pressures could compel him to renege: and that is what ended up happening now.
Under pressure from his far-right allies, Netanyahu abandoned the agreed timeline.
The second phase of the deal—scheduled for March—was to see a full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza.
Instead, Netanyahu refused and with that secured the return of far-right figures like Ben-Gvir into his cabinet to consolidate his political base.
Under the original terms of the ceasefire, Phase One was to be followed—after six weeks—by a second, far more ambitious phase: a complete Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, a formal end to the war, and the release of all remaining living hostages.
That framework had been agreed upon by both sides.
Phase One was implemented:
30 live hostages were released from Gaza.
Eight bodies of deceased captives were returned.
1,900 Palestinian prisoners were freed from Israeli jails.
Israeli forces withdrew from most of the Strip.
But when the moment came to begin Phase Two, Israeli negotiators didn’t show up.
Prime Minister Netanyahu, under pressure from hardline coalition partners, now insists the war cannot end as long as Hamas remains in power—a condition not included in the original agreement.
Instead of proceeding with the agreed roadmap, Israel pivoted.
At first, the White House pushed back, insisting Israel must uphold its obligations under Phase Two.
That position has since quietly shifted.
And Washington opened direct talks with Hamas, attempting to extract further hostage releases without Israeli concessions.
Now, the U.S. appears aligned with Netanyahu’s strategy.
President Trump has openly threatened Hamas, warning of “all hell” if the remaining hostages are not released.
A White House spokesperson confirmed Israel had “consulted” with the U.S. prior to renewed strikes in Gaza, and doubled down on the threat that Hamas would face “a price to pay” if it failed to yield.
The result: a deal designed to end the war has collapsed midstream, with the U.S. now tacitly backing a renegotiation-by-force approach.
The original roadmap lies abandoned—hostages still held, the war very much ongoing, and Gaza once again absorbing the cost of shifting political red lines in both Jerusalem and Washington.
The strategic rationale here is political survival for Netanyahu.
Netanyahu is once again bracing for legal challenges over long standing corruption and bribery charges, including allegations of accepting illicit payments from Qatar and leaking sensitive information—charges he strenuously denies.
However, he is now seeking to dismiss both the Attorney General and Shin Bet Chief Ronen Bar.
Should the Supreme Court intervene and deem these moves illegal, Israel could plunge into another constitutional crisis.
Fortunately for Israeli democracy, Netanyahu’s prior efforts to strip the judiciary of its power were stalled in 2023 due to the Gaza conflict.
That delay preserved the Court’s authority, potentially allowing it to act as a safeguard against autocracy.
But as Netanyahu girds for political and legal war at home, he is expanding military engagements abroad.
Gaza Is Not The Only Theater Where Netanyahu Acts Unchecked.
In the West Bank, there are signs of planned Israeli incursions without justification—suggestive of a broader land acquisition agenda.
In Syria, after failing to incite unrest among Druze and Kurdish populations against the central government (both reaffirmed alignment with the HTS-led government and SDF agreed to be incorporated to the overall Ministry of Defense), Netanyahu has shifted to direct attacks on critical Syrian infrastructure, including air bases.
These strikes appear designed to provoke Turkey into conflict.
Netanyahu now publicly asserts that conflict with Turkey is “inevitable,” yet he believes full-scale escalation is unlikely due to Turkey’s NATO membership and U.S. influence.
Still, what if Turkey calls Israel’s bluff?
What if Turkish military advisers get killed in the mayhem?
As such, Israel is likely preparing for limited clashes, particularly in southern Syria, relying on its air superiority and aiming to avoid ground combat.
This strategy is dangerously unpredictable.
Netanyahu is gambling that limited hostilities can generate a “rally around the flag” effect, shoring up his domestic support at a critical time.
But there is a high risk of miscalculation—especially since Turkish President Erdoğan is also facing growing dissent, particularly over authoritarian moves like jailing opposition leader Ekrem İmamoğlu, leader of the CHP.
Both leaders now have powerful incentives to fan nationalist fervor and escalate tensions—even if they stop short of full war.
This is a disastrous trajectory for Syria’s people, for democratic institutions in both Israel and Turkey, and for broader U.S. strategic interests.
Meanwhile, looming in the background is the Iran question.
Should indirect diplomacy (apparently via the UAE) with Tehran collapse, Israel could seize the opportunity to strike Iran—an entirely separate but imminent risk.
(side note: Iran strikes are a different/more complex issue altogether. There are a lot of nuances there. It is not black and white, and done properly and in a very precise manner, strikes on nuclear program facilities (all of the supply-chain etc) may be justified. But they may also fail to deliver - all the while strengthening the regime by rallying the nation against external threats. We will of course continue to revisit this discussion.)
The crux of the matter is this: with what Netanyahu perceives as a blank check from Trump, he is pursuing a hyper-aggressive, politically motivated strategy across the region.
This not only endangers regional stability but threatens the very foundations of Israeli democracy and long-term security, as well as broader U.S. interests in the region.
Trump holds substantial leverage and must use it to rein in Netanyahu’s increasingly reckless behavior—for the sake of U.S. interests and those of its allies.