The Israeli government’s actions under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have significantly contributed to the growing instability in the Middle East. This includes the ongoing conflict in Gaza, marked by extensive destruction and civilian casualties, as well as Israel’s military operations in Lebanon, Syria and Yemen, often executed without sufficient international oversight.

Netanyahu’s recent announcement of intent to occupy Gaza, following a tense exchange with Iran, highlights a strategy that could lead to irreversible regional escalation. Although these policies may provide Netanyahu with immediate political advantages that strengthen his domestic position amid internal challenges, they ultimately undermine Israel’s long-term security and international reputation.

Experts argue that aggressive measures, such as the prolonged Gaza offensive and reports of widespread human rights violations, are unlikely to deliver lasting success for Israel. Rather, they drain economic resources, damage the nation’s global image and position it as an outlier in the international community. This view is increasingly shared in the US, where members of Congress from both parties have called for a halt to arms deliveries, signaling a shift from long-standing unconditional support.

These concerns arise not from a lack of allegiance to Israel but from apprehensions about self-inflicted harm: involvement in endless asymmetric conflicts, rising military losses and the burdensome responsibilities of occupying a territory that is home to more than 2 million Palestinians. Even among progressive Jewish groups, there is a growing movement to “protect Israel from its own policies,” perceiving Netanyahu’s direction as a route to national decline.

American journalist Chris Hedges has described Israel’s operations in Gaza as going beyond ethnic cleansing, amounting to the systematic erasure of Palestinian identity, culture and history. Such actions, he contends, erode the moral foundations of Israel’s establishment. Hedges also criticized US presidents like Joe Biden and Donald Trump, along with European leaders, for enabling these developments through superficial condemnations while providing continued support.

Netanyahu’s assertiveness may stem in part from perceived encouragement from Trump, who reportedly advocated for a decisive approach without compromises. However, Trump’s later comments have added nuance, cautioning that unrestrained actions could harm Israel’s standing in Congress and internationally.

To offer a balanced perspective, it is crucial to recognize Israel’s valid security challenges, including threats from armed groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. These organizations have conducted attacks, taken hostages and disrupted civilian life, as was particularly evident in the October 2023 incident that claimed numerous lives. Supporters of Israel’s position maintain that robust military responses are essential to neutralize these dangers and safeguard citizens, arguing that restraint could invite further aggression.

Nonetheless, as a critic of the current approach, I believe the intensity of Israel’s retaliation, characterized by disproportionate force and significant civilian impact, surpasses what is necessary for defense. This overreach perpetuates a vicious cycle of violence, breeding resentment and instability rather than resolution.

Netanyahu’s handling of different fronts illustrates this inconsistency: he has shown relative pragmatism toward Hezbollah, acknowledging its strength, yet remains unyielding on Gaza, rejecting multiple hostage negotiation proposals. This inflexibility seems influenced by his coalition’s ultranationalist factions, who favor expanding settlements in northern Gaza over diplomatic solutions.

The plan to occupy Gaza after months of bombardment, which the International Committee of the Red Cross has deemed incompatible with safe civilian evacuation, reflects an extremist outlook. Without counterbalancing with moderate voices, this path courts disaster.

Regionally, leaders in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere have strongly denounced these developments via diplomatic statements, condemning tactics such as food blockades, population transfers and displacement as breaches of Palestinians’ long-standing rights to their homeland. The Saudi Foreign Ministry has emphasized that the international community’s passivity weakens global standards, paving the way for additional violations and threatening broader peace efforts.