Why Netanyahu’s Gaza Plan Rejection Could Prolong the War

Israel’s refusal to commit to a phased military withdrawal has put the US-backed Gaza roadmap under fresh strain, raising fears that the ceasefire process could unravel and leave the territory trapped in renewed conflict.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has thrown the future of a US-backed roadmap for Gaza into doubt by insisting that Israeli troops will not withdraw until Hamas is fully disarmed.

The demand cuts to the heart of the proposed agreement, which requires Hamas to disarm in exchange for a phased Israeli military withdrawal and the transition of governance to a technocratic Palestinian committee backed by an international security force. With the two sides still divided over how those commitments should be implemented, analysts warn that the latest dispute could stall the ceasefire process and increase the risk of renewed fighting.

Al Jazeera reported that Netanyahu’s rejection came just weeks before Israel’s crucial elections, with Israel continuing to maintain military control over more than 70 percent of the Gaza Strip. The disagreement goes beyond the immediate question of troop withdrawals. It also concerns who will govern Gaza, what role Hamas and other Palestinian actors will have, and how security would be maintained during the transition.

Why disarmament has become the sticking point

Netanyahu has made Hamas’s complete disarmament a precondition for any Israeli withdrawal from Gaza. Analysts quoted by Al Jazeera argue that the demand risks preventing the agreement from moving forward because of the practical difficulties involved in eliminating weapons from the territory.

Mahjoob Zweiri, an academic and expert in Middle East politics, said Netanyahu’s broader objective is to prevent a return to pre-war conditions in Gaza.

“He does not want Gaza to be as it was on the sixth of October 2023. Meaning: no rule for Hamas, no rule for the Palestinians, no weapons, no normal life. In other words, transforming Gaza into an area unfit for life,” said Zweiri.

Zweiri also argued that complete disarmament would be extremely difficult to verify or enforce under current conditions.

“Israel knows deeply that the issue of ending weapons in an environment like the environment of Gaza or even Lebanon is almost an impossible matter,” he said, citing the lack of a weapons database and the absence of a trusted neutral party.

His argument suggests why the disarmament requirement could become a major obstacle to implementing the roadmap.

Fear of renewed military operations

The uncertainty surrounding the negotiations has fuelled concerns inside Gaza that military operations could intensify if the diplomatic process breaks down.

Gaza-based political analyst Eyad al-Qarra warned that Netanyahu’s position could lead to further Israeli attacks, including operations near the so-called “Yellow Line”, described as the unilaterally imposed Israeli buffer zone squeezing Palestinians into smaller areas.

“There is a form of fear, unfortunately, because the matter is linked to Netanyahu possibly undertaking steps to return to assassination operations, bombing operations and targeting operations near the yellow areas,” said Gaza-based political analyst Eyad al-Qarra, referring to the unilaterally imposed “Yellow Line”, the effective Israeli buffer zone squeezing Palestinians into smaller areas.

The Gaza Government Media Office described Netanyahu’s stance as a deliberate effort to derail the negotiations and prolong the conflict.

“These positions represent a clear and explicit coup against the negotiation path and its outcomes, deliberately obstruct the path to calm, and greatly reinforce the state of humanitarian deterioration,” it said in a statement.

The office added that Netanyahu’s statement proves Israel “takes the negotiation path as a false political cover to buy time, pass its destructive projects, and continue the war of genocide against defenceless civilians.”

Hamas, meanwhile, said it remained committed to the diplomatic process under the US-led Board of Peace and International Stabilization Force and called on mediators and guarantors to ensure all parties comply with the agreement.

Al-Qarra warned that if mediators fail to pressure Israel, Palestinians might face “the worst option, which is announcing practically the end of these negotiations after Netanyahu’s rejection and coup against them”.

Displacement concerns remain central

The diplomatic fallout has also reignited concerns about the possibility of Palestinians being pushed out of Gaza.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty warned that what has been described as “voluntary displacement” cannot be considered voluntary if conditions inside the territory make normal life impossible.

“The so-called ‘voluntary displacement’ cannot be considered voluntary if they create conditions that make life inside the Strip impossible,” Abdelatty said in statements carried by Egyptian media, stressing that pushing the population to leave under such conditions is a “red line” for Egypt, Arab and Islamic countries.

Abdelatty said Egypt would neither accept nor allow displacement from Gaza. He also criticised the failure to implement parts of the agreement’s first phase, including the target of allowing at least 600 aid trucks into the territory each day.

For Israeli affairs expert Nihad Abu Ghosh, the dispute over displacement helps explain Israel’s objections to the roadmap.

“The fundamental issue is that Israel does not want to give up the option of displacement,” he said. “And everything going on from partial objections on this issue or that is in truth an Israeli adherence to the displacement of the Gaza Strip and the displacement of the population.”

Abu Ghosh argued that Israeli officials were aware of the plan’s details but expected Hamas to reject it. He also said Netanyahu wants his refusal to constrain the choices available to future Israeli governments.

The domestic political calculation

Analysts also see domestic politics as a key factor behind Netanyahu’s position.

The Israeli prime minister faces elections in October while also fighting corruption charges that date back to 2019. Analysts cited in the report link Netanyahu’s position to his political survival ahead of the October elections.

Israeli affairs expert Adel Sheded argued that Netanyahu is using the disagreement with the US-backed proposal to shape the election campaign.

“Netanyahu was waiting for this opportunity to say a big ‘no’ of this size to President Trump in order to control the debate, the propaganda and the election campaign with it,” said Israeli affairs expert Adel Sheded.

Sheded said Netanyahu wants to demonstrate to Israeli voters that he is the only political figure capable of saying no to Washington.

Suleiman Bisharat offered a broader assessment, arguing that Netanyahu is using the Gaza file to influence discussions on other regional issues as well.

“It is very clear that Benjamin Netanyahu wanted to flip the table in all files, starting from the file related to the Gaza Strip, on the basis that it is the file that establishes the rest of the files,” he said, noting that this challenge stems from his desire to appear as a hero to the right-wing Israeli public in a bid to secure his political future.

For now, the dispute has left the future of the US-backed roadmap uncertain. Hamas has said it remains committed to the diplomatic process, but Netanyahu’s insistence that Israeli forces will remain in Gaza until Hamas is fully disarmed has created a significant impasse. Unless mediators can bridge that gap, the ceasefire process risks unravelling and renewed fighting in Gaza.