John Law (10:25)
All right, first up, let's start with what the left is saying. The left is troubled by the resumption of the conflict, but says the ceasefire was never going to hold. Some say Netanyahu and Trump are to blame for the lack of a lasting peace. In the Atlantic, Yair Rosenberg argued the Gaza ceasefire was always going to end. Trump was less interested in ending the war than in being able to say he had gotten some hostages out by the time he was inaugurated. Hamas was willing to release those hostages in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners, but it was never going to agree to permanently lay down its arms. Israel, for its part, sought to extract as many of its own people from Gaza as possible and wanted to stay on Trump's good side so that he may grant them sweeping policy wins later on, rosenberg wrote. Two months in this confluence of interests has come apart and so has the ceasefire. The deal had been on life support for weeks, with no hostages coming out of Gaza and no humanitarian aid going in. More war is not what the people of Gaza or Israel wants. But Gazans have no ability to control or restrain Hamas, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not responsive to the preferences of the Israeli public, Rosenberg said. Setting aside the interests and intentions of Hamas, Netanyahu and Trump, the Gaza ceasefire was never going to hold. For a more fundamental reason, neither side is willing to tolerate the other's continued existence. Hamas has sworn to Israel's destruction. For Israel, the conflict cannot end until Hamas is gone. In Forward magazine, Dan Perry blamed Netanyahu's survival, politics and Trump's volatility for the ceasefire's end. Netanyahu's decision to resume hostilities appears to have been deeply political. To maintain his grip on power, he needed to ensure that his remaining right wing allies did not follow Ben Gvir's lead, an outcome that would have destroyed his governing coalition, Perry wrote after October 7. Prolonging the war gave Netanyahu a convenient excuse for avoiding efforts to hold him accountable for his role in the failures that led to October 7th. It seems likely that by disrupting the ceasefire, he hopes the same trick will work a second time. The influence of Trump's unique way of doing business cannot be overstated. Unlike previous administrations, which would insist on adherence to a signed ceasefire, Trump granted Netanyahu the flexibility to walk away from the deal. Because Trump sees international agreements as not binding commitments, but rather as tools to be reshaped as circumstances change, Perry said. As much as Trump helped bring about the ceasefire, he also laid the groundwork for its end. As the many contractors he stiffed in his career as a developer can attest, the president is fond of making deals and less concerned with keeping them. Alright, that is it for what the left is saying. Which brings us to what the right is saying. The right mostly supports Israel's renewed action, arguing it is acting in its self interest. Some say Trump bears responsibility for the ceasefire's end. In creators, Ian Haworth asked, do you want Israel to win? Predictably, Israel is being vilified for doing what any nation must do defend itself against an enemy that has no interest in peace, no interest in releasing hostages and no interest in putting an end to ongoing attacks against Israel, haworth said. The deck is stacked. Israel is always guilty, Hamas is always innocent, and the so called international order is far too happy to sit back, tweet war is bad and make excuses for those whose one goal in life is to murder every Jew on the planet. The usual chorus of online critics is far too happy to sit back and call for Israel to just wait for the next pogrom. Worse, the moral calculations of Israel's critics are fundamentally broken. If Hamas chooses to launch attacks from civilian areas, use civilians for human shields and embed military assets within hospitals and schools. The blame for any civilian casualties lies squarely at their feet, not to mention the fact that this war could end tomorrow if Hamas released the hostages, haworth wrote. If you don't have a viable alternative that ensures Israeli security, then your condemnation is nothing but the same feckless virtue signaling that put us in this situation in the first place. In reason, Matthew Petty said Trump owns the Middle east wars now Donald Trump's most impressive accomplishment was also his first one bringing calm to the Middle East. Before taking office, he pushed Israel and Hamas to accept a ceasefire deal that had been on the table since May 2024, including an Israeli Palestinian prisoner exchange, petty wrote. Now Trump is rapidly undoing those accomplishments. Turning a ceasefire into permanent peace was always going to be difficult, and both Israel and Hamas played hardball, especially as Trump's plan to empty the Palestinian population loomed in the background. The ceasefire breaking down at exactly this time in exactly this way, however, was a U.S. israeli decision. Trump's America first mantra has always contained two contradictory urges. On one hand, there's a feeling that America is wasting its resources on hopeless foreign causes, which can be avoided by trying to solve problems over the telephone. On the other hand, there's an intense desire to show strength and an intense fear of looking weak, petty said. Just as things shifted rapidly over the past few weeks, they can shift again. By both brokering the ceasefire and allowing it to fall apart, Trump demonstrated that he has more control than anyone else over the pace of violence in the Middle east, and that means he owns whatever comes next. Alright, that is it for what writers from the left and the right are saying. Which brings us to what some regional writers are saying. Israeli writers have disparate responses to the war resuming, but many say Hamas bears the brunt of the blame. Palestinian writers say Netanyahu is extending the war to protect himself politically, the Jerusalem Post editorial board wrote. The world must finally recognize Hamas tactics as manipulation. For weeks, Hamas stalled negotiations in Doha, rejecting opportunities to release hostages and deescalate the conflict. It refused to release captives on March 1, March 8 and March 15 while simultaneously pretending to engage in good faith discussions. This pattern is familiar. Hamas constantly seeks international sympathy through ceasefires it never intends to honor while using the lull to strengthen its forces, the board said. Israel understands the cost of waiting. Every delay emboldens the terrorist organization and prolongs the suffering of the hostages it continues to hold. Israel's response Targeted strikes on Hamas infrastructure is a necessary step to ensure that Hamas does not use a ceasefire as a smokescreen for its next attack, Hamas has no legitimacy to cry foul. It was Hamas that provoked this latest round of violence, just as it did on October 7 when it launched its brutal attack on Israeli civilians. Since then, the terror group has sought to dictate the terms of engagement, weaponizing human shields and international media narratives while keeping the people of Gaza under its oppressive rule, the board wrote. Israel has no obligation to allow Hamas to dictate the battlefield. The era in which Hamas could launch attacks, retreat under the COVID of ceasefire, and then re emerge stronger must come to an end. With the backing of its allies, Israel must continue to pressure Hamas until it is no longer capable of threatening its citizens in the Middle East. Eye Ahmad Tibi said Netanyahu is bombing Gaza again to save his political life. Israel unilaterally violated the Gaza ceasefire after refusing to proceed to the second phase, which would have secured the release of all remaining hostages. Netanyahu has repeatedly rejected offers from Hamas for their release, TB wrote. If his government had genuinely prioritized bringing the hostages home, a deal could have been reached long ago. But that would mean ending the war, without which Netanyahu's coalition would collapse. The fighting has thus become a political tool carried out under the pretext of security. Netanyahu operates like Procrustus, the cruel figure from Greek mythology who forced his guests to fit into a bed that was never the right size. If they were too tall, he chopped off their legs. If they were too short, he stretched them until they broke. Anyone who came to him was forcibly adjusted to the predetermined measurements, TB wrote. Instead of ending the war with a negotiated deal, he is keeping Israel and the hostages trapped in an artificial framework of brutality and destruction. To cling to power, Netanyahu is willing to fire the Shin Bet chief for investigating the prime minister's office, to dismantle the judicial system in an attempt to evade a criminal trial that could send him to prison and to abandon the hostages despite their family's desperate pleas. All right, let's head over to Isaac for his take.
