PM Netanyahu’s push for a full military takeover of Gaza has ignited a fresh rift with the IDF, exposing a pattern of blame-shifting that threatens to undermine Israel’s war strategy.
The escalating tension, centered on a newly announced plan to seize and hold the entire Gaza Strip, has placed IDF Chief Eyal Zamir in a difficult position, with reports suggesting he may resign if the government proceeds.
This discord underscores a broader struggle between Netanyahu’s agenda and the military’s operational concerns.
On August 4, Israeli media reported that Netanyahu is pressing for a complete takeover of Gaza to break the deadlock in the war. A senior official close to the PM was quoted as saying that the decision has been made to conquer the entire Strip, with operations planned even in areas where hostages are held.
This high-risk strategy has alarmed military leaders.
The new plan aims to dismantle Hamas, secure the release of remaining hostages, and establish long-term Israeli control over the territory. However, the IDF has voiced strong objections.
IDF Radio journalist Doron Kadosh reports that Zamir is warning that the army could capture Gaza within months but rooting out Hamas’ extensive tunnel network and fighters could stretch into years, at immense cost.
The IDF’s skepticism stems from practical concerns: a full takeover would require sustained ground operations, likely leading to heavy casualties and prolonged insurgency.
The prospect of urban warfare in densely populated areas, coupled with the risk to the estimated 20 living hostages still held by Hamas, has fueled Zamir’s reluctance to endorse the plan.
Netanyahu’s pattern of blame
This clash is not the first time Netanyahu has found himself at odds with the IDF. Since the war’s onset on October 7, Netanyahu repeatedly deflected responsibility for setbacks onto the military.
In 2024, Netanyahu replaced former IDF Chief Herzi Halevi, asserting that Halevi’s leadership was inadequate to achieve Israel’s objectives in Gaza. Enter Eyal Zamir, appointed with promises that his strategic vision would turn the tide.
Yet, less than six months later, Netanyahu appears poised to pin the same accusations on Zamir. This echoes a familiar tactic: when military achievements fall short of political promises, Netanyahu shifts the spotlight to the IDF’s leadership rather than his own policies.
Netanyahu’s insistence on a full Gaza takeover is heavily influenced by his hard right coalition partners, including Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, whose support is critical to his government’s survival.
In contrast, Zamir and other defense officials advocate for a ceasefire and hostage deal to avoid the quagmire of a prolonged occupation.
However, Netanyahu’s pattern of scapegoating the IDF, first Halevi and now Zamir, suggests that even a new chief of staff may not satisfy his demands for quick victories in a war that defies simple solutions.
Meanwhile, for Zamir, the choice is stark: comply with a strategy he believes is doomed to fail or step down, potentially triggering a broader crisis in Israel’s military leadership.
