Israel's full reoccupation of Gaza faces strong criticism

In recent months, the situation in Gaza has become increasingly tense as Israel has deployed its forces in approximately 75% of the area, significantly weakening Hamas as a military force. This deployment raises questions about whether Israel intends to fully reoccupy Gaza or if it is merely a strategy to exert pressure on Hamas for a new agreement. Middle East analyst Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. diplomat, argues against the feasibility and rationale of a complete reoccupation, suggesting that it would not yield positive results. As international scrutiny increases regarding actions in Gaza, the geopolitical landscape has shifted. Miller highlights the lack of significant involvement from European nations such as Britain, France, and Germany, which have not imposed meaningful consequences on Israel for its policies. This lack of pressure allows the conflict to persist without resolution, leaving many to wonder what obligations major powers hold towards both the U.S. and Israel. Moreover, Miller discusses the changing perspectives of American public opinion on the issue, indicating a growing divide between Democrats and Republicans. This shift complicates the U.S. stance on the conflict and raises questions about potential changes in support from the government. Yet, he notes that there appears to be no dramatic pivot in U.S. policy that could force Israel to change its approach or find an alternative solution to the situation in Gaza. In light of this, the commentary also touches on former President Donald Trump's potential future actions regarding Israel and Gaza. While Miller opines that Trump is unlikely to break from Israel, he acknowledges that any conflict that impedes Trump's goals, such as the pursuit of a peace prize, could alter his previous unwavering support. Overall, the discussion underscores a complex interplay of local, regional, and international tensions surrounding Gaza, as various actors vie for influence amidst ongoing conflict.