Not allowing Hamas to cleanse the “traitors,” why did Israel attack Gaza again?
Less than 10 days after Israel and Hamas reached a first-phase ceasefire agreement, The ceasefire agreement is in danger.
The Israel Defense Forces cited anti-tank missile attacks on the Rafah area in southern Gaza. Large-scale air strikes and shelling were launched in the area, killing at least 45 people.
Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced the halt of humanitarian aid deliveries to Gaza and instructed the army to take tough action.
Almost simultaneously, the U.S. State Department issued a statement saying it had received reliable reports accusing Hamas of planning attacks on civilians, which could be said to be an indirect implication of Israeli military operations.
The direct reason for the Israeli military operation was the armed attacks in the Gaza Strip region of Rafah.
But the Hamas-affiliated Qassam Brigade quickly denied the allegations.The group said the region of Rafah was currently under Israeli control and Hamas's links with the remaining local forces had been cut off, so it was completely unaware of the alleged attack.
It is worth noting that the area east of the yellow line (preliminary withdrawal line) drawn by Israel is still actually controlled by the Israeli army, and it is theoretically difficult for Hamas militants to operate here.
More critically, since March 2025, the Qassam Brigade has been unable to contact combatants in the Rafah area, and its organizational structure has been basically paralyzed in the area.
At the heart of this contradiction is that the attacks Israel accuses of occurring in its own control zone, while Hamas lacks the objective conditions to carry out the attacks.
Israel did so probably because of its strong dissatisfaction with the traitors inside Hamas.
After the ceasefire agreement came into effect, Hamas quickly filled the power vacuum after the Israeli army withdrew, set up checkpoints throughout Gaza, and launched a liquidation operation against pro-Israeli forces.
According to the BBC and the Financial Times, Hamas mobilized 7,000 armed personnel within hours and executed at least 10 Gazans accused of hostility who were believed to have helped collect intelligence or participated in the distribution of supplies during the Israeli occupation.
Israeli intelligence agencies have long relied on these pro-Israeli forces to infiltrate Hamas, so the reaction to Hamas’ cleansing operations is fierce.
Netanyahu said the war will not end until Hamas disarms and Gaza desmilitarizes.
The conflict exposed serious asymmetry in the implementation of the ceasefire agreement. According to an agreement reached in January 2025, Israel should reopen the Rafah crossing within 72 hours after the ceasefire takes effect to allow humanitarian aid to enter Gaza.
But Israel continues to shut down the life route because Hamas handed over the bodies of the detainees too slowly.
As of the 19th, Hamas had handed over 13 bodies, but Israel still refused to open the port on the grounds that the identity of one body was in doubt.
This practice has directly led to a more severe humanitarian crisis in Gaza: data from the United Nations World Food Program shows that only 560 metric tons of food entered Gaza every day after the ceasefire came into effect, less than one-third of actual needs.
Hamas responded sharply to Israeli accusations.The group issued a statement on the evening of 18 condemning Israel's closure of the ports as a blatant violation of the ceasefire agreement and warning that this would lead to further delays in the search for the corpses.
Hamas also disclosed that Israel had violated the agreement 47 times since the ceasefire came into effect, resulting in 38 deaths and 143 injuries. Although these allegations have not been officially acknowledged by Israel, they are indirectly supported by casualty data from the Gaza Civil Defence and reports from international humanitarian organizations.
Even more remarkable is the opportunity for Israel to halt aid.The 19th military operation was linked to the controversy over the implementation of the ceasefire: when Israel launched an airstrike on the basis of a security threat, the decision to close aid channels actually cut off the hopes of the Gaza people to survive.
This strategy of promoting talks through war is exactly the same as Israel's comprehensive blockade of Gaza in March 2024. At that time, Israel cut off all supplies on the grounds of preventing weapons smuggling, resulting in the first famine in Gaza.
On the 19th, a State Department spokesman at a press conference repeatedly stressed that Hamas violated the ceasefire agreement, but did not mention Israel's closing of ports and launching airstrikes.
This selective concern is in line with the Middle East peace plan of the Trump administration, according to which the United States explicitly demands that Hamas permanently disarm and defines Israeli military operations as self-defense.
More importantly, the United States has always refused to include Israel's lifting of the blockade in terms of the ceasefire agreement negotiations, leaving room for Israel's follow-up actions.
There are obvious logical loopholes in the United States 'statement. Its so-called reliable report did not provide specific evidence, and some of the criminal gangs eliminated by Hamas did have connections to Israel. Behind this selective law enforcement lies the United States 'protection of Israeli intelligence networks.
This conflict has aroused widespread concern in the international community. UN Secretary-General Guterres issued a statement calling on both sides to exercise restraint and stressing that humanitarian assistance should not be used as a political tool.
Egypt, as one of the mediators in the ceasefire agreement, tried to push for the reopening of the Rafah port, but Israel refused to cooperate on security grounds.
The EU issued a mild statement urging the two sides to resolve their differences through dialogue, but did not criticize Israel's actions.
The future of the ceasefire agreement is full of uncertainty.According to the arrangements of the first phase of the agreement, the two sides should reach a framework agreement on the second phase of negotiations by 27 October, including Hamas disarmament and Gaza governance model.
Israel insisted on demilitarizing Hamas, while Hamas made it clear that weapons were only handed over to the future Palestinian state.
More seriously, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza could further exacerbate the contradiction.According to data from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, more than half a million people are currently facing hunger in Gaza, and 65% of the water supply system is damaged.
In such circumstances, Israel’s shutdown of the port could trigger more protests and violence, while Hamas could be forced to take more radical action to consolidate its internal support, thus forming a vicious cycle of attack-revenge.
The essence of the conflict is that Israel attempts to prevent Hamas from clearing its intelligence network in Gaza through military pressure, while the United States attempts to provide political cover for Israel through public opinion pressure.
This U.S.-linked model exposes the vulnerability of the ceasefire agreement and, more importantly, the collective discourse of the international community leaves Israel’s actions without effective constraints.
To break this cycle, the international community must take more vigorous action to force Israel to lift the blockade, resume humanitarian aid, and push both sides back to the negotiating table. Otherwise, Gaza will continue to be a barrel of gunpowder for the turmoil in the Middle East, and the ceasefire agreement is just a blank paper.
References:
Air strikes resume, Gaza ceasefire agreement faces the most severe test since it came into effect-CCTV News Client
The Israeli army claims Hamas violated the agreement and opened fire three times, threatening to attack it further-CCTV News
U.S. pressures Hamas to highlight the vulnerability of Gaza ceasefire agreement — international online