Shortly after a ceasefire agreement was reached between Israel and Hamas, the Middle East was again tense.

Israel suddenly tore up the ceasefire agreement, launched military operations against the Gaza Strip, and suspected of provoking Iran through proxy war, resulting in the "beheading" of many officials in southeastern Iran.

Behind this series of actions lies Israel's two-line strategy and the deeper security crisis in the Middle East.

According to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's statement, Israel will take tougher military action in the Gaza Strip.

On the 19th, the Israeli Defense Forces launched artillery and air strikes on the Gaza Strip, destroyed several military bases, and launched fire attacks on the central Gaza region of Del-Bayrah.

Israel said the move was in response to Hamas militants opening fire, but in fact, it was behind Israel's strategic intention to build a "permanent security zone" in Gaza.

By weakening Hamas¡¯s control over the north of Gaza, Israel hopes to create a factual basis for a future ¡°delegate rule¡± scheme.

Meanwhile, an extreme attack took place in the south-eastern province of Sistan-Balochistan, resulting in the deaths of several Sunni tribal leaders.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guards accused Israel of being behind the scenes, believing that Israel undermined Iran¡¯s internal cohesion through an agent war and sought to expand the confrontation front.

The attack not only exacerbated the hostility between Israel and Iran, but also reflected the increasing frequency of friction between the two sides in the agent war.

Recalling the Israeli-Hamas ceasefire agreement reached by Egyptian mediators, the two sides agreed to release prisoners of war and gradually mitigate the conflict.

However, the ceasefire agreement lacks clear details and the trust foundation between the two sides is weak.

Hamas demands the withdrawal of Israeli troops and the release of Palestinian prisoners, while Israel insists on prioritizing the hostage issue and demands that Hamas disarm.

These contradictions have led to negotiations falling into a vicious circle of circular breakdown.

The international community¡¯s mediation efforts have also failed to effectively ease the situation.

The "20-point ceasefire" proposed by the United States has lost credibility due to Israeli continued airstrikes, while indirect negotiations in Egypt have failed to make substantial progress due to core differences between the two sides.

Israeli military action further undermined the credibility of diplomatic efforts.

It is worth noting that Israel¡¯s tough policies are also closely linked to its domestic political difficulties.

Netanyahu's government has faced pressure from a far-right coalition, while it has been criticized for corruption allegations and poor handling of the hostage crisis.

Through foreign hardship, Netanyahu tried to shift domestic contradictions and consolidate his political position.

At present, Israel¡¯s two-line action is both a tactical precursor and a reflection of the deep crisis in the security architecture of the Middle East.

The situation in Gaza is difficult to settle completely in the short term, and the two sides will either continue to maintain the "grey zone conflict" and avoid direct military bargaining, but the intensity of the agent war will escalate further.

The real key to breaking the situation lies in promoting the construction of a common security mechanism, implementing the "two-state solution", and realizing Palestinian statehood.

However, the peace process still faces major obstacles, including Israeli settlement expansion policies and political divisions within Palestine.

The international community urgently needs to take more effective action to push the two sides back to the negotiating table.