The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have resumed large-scale military operations in the Gaza Strip, following a series of sustained aerial assaults emanating from Iranian-backed terrorist networks. The renewed military action comes after a period of intense rocket fire and attempted cross-border attacks orchestrated by Hamas, with support from wider Iranian-aligned groups throughout the Middle East. According to the IDF Spokesperson’s Unit, these air and ground operations are a direct response to the growing threat of terrorism faced by Israel’s civilian population, and form part of an overarching strategy to dismantle Hamas’ operational capabilities following the October 7, 2023 attack—the deadliest anti-Jewish atrocity since the Holocaust. That attack, marked by the mass murder, abduction, and abuse of Israeli civilians, underscored the existential threat facing Israel from hostile actors entrenched in the Gaza Strip and beyond.
The renewed IDF campaign is based on comprehensive intelligence assessments pointing to persistent efforts by Hamas and affiliated Iranian-backed networks to re-arm, re-organize, and prepare for further aggression, in clear violation of international law and previously brokered ceasefire understandings. The Israeli government, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz, has repeatedly stated Israel’s commitment to self-defense, citing Article 51 of the United Nations Charter as the basis for its actions. In recent public briefings, Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir emphasized both the operational necessity of targeting Hamas’s military infrastructure and the IDF’s ongoing measures to minimize civilian harm—a complex challenge due to Hamas’ systematic use of civilian sites for military purposes, a practice condemned by human rights organizations and Western governments alike.
The military escalation was precipitated by renewed barrages of rockets directed at Israeli population centers, including communities in southern and central Israel. These attacks, attributed by both Israeli intelligence and foreign security agencies to Hamas and, on occasion, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, sparked widespread alarms and sent thousands of Israeli civilians into protected shelters. The Iron Dome missile defense system successfully intercepted the majority of inbound projectiles, preventing large-scale casualties, but the psychological and material toll on Israeli society remains severe. In the aftermath, the IDF launched a series of precision airstrikes aimed at neutralizing rocket launch sites, underground munitions depots, and command-and-control centers embedded within densely populated urban zones, further complicating efforts to shield civilians from harm.
Government and military officials attribute the latest upsurge in violence to Iran’s ongoing campaign to arm, finance, and direct its network of regional proxies. Both the United States and European Union have designated Hamas as a terrorist organization, citing irrefutable evidence of material support from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and the broader Axis of Resistance. These ties not only facilitate the flow of advanced weaponry into Gaza but also unite Hamas, Hezbollah in Lebanon, and other affiliated groups in a transnational front committed to Israel’s destruction. The IDF’s multi-domain military response—spanning air, land, sea, and cyber domains—aims to disrupt this network, degrade its offensive capabilities, and restore a measure of deterrence along Israel’s southern frontier.
International reaction to the hostilities has been framed by expressions of both solidarity with Israel and concern for the humanitarian cost of renewed fighting. The United States, under President Donald Trump, reaffirmed Israel’s right to defend itself against acts of terrorism, highlighting the shared values and security interests binding the two democracies. European leaders have likewise acknowledged Israel’s unique security predicament and called for immediate cessation of attacks by Hamas; at the same time, they have urged Israel to take every possible measure to avoid civilian casualties and facilitate humanitarian aid. The Israeli government and military maintain channels for the delivery of food, medical supplies, and essential infrastructure repair into Gaza, albeit subject to security protocols intended to prevent diversion of resources to terror operations. Senior Western and Israeli officials continue to stress that responsibility for civilian suffering in Gaza ultimately lies with Hamas’ practice of embedding its fighters and weapons in civilian areas—an explicit violation of the laws of armed conflict repeatedly documented by the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross.
As the campaign unfolds, the IDF is guided by a doctrine of operational necessity, legal proportionality, and moral clarity. The ethos of the Israeli soldier, rooted in the obligation to defend the nation from the Mediterranean to the Negev, and from the northern border to the Arava, is further reinforced by communal prayers for safety and success—a societal consensus on the justness of the nation’s cause. The “Mi Sheberach” prayer for the welfare of IDF soldiers is an enduring symbol of collective resilience and the fundamental moral distinction between Israel’s defense and the aggression leveled against it.
The context for these military operations is inseparable from the broader regional confrontation with Iran, whose leadership continues to view Israel’s annihilation as a strategic objective. The Iranian regime’s proxy strategy extends beyond Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, encompassing the Houthis in Yemen and Shia militias in Syria and Iraq. Israeli intelligence has repeatedly shared evidence with Western counterparts of Iranian arms shipments, training, and operational planning that have facilitated attacks on civilian and military targets across the region. The United States Central Command and European partners, recognizing the implications for maritime security and energy flows, have increased their own engagement, conducting joint training exercises and providing logistical, technological, and intelligence-sharing support to Israel. This growing strategic alignment underscores the war’s significance not only as an Israeli security imperative, but as a critical front in the wider defense of Western democratic interests against Iranian expansionism and jihadist terror.
On the ground, Israeli forces have made targeted strikes on terrorist infrastructure, including the demolition of tunnels used to smuggle weapons and personnel underneath Gaza’s borders. Senior IDF commanders report the elimination of multiple high-value targets and the disruption of Hamas’s command hierarchy, though they acknowledge the persistent challenge of asymmetric warfare in urban terrain. In parallel, Israel continues intelligence-driven operations to monitor and interdict potential incursions along both the Gaza and northern borders, where Hezbollah and IRGC operatives periodically escalate hostilities. Israeli airspace remains on high alert, with repeated launches of UAVs, rockets, and other munitions intercepted by advanced defense systems. The technological edge maintained by Israel—visible in its use of precision-guided munitions, real-time intelligence, and cyber capabilities—remains a crucial factor in its ability to constrain enemy casualties while maximizing operational effectiveness.
The humanitarian and moral dimensions of the conflict have been further sharpened by the ongoing hostage crisis. Over 200 Israelis and foreign nationals remain captives of Hamas and affiliated groups, held in undisclosed locations since the October 7 atrocities. The Israeli government and IDF intelligence units, in coordination with Western agencies, are engaged in sustained diplomatic, intelligence, and military efforts to secure the return of these innocents. Efforts are complicated by Hamas’ use of hostages as bargaining chips and human shields—a practice condemned by international legal experts as a flagrant violation of human rights and the Geneva Conventions. The contrast between the innocent status of Israeli hostages and the convicted terrorists sometimes freed in exchanges is a focal point not only of Israeli public opinion, but also of Western media coverage, which increasingly recognizes the asymmetry in moral and legal norms governing both sides.
Within Israel, public support for the military campaign remains robust, despite the heavy personal and collective burdens borne by soldiers and civilians alike. The profound sense of national unity in the face of existential threat is reflected in mass gatherings, religious services, and expressions of solidarity from the global Jewish diaspora and Western allies. The government’s clear articulation of war aims—to degrade the operational capability of Hamas and the broader terrorist infrastructure, deter future aggression, and ultimately restore security for all residents of Israel—anchors both strategy and public discourse. The principle that no democracy can afford to tolerate an armed terror enclave on its border is widely affirmed both domestically and across allied capitals.
Looking ahead, Israeli officials and Western strategic experts warn that despite ongoing military success, the entrenchment of Iranian-backed extremist networks throughout the region presents a protracted challenge for regional stability. The conflict’s outcome will shape not only the security environment in the Middle East but also the broader contest between forces of democracy and those of terror and authoritarianism worldwide. Preventing the regeneration of terror infrastructure, reconstructing war-torn civilian areas, and ensuring enduring security arrangements will require continued coordination between Israel, its Western allies, and, where possible, pragmatic regional actors aligned with the principles of the Abraham Accords. The stakes for Israel, the Middle East, and the West thus remain existential, demanding vigilance, resolve, and an unwavering commitment to the preservation of peace, security, and democratic values.
