Israel is violating ceasefires in Gaza and Lebanon, and Trump is allowing it

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the word “ceasefire” means: “a suspension of active hostilities.” The so-called “kids’ definition” is: “a temporary stopping of warfare.” That all seems clear enough.

But Israel’s definition differs significantly. They understand “ceasefire” to mean: “they cease, we fire.” 

This is not news to Palestinians, Lebanese, or any of Israel’s neighbors. Much like how Israel and its supporters like to say that there was “peace” before October 7, 2023, questions of violence are always defined not by whether there is shooting or bombing but by whether Israelis are getting hit with those bullets and bombs. 

When the United States imposed or brokered ceasefires between Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah, it was well understood by all that Washington would have to keep Israel on a tight leash for the agreements to hold. It was not hard to anticipate that the attention to that task would not be sustainable under Donald Trump.

Recent events have proven that to be true. Israel has never held to either ceasefire, of course. But in recent days, it has dramatically escalated its violations in both Gaza and Lebanon, and these violations have been met with utter silence from the United States. 

Are we about to see a return to the full-scale atrocities in Gaza and Lebanon that became so sickeningly familiar these past two years? And why did the U.S. go to the trouble of brokering these ceasefire agreements if they were just going to let Israel destroy them so flagrantly and easily?

Above all, what is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu trying to achieve, as he seems to be calling all the shots, directly or indirectly?

Israel’s aims

Israel’s goals are clear enough: endless war. 

After the United Nations Security Council shamefully voted to endorse Donald Trump’s colonialist plan to impose conditions on the Palestinians as the price for stopping Israel’s full-scale genocide in Gaza, Netanyahu reacted not like a leader who had gotten what he wanted, but like a man who just saw a development he needed to prevent.

“Israel extends its hand in peace and prosperity to all of our neighbors” and calls on neighboring countries to “join us in expelling Hamas and its supporters from the region,” he said in a series of posts on X. 

Expulsion of Hamas was not part of Trump’s plan or the Security Council’s resolution. Netanyahu obviously added this to prick Hamas, add fuel to his efforts to undermine the Trump plan, and to toss a bone to his right flank. 

Israel had never heeded the ceasefire to begin with. More than 340 overwhelmingly non-combatant Palestinians have been killed since the ceasefire was put in place, and over 15,000 more structures in Gaza have been destroyed, just as flooding, overflowing sewage, rains, and the cold weather of approaching winter start to hit the already battered population. 

In just the past few days, though, Israel has killed more than 60 Palestinians in Gaza, a sign of escalation. It is no coincidence that this uptick comes on the heels of Saudi Crown Prince Muhammad Bin Salman’s (MBS) visit to Washington where he once again insisted, much to Trump’s annoyance, that if Donald Trump wanted to see a normalization deal between his kingdom and Israel, there would need to be a clear, committed path to a Palestinian state with a timeline. Whether MBS was sincere about that or not, Netanyahu has no intention of making even the slightest gesture in that direction, and the escalation in Gaza was, at least in part, his response to that part of the Trump-MBS confab. 

Israel’s justifications for its attacks on Palestinians are threadbare and reflect how little Washington cares. 

Netanyahu claims that Hamas has repeatedly violated the ceasefire by sending their people across the arbitrary line Trump drew in Gaza, when, in fact, these are Hamas members who were caught on the wrong side when the ceasefire was imposed and have been cut off from their commanders. 

Other Israeli claims are equally thin and disingenuous, such as the false claim that Hamas is killing Palestinian civilians or that they staged a body recovery, which is true but hardly merits the mass slaughter Israel engaged in response. 

But for the most part, Israel is not even bothering to justify their actions. They simply say, “There was a Hamas person there,” and that is good enough for the U.S. and most of the mainstream Western media. This is despite the fact that Hamas has stuck to their side of the agreement, in terms of refraining from attacks on Israelis, despite the fact that, legally, they have every right to attack an occupying army. 

Setting sights on Lebanon

Yet as much as Israel continues to escalate in Gaza, they are wary of reigniting the global outcry that has quieted a bit as some people — mostly those eager to go back to disinterest in the plight of the Palestinian people — accept the idea that the slightly slower pace of genocide occurring now can be called a “ceasefire,” and an end to “the war.” 

Israel is hoping that the isolation that was created, mostly by popular movements, during the genocide might ease. Netanyahu, who is always seeking ways to have the best of both worlds, will not end the killing in Gaza to achieve this, but is hoping the illusion of an end to genocide might take hold. So far, it has not, despite the fact that many sources, even some Arab ones, persist in referring to the ceasefire as if it were genuine. 

Netanyahu needs perpetual war. An Israel that faces diplomatic challenges abroad and internal questions at home is not a hospitable one for Netanyahu’s election chances next year. 

Lebanon offers an alternative. While there may be protests regarding attacks on Lebanon as well, it has not generated the same kind of global response as attacks on Gaza. With even less provocation from Hezbollah than they have gotten from Hamas (which, itself, was virtually nil), Israel has stepped up the attacks on Lebanon that it also never ceased. 

There could not be better proof that Israel has no interest in peace and regional stability,  but prefers a state of constant war. 

The ceasefire deal that was struck last year between Israel and Lebanon calls for the Lebanese military to take over the defense of the country in the south, where Hezbollah has been the de facto defense force for decades. The new Lebanese government agreed to do this and to work with Hezbollah to bring about the absorption of the group’s armed wing into the Lebanese military, unified under the solitary command of the Lebanese government.

This should be exactly what Israel wants. It would mean that Hezbollah, which would continue to be a political entity in Lebanon, would no longer have an independent armed wing. Their fighters and arms would instead be controlled by a government that is not only friendly to the West but also heavily dependent on it for its economic recovery. 

The Lebanese military made it clear from the outset that they would not — and indeed, they could not — disarm Hezbollah by force. They are not about to risk another civil war after the way the last one devastated the small country. 

Persistent Israeli attacks and Israel’s refusal to leave key areas in southern Lebanon have greatly complicated matters. Hezbollah has evacuated its sites in the south, but they are not prepared to disarm while Israel continues to occupy Lebanese territory and launch regular attacks. That is not an unreasonable position; they are simply asking that Israel fulfill its side of the ceasefire.

Israel assassinated Hezbollah’s chief of staff Haytham Ali Tabatabai last Sunday, in a clear escalation that was widely interpreted as a warning to Lebanon and the U.S. over what they considered the “slow pace” of Hezbollah disarmament and their claims that Hezbollah is slowly building up an arms cache again. 

Indeed, the pace is slow, and it seems that Hezbollah is likely rebuilding its stock of weapons. However, their support from Iran is greatly diminished, as are their domestic manufacturing capabilities; therefore, any rearming is a much slower process than it might have been in the past. 

Israel’s refusal to abide by even one moment of the terms of the ceasefire agreement is the greatest impediment to the process that the Lebanese government has been insisting is the only way they can not only disarm Hezbollah, but also normalize the country’s entire security apparatus, bringing it under one authority. 

The U.S.’ short attention span

At first, when the ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel was announced, the United States seemed to understand that the Lebanese military, weak as it is, would need to work with Hezbollah, not against it, in order to achieve the outcome everyone seemed to want. The Trump administration also seemed to get it.

But neither the outgoing Biden administration nor the incoming Trump one was prepared to push Israel to abandon its positions in southern Lebanon. Nor was either prepared to rebuke Israel for its continuous attacks, even when those attacks were directed at civilians, or even United Nations personnel.

American diplomats have sent mixed signals. Trump’s Special Envoy for the region, Tom Barrack, has vacillated between complimentary words on the progress being made by the Lebanese government in its talks with Hezbollah and threats of Israeli action if the process of disarming Hezbollah is not completed soon. 

When Trump took office, he sent similarly mixed messages. While he voiced his support for the Lebanese government, he almost immediately started pushing the government to accelerate the process of disarming Hezbollah. 

While Trump seemed to understand that Israeli attacks made this already difficult task much harder for the fledgling Lebanese government — asking Israel to “scale down” its attacks — he continued to show impatience with a process that requires careful steps, not bluster.

For Trump, his aims were largely achieved by his ability to claim a ceasefire in Gaza, however false a claim that may be. In Lebanon, the truce was not technically of his making; he likely would not mind a new round of large-scale warfare, which he could then claim to have brought to an end. The reality of such claims, and how they actually play out on the ground, is of no importance to him. 

In recent days, Trump has focused his attention on Russia and Ukraine, and, as a result, he is paying even less attention to Gaza and Lebanon than he was before. Netanyahu noticed.

In looking at what Trump is pursuing in Ukraine, and the potential wealth he personally stands to gain from his plans there, it is obvious that any interests he may have had in Trump casinos and towers in Gaza or Beirut are insignificant next to the mineral and other forms of profit he hopes to leech out of Ukraine. 

In the end, Trump decided to act in Gaza largely out of his concern for his business partners in Qatar, after Israel’s attack there crossed a line. That rebuke has now been registered, and his interest lies elsewhere. 

No one is reading this more clearly than Netanyahu. He will continue to pursue his Genocide 2.0 in Gaza, allowing a quarter of the aid needed into Gaza rather than none of it, and featuring daily killings of a slightly lower number than before. 

Lebanon is where he envisions a return to larger-scale fighting, but, at least for now, he needs Hezbollah to retaliate for his provocations. So far, they haven’t taken the bait. 

But how much more provocation can they realistically be expected to stand for? That is the bet Netanyahu is making with the full knowledge that Trump has turned his attention away from these actions. Trump, being his mercurial self, could pivot back, but there is little reason for him to do so at this point.