Israel’s current attacks on Gaza are rooted in both an immediate trigger and a long history of conflict between Israel, Hamas, and the broader Palestinian population in Gaza.

Quick Scoop: What started this phase?

Most recent large‑scale Israeli offensives on Gaza have followed major attacks by Hamas and other armed groups from Gaza into Israel, especially the 7 October 2023 assault in which Hamas fighters crossed the border, killed civilians, and took hostages.

Israel framed its massive military response in Gaza as a war to “destroy Hamas,” free hostages, and prevent future attacks, which turned into a prolonged campaign of airstrikes, artillery, and ground operations.

Core reasons Israel gives

Israel’s leaders usually justify attacking Gaza with several overlapping arguments:

  • Self‑defence and deterrence : They argue that as long as Hamas and other factions fire rockets, carry out raids, or threaten attacks, the army must strike Gaza to protect Israeli civilians and restore deterrence.
  • Eliminating Hamas’s military capacity : Officials present the war as a campaign to dismantle Hamas’s command structure, tunnels, rocket factories, and leadership to prevent another 7 October‑type attack.
  • Border and hostage issues : Early phases of the war heavily focused on rescuing Israeli hostages taken into Gaza and regaining full control along the Gaza fence.
  • Internal politics and leadership survival : Analysts note that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faces huge domestic pressure and may prolong or expand operations to avoid elections, manage coalition politics, and appear tough on security.

In 2025–26, some reporting and analysis suggest that even after formal ceasefire announcements, Israel has kept up strikes and demolitions in Gaza, sometimes framed as “security operations” or responses to alleged ceasefire violations.

How Palestinians and critics see it

From the Palestinian side and many international critics, the picture looks very different:

  • Occupation and blockade : Palestinians and many human-rights organizations argue that Gaza has effectively been under Israeli blockade and control for years, with severe restrictions on movement, trade, and reconstruction, and that repeated wars are tools to maintain this system.
  • Disproportionate force and collective punishment : Critics say Israel’s attacks deliberately or recklessly devastate civilian areas—homes, hospitals, schools, basic infrastructure—killing tens of thousands and displacing most of the population, which they describe as collective punishment or even genocide, not self‑defence.
  • Territorial and demographic goals : Some analysts now argue that the scale and pattern of destruction, especially in northern Gaza, suggest an aim to make parts of Gaza unlivable and to shrink or fragment the territory, potentially paving the way for new Israeli military zones or settlements.
  • Longer history of dispossession : Many Palestinians link the attacks in Gaza to a longer process since 1948 of displacement, loss of land, settlement expansion in the West Bank, and denial of an independent Palestinian state.

An opinion piece in early 2026, for example, describes the last two years not as a conventional war but as an attempt to “downsize” Gaza territorially and demographically through ongoing, lower‑intensity attacks even after ceasefire deals.

Why it keeps flaring up

The violence is not just about isolated incidents; it rests on structural issues that keep the cycle going:

  • No final political settlement : There is no agreed‑upon solution on borders, refugees, Jerusalem, or Palestinian statehood, and the current Israeli government openly rejects a sovereign Palestinian state.
  • Armed resistance vs. security doctrine : Hamas and other groups say armed struggle is the only way to resist occupation and blockade, while Israel’s doctrine relies heavily on overwhelming military force rather than political compromise.
  • Regional and international dynamics : Regional powers (like Iran, Qatar, Egypt) and global actors (USA, European states) each back different sides or priorities, which sometimes freezes diplomacy and allows the military status quo to continue.
  • Leaders’ incentives : On both sides, hard‑line political factions can gain support during conflict, making de‑escalation politically risky.

In late 2025, reports highlighted that even after a ceasefire, Israel demolished over a thousand buildings in Gaza and carried out “incremental” attacks, which many fear could collapse any fragile truce and reignite full‑scale war.

How forums and public debate talk about it

Online forums and social media discussions are intensely polarized:

  • Some participants emphasise Hamas’s 7 October attack and rocket fire, arguing Israel has a right—even an obligation—to destroy Hamas militarily.
  • Others focus on footage of mass civilian casualties, destroyed neighbourhoods, and traumatized families in Gaza, calling Israel’s actions genocide and accusing Western governments of enabling it.
  • Many users, including some Israelis and Palestinians, express exhaustion, grief, and anger at all political leaders, arguing that ordinary people on both sides pay the price while real political solutions are ignored.

A typical forum comment thread mixes raw emotion (“this is genocide,” “they want us dead”) with arguments over international law, media bias, and historical responsibility, illustrating how hard it is to separate facts from deeply held narratives.

TL;DR: Israel says it is attacking Gaza to defend itself, destroy Hamas, and prevent future attacks, especially after the 7 October 2023 assault. Palestinians and many observers say the scale and persistence of the campaign go far beyond self‑defence and amount to collective punishment or an attempt to fundamentally shrink and reshape Gaza under ongoing occupation and blockade.

Information gathered from public forums and publicly available news and analysis online and portrayed here.