Many Israelis have expressed dissatisfaction over their government’s decision to agree to a quick cease-fire with Hamas after the terrorist group fired hundreds of rockets in a short span of time. To protest this move, Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman resigned, taking his Yisrael Beiteinu party out of the governing coalition and likely precipitating elections. Yet Zev Chafets believes the government acted wisely:

The political din breaking out in Jerusalem threatens to drown out Benjamin Netanyahu’s uncharacteristic decision to make an accommodation with Hamas. . . . The prime minister calculated, correctly, that doing so would free Israel up to deal with the more ominous threat to the north, from the troika of Hizballah, Syria, and Iran. The decision also suggests he has finally acknowledged that Hamas’s control of Gaza is a political reality that cannot be wished—or bombed—away. . . .

In previous confrontations, Netanyahu has ordered the Israel Defense Forces to seal off Gaza and pound it into submission. This time, his response was more restrained: the air force bombed the Hamas television studio, a couple of evacuated Hamas installations, and a few empty high-rise buildings. No Israeli ground forces were deployed, and the Gaza fatality count was seven. . . .

Netanyahu must now persuade Israelis that he has not gone soft on Hamas. . . . His argument will be that he is simply being realistic. Hamas’s control of Gaza is a fact of life; defeating it with an invasion would be costly and ultimately counterproductive, since it would leave Israel with an even more hostile Arab population. Others have been making this argument for years, but Netanyahu never spelled it out explicitly until his press conference in Paris [on Sunday]. . . .

He will argue, too, that the Iron Dome, and a massive border wall scheduled for completion next year, render Hamas no more than a nuisance, compared to the potent threat of Hizballah. Israel estimates that Hamas has somewhere between 10,000 and 20,000 thousand missiles. Hizballah has ten times that many, as well as allies in Syria and Iran. . . . That may not be an easy message for Netanyahu to take into an election campaign, but it is the right one.

For more than a year, the Iran-backed Houthis have been launching drones and missiles at ships traversing the Red Sea, as well as at Israeli territory, in support of Hamas. This development has drastically curtailed shipping through the Suez Canal and the Bab al-Mandeb Strait, driving up trade prices. This week, the Trump administration began an extensive bombing campaign against the Houthis in an effort to reopen that crucial waterway. Burcu Ozcelik highlights another benefit of this action:

The administration has a broader geopolitical agenda—one that includes countering China’s economic leverage, particularly Beijing’s reliance on Iranian oil. By targeting the Houthis, the United States is not only safeguarding vital shipping lanes but also exerting pressure on the Iran-China energy nexus, a key component of Beijing’s strategic posture in the region.

China was the primary destination for up to 90 percent of Iran’s oil exports in 2024, underscoring the deepening economic ties between Beijing and Tehran despite U.S. sanctions. By helping fill Iranian coffers, China aids Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in financing proxies like the Houthis. Since October of last year, notable U.S. Treasury announcements have revealed covert links between China and the Houthis.

Striking the Houthis could trigger broader repercussions—not least by disrupting the flow of Iranian oil to China. While difficult to confirm, it is conceivable and has been reported, that the Houthis may have received financial or other forms of compensation from China (such as Chinese-made military components) in exchange for allowing freedom of passage for China-affiliated vessels in the Red Sea.