Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Israel-Hamas / The implications of an Israeli assault on Rafah are horrible
Israel‑Hamas, Israel, Middle East

May 7, 2024

The implications of an Israeli assault on Rafah are horrible

By Daniel DePetris

At the time of writing, the cease-fire talks between Israel and Hamas are boiling in a cauldron of disinformation. After CIA Director William Burns flew to Doha, Qatar, over the weekend in a last-minute stop to prod the two sides to keep talking, Hamas announced that it accepted a cease-fire proposal presented to the group earlier in the week. Israel responded immediately, saying that the proposal Hamas agreed to was a significant watering down of what Israel could tolerate.

The entire monthslong process has been about as tiresome as trying to jam a round peg into a square hole. Even committed mediators will find it hard, if not impossible, to do their jobs if the two sides refuse to budge from their bottom-line positions.

Whether the truce talks succeed or officially fall apart, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been clear that Israel will eventually send its forces into Rafah to root out what remains of Hamas’ organized battalions. The only question was when an Israeli offensive would begin. If Israeli negotiators aren’t able to come to an agreement with Hamas, as looks increasingly likely, the operation would proceed faster than usual.

On Monday, Israel’s military issued a directive to 100,000 Palestinians in eastern Rafah to evacuate to safer ground. Of course, the term “safer ground” is oxymoronic at this point. There is no safe place in Gaza, and so-called safe zones have been bombed by Israel on multiple occasions during the war. Most Palestinians will likely adhere to the evacuation calls, while others will stick around and take their chances after having to move two, three or even four times over the last seven months.

Read at The Chicago Tribune

Author

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Middle East

Op-edUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

What Does the Iran War Mean for the Global Economy?

By Rosemary Kelanic

June 2, 2026

In the mediaUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

Both Iran And U.S. Lost The War, But The U.S. Lost More: Geopolitics Expert

Featuring Rosemary Kelanic

May 29, 2026

Op-edUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

Donald Trump’s Iran War Could Become America’s ‘Syracuse’—the Disaster That Ended an Empire

By Gil Barndollar

May 29, 2026

Op-edIsrael, Middle East, US‑Israel‑Iran

Are Trump and Netanyahu heading for a showdown?

By Daniel DePetris

May 29, 2026

Op-edUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

Trump’s Least Bad Option in Iran

By Rosemary Kelanic and Jennifer Kavanagh

May 28, 2026

In the mediaUS‑Israel‑Iran, Iran, Middle East

On BBC, Ben Friedman argues for the United States to cut a deal with Iran to open the strait

Featuring Benjamin Friedman

May 27, 2026

Events on Israel-Hamas

See All Events
virtualMiddle East, Basing and force posture, Diplomacy, Houthis, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Israel‑Hamas, Military analysis, Syria

Trump in the Middle East: Impacts, implications, and alternatives

May 16, 2025
virtualHouthis, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Middle East, Yemen

Houthi conundrum: defend, degrade, or defer

March 28, 2024
virtualMiddle East, Iran, Israel‑Hamas, Israel‑Iran, Syria, Yemen

Keeping the U.S. out of war in the Middle East

January 16, 2024

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.