There has been a narrative about Prime Minister Netanyahu’s war aims and how they are shaped by the religious-right members of his cabinet. One which presents him as something of a hostage to their extreme demands. In parallel with this is the view that he is desperate to remain in power in order to delay the case against him relating to fraud, breach of trust and accepting bribes. This creates the impression that his personal legal woes are to a great extent shaping his approach to the War in Gaza and elsewhere.

It is almost certain that PM Netanyahu has an eye to his personal legal jeopardy. He may feel that victory in a war against Hamas would make hims so popular that no Israeli court would be able to find him guilty of the charges he faces. I’m not sure I would bet on that, however.

When PM Netanyahu appointed his current cabinet it was said to be the most right-wing in the history of Israel. However, the bar for this was set by PM Netanyahu himself. According to Ian Black in his work “Enemies and Neighbours” when Netanyahu formed his first government in 1996 it was “the most right-wing coalition in Israeli history.(pp349) And at the time he pledged to support the “pioneering settlement” of Eretz-Yisrael, making good on this promise by lifting the restrictions on settlement that the previous Labour Government had imposed.

PM Netanyahu is not a hostage to the religious right, he shares their expansionist view of the future of Israel and is very clearly an active promoter of their aims.

This brings us to the Prime Minister’s war aims. These were clearly articulated in a speech at the start of the military campaign as being about, 1) bringing home the hostages, 2) destroying Hamas. But in the same speech he also spoke more broadly about “changing the Middle East”. What these words meant was never specified at the time but they are starting to sound, and look, as if they related to a war aim as fundamental as the other two.

After the precision carpet bombing of the whole of Gaza there are signs preparations are being made for what happens when the war ends. Various corridors are being established which it is said will be used to divide Gaza in ways which will make it easier to control and so prevent Hamas regaining any foothold in the area.

If this were the case the picture of life, for remaining Palestinian civilians would look bleak. Their movements would be further constrained between secure areas within the largest open prison in the world. The practicalities of life within this context would mean its very viability as a place to live would be questionable. Which of course some on the religious-right in Israel may regard as a happy “unintended consequence” of their need for effective “self-defence”.

However, in the North of Gaza steps might be being taken for an even more radical solution. A corridor, or new military dividing line, is being developed to separate an area in Northern Gaza from the rest of the territory. Its ostensive purpose, according to the IDF, is to trap Hamas in a confined area with no means of retreat or supply. This is the area which the Israeli government through the IDF have ordered all civilians to leave on pain of being treated as hostile combatants if they remain. An area into which it was suggested no foreign aid would be allowed, nor water of power, on the basis that there would be no civilians to need it as it would simply be a battle zone.

Some rhetorical retreat from that has occurred however any aid that does get into the area is woefully inadequate and fears that starvation and the lack of any medical facilities or medicines will lead to further significant loss of civilian lives.

This area in the North is subject to significant clearance. A process which some fear may be followed, at some stage. by a new programme of settler development. This would mean the permanent loss of the area, thus reducing the size and viability of Gaza even further. It would be a brave person who would take a bet that this will not happen.

Indeed, this scenario is leading to fears amongst neighbouring Arab states that they may well face a massive refugee crisis in the not too distant future. A crisis caused by Palestinians fleeing from a non-viable and hostile Gaza and West Bank.

The Israeli government denies this as a war aim. If they are honest in this assurance, it still leaves open the possibility that their practice of “self defence”, in the long term, has the “unintended consequence” of making everyday life so intolerable that it drives the Palestinians out of Palestine.

The US and the UK have access to detailed satellite imagery, military strategy experts, intelligence reports and a whole lot more information than is in the public domain. Perhaps this all supports the Israeli contention that their acts of defence are within International humanitarian law. Further, they remain focused on their original and limited aims of getting the hostages back and destroying Hamas.

From outside it does not look like this. What is happening, right now, in the occupied territories is unspeakable. It is being called out by a number of western institutions including the UN and the International Court of Justice and a range of NGO’s operating in the region. And yet our government and that of the United States are not taking decisive action to prevent what is happening.

What is happening in Palestine is already having far reaching implications. The dramatic collapse of Assad’s Syrian regime is the result of many factors, however, the weakened position of Hezbollah in Lebanon will have played its part.

If it turns out that this is a second Nakba PM Netanyahu may well achieve his objective of “changing the Middle East”. However, it might not be for the better for the Middle East, or, indeed in the long term for Israel.