It isn't just Netanyahu the US should point fingers at for the Middle East conflict

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spoke to a joint meeting of the US Congress last month. AP

Why – in the midst of critical negotiations to implement US President Joe Biden’s plan to bring about a ceasefire in Gaza, release Israelis held captive by Hamas and a significant number of Palestinians held by Israel, and move towards a negotiated permanent end to the conflict – would Israel decide to assassinate the chief Hamas negotiator while he was visiting Iran?

And why – while the US says it was working to de-escalate tensions with Lebanon’s Hezbollah – would Israel choose to up the ante by assassinating Hezbollah’s number two?

We know the answers to both questions: Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is clearly not interested in peace. He doesn’t appear to want a negotiated deal to release hostages and end the war on Gaza. He doesn’t want to de-escalate the conflict in Gaza or in the north with Hezbollah. And he most certainly doesn’t want a “two-state solution” that would grant the Palestinian people independence in a sovereign state of their own.

There are two things Mr Netanyahu does seem to want, and at this point, both are perversely connected.

Above all, he desperately wants to remain in office, because should he lose his post as Prime Minister, the prosecution of the corruption charges against him will continue in full force. As the charges are so serious and the evidence so clear, he will probably be convicted and humiliated. This is not speculation – it’s widely discussed in Israel and was even hinted at by Mr Biden in a May 28 interview with Time magazine. When he was asked, “Is Netanyahu prolonging the war for political reasons?”, Mr Biden responded: “There is every reason for people to draw that conclusion.”

The second reason is that Mr Netanyahu wants the war to continue and even be accelerated. He made this clear in his remarks before US Congress and in an address to the Israeli public a few days ago. He seeks “total victory”, which he defines as more than the military defeat of Israel’s enemies.

Without acknowledging any Israeli culpability, he charged that the Palestinians had created a hate-filled culture which in the post-war period would require massive de-radicalisation – the outcome of which would seemingly have Palestinians accepting Jewish hegemony in Israel and understanding their place as a conquered and subordinate people. This is the messianic Zionist vision that has long driven Mr Netanyahu and which he now sees as possible, but only if all of Israel’s enemies – meaning Palestinians resisting occupation, Iran and its surrogates – are brought to heel. And this can only be realised if Israel can involve the US in their regional conquest.

Mr Netanyahu’s worldview raises several additional questions that must be considered. If we know that Mr Netanyahu has never accepted the terms of the Biden plan, why has the US President continued to maintain that it was “Israel’s plan” and placed the burden on Hamas to accept it?

And if we know that Mr Netanyahu is unwilling to make any peace agreement for fear of losing his other extremist coalition partners (who have threatened to abandon his government should he accept any terms leading to peace), why do we continue to dance around that fact?

Why hasn’t the administration condemned the assassinations in Beirut and Iran when it knows that it will surely sabotage the efforts of negotiators? Why, when we know that Mr Netanyahu has no intention of completing a deal to release those held captive, do we continue to allow him to exploit the pain of their families, pretending that negotiations are close to completion when we know they aren’t?

And why, when we know that the demands and actions of Mr Netanyahu’s extremist coalition partners are wreaking havoc in the West Bank and Jerusalem – terrorising the Palestinian population, annexing more land, building more settlements and erasing the possibility of Palestinian self-determination – has much of the international community been so passive and tolerant in response?

Let’s be clear: Hamas and Hezbollah are not good actors. The former was born of the brutal and sustained Israeli occupation of Palestinian land. It was nurtured by Israel to create division in the Palestinian ranks and fuelled by Israel’s ruthless, decades-long strangulation of the population of Gaza.

Hezbollah was born of Israel’s invasion of Lebanon and by that country’s corrupt sectarian system that denied the Shiite community adequate representation and resources. It was fuelled by Israel’s decades-long occupation of Lebanon’s south and massive devastation of the country’s infrastructure in 2006. To be sure, both have engaged in condemnable actions. But to criticise only them, while absolving Israel of its far greater crimes, is hypocrisy at best.

If the US were serious about ending conflict in the region, instead of turning a blind eye to Israel’s behaviour that is deliberately designed to provoke more war, international stakeholders need to stop playing games and get serious about holding Israel accountable.

This leads to one final question: why, when the US continues to massively supply Israel with weapons and block all efforts to sanction their deplorable behaviour, does Washington expect that anything will change?