In November 2025, an airstrike hit a camp for displaced people in the Gaza Strip, killing several Palestinians, including children. Just days earlier, an Israeli airstrike on a Palestinian refugee camp in southern Lebanon had claimed at least 13 lives. These events are not isolated incidents but rather part of a pattern of Israel’s persistent hardline actions against its neighbors in recent years.
01 Sustained Offensive: The Reality of Multi-Front Engagement
Israel has recently taken military action on multiple fronts simultaneously, displaying an unusually proactive and offensive posture.
In the Gaza Strip, despite a ceasefire agreement reached on October 10, 2025, Israel has launched repeated attacks. Data from the Gaza Strip Government Media Office shows that as of November 18, 2025, Israel had provoked 393 incidents violating the ceasefire, resulting in 279 deaths and 652 injuries.
On the Lebanese front, Israel not only bombed refugee camps but also violated the ceasefire by crossing the border to build a separation wall. According to reports from Iran’s Pars Today, Israel openly crossed the Blue Line (the UN-designated temporary border between Israel and Lebanon), occupying thousands of square meters of Lebanese land and constructing a concrete wall.
In Syria, Israeli forces established new checkpoints near the Golan Heights and sent patrols into Syrian villages, gradually strengthening their de facto control over southern Syria.
Analysis suggests that these Israeli actions constitute a “silent offensive”—a reshaping of the regional reality through multi-front strikes without a full-scale war.
02 Strategic Motivations: Security Anxieties and the Pursuit of Regional Hegemony
Behind Israel’s assertive strikes lie multi-layered strategic considerations, stemming from profound security anxieties while also reflecting ambitions for regional hegemony.
Countering the Iranian threat has always been a core consideration in Israel’s regional security strategy. In June 2025, Israel launched a large-scale strike against Iran codenamed “Operation Lion,” directly targeting Iranian nuclear facilities and military leaders. Israel fears that the development of Iran’s nuclear capabilities could challenge its regional “nuclear monopoly.”
Domestic political pressure is also a significant factor. Wang Jin, Director of the Center for International Strategic Studies at Northwest University, pointed out that the stances of Israel’s right-wing and far-right political figures are becoming increasingly radical, with figures like Finance Minister Smotrich even publicly advocating for the annexation of the West Bank.
Reshaping the regional order is another key Israeli objective. By acting simultaneously on multiple fronts, Israel is attempting to leverage the current window of opportunity in the regional balance of power to reshape the geopolitical landscape in its favor.
03 Tactical Means: Offense as Defense and Creating Facts on the Ground
Israel’s tactical execution demonstrates a high degree of strategic coordination, combining various means to maximize benefits.
Israel is adept at employing a “preemptive” strike strategy. The attack on Iran in June 2025 is a classic example—Israel deployed 200 fighter jets to simultaneously strike Iranian nuclear facilities and senior military leaders.
On the Lebanese border, Israel is gradually encroaching on territory and creating faits accomplis through methods like building separation walls. This “silent offensive” avoids full-scale conflict while substantially altering the border status quo.
Furthermore, Israel systematically weakens international monitoring forces. According to reports, Israeli Merkava tanks even surrounded a UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) patrol for half an hour, clearly attempting to undermine UNIFIL’s monitoring role.
04 Regional Impact: Intensified Contradictions and a Stalled Peace Process
Israel’s hardline policies have had a profound impact on the regional landscape, intensifying contradictions and pushing the peace process further out of reach.
Israel’s unilateral actions have exacerbated regional tensions. An analysis by Guangming Daily noted that Israel’s military operations “not only fail to resolve the deep-seated contradictions in the region but instead further entangle the situation.”
Simultaneously, the normalization process between Arab states and Israel has suffered setbacks. Countries like Saudi Arabia have explicitly stated they will not consider normalizing relations with Israel unless the Palestinian issue is properly addressed.
More gravely, the humanitarian crisis is worsening. Bassam, a spokesperson for the Gaza Civil Defense, revealed that Israeli military targets even included buildings and camps housing displaced people. Abu Sultan, a Gaza resident, expressed despair: “We barely managed to repair a room in our destroyed house two days ago, trying to settle down, and then the bombing and death started again… giving us no chance to catch our breath.”
05 International Response: Legal Pressure and Diplomatic Isolation
Israel’s assertive behavior has triggered complex international reactions, facing increasing legal pressure and diplomatic isolation while still retaining significant international support.
Israel faces growing pressure at the level of international law. According to Haaretz, even if the Gaza war ends, Israel will find it difficult to escape legal consequences in The Hague.
Furthermore, cracks have appeared in relations with traditional allies. The UK announced in May 2025 that it was suspending free trade agreement negotiations with Israel.
Nevertheless, Israel still relies on steadfast US support. During the US strikes on sites like Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility in June 2025, weapons not in Israel’s arsenal, such as the GBU-57 A/B “bunker busters,” were used, demonstrating close US-Israel military cooperation.
06 Future Direction: Short-Term Advantages and Long-Term Dilemmas
From a strategic perspective, Israel’s assertive policies have yielded some security gains in the short term, but in the long run, they may lead to a deeper security dilemma.
In the short term, Israel’s military actions have indeed weakened some hostile forces. The June 2025 strike on Iran significantly damaged Iranian nuclear facilities.
However, in the medium to long term, Israel faces the risk of strategic isolation. Professor Wang Jin noted that Israel’s hardline policy “instead pushes it into a security predicament of ‘the more it strikes, the more dangerous it becomes.'”
More fundamentally, Israel’s assertive policies do not address the root causes of the conflict. As Guangming Daily pointed out: “The complexity of the Middle East issue dictates that military means cannot bring lasting peace; only political solutions to regional conflicts can achieve long-term stability.”
Israel’s sustained offensive against its neighboring regions reflects the strategic choice of a country gripped by profound security anxiety, attempting to create a living space for itself through military means. However, this logic of “trading strength for security” has trapped Israel in a cycle of self-negation—the more it pursues absolute security, the more insecure it becomes.
The real challenge Israel faces is that military means can temporarily suppress contradictions but cannot resolve the deep roots of the conflict. In the foreseeable future, Israel will likely maintain its assertive posture, but this will not bring it the peace and security it desires. Only through political dialogue, respect for international law, and recognition of the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people can the path to lasting peace truly be opened.
About the Author
