A recent exposé in The New York Times has ignited a firestorm of controversy, alleging that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu manipulated the recent Gaza conflict to bolster his political standing domestically. The article meticulously details how Netanyahu, facing a challenging political landscape and struggling to maintain his coalition government, allegedly prioritized his own political survival over the urgency of achieving a swift resolution to the conflict. This assertion is supported by leaked intelligence reports and interviews with several high-ranking officials, painting a picture of a Prime Minister deeply entangled in complex political calculations, where the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza served as a calculated backdrop for his maneuvers.

The investigation casts doubt on the official narrative surrounding Israel's military actions, suggesting that certain strategic decisions were made not purely for military or security reasons, but rather to appeal to particular segments of the Israeli electorate, specifically those concerned about issues like the Haredi draft-dodging law. Critics argue that by allowing the conflict to drag on, Netanyahu skillfully shifted national attention away from his internal political vulnerabilities, using the war as a powerful tool to solidify his position and maintain control. International condemnation has been swift and intense, with many questioning the ethical implications of prioritizing domestic political strategies above the humanitarian crisis unfolding in Gaza and the immense suffering of its civilian population. The allegations raise serious questions about accountability and the potential abuse of power during times of armed conflict.