Under the global spotlight, the conflict between Israel and Hamas has reached a new crossroads. The collapse of ceasefire talks on Wednesday (July 30) has left Israel facing a difficult decision: to continue its current military strategy, or to take more radical action, such as a full-scale occupation of Gaza? This question has reverberated not only in the Middle East but also in the international community.

1. Trump's "hint" ignites the powder keg

On July 29, US President Trump suddenly referred to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by his nickname "Bibi," publicly stating that "it may be time to change the approach." This ambiguous statement immediately sparked an uproar—the so-called "new approach" was widely interpreted as tacit approval of Israel's military escalation.

It is worth noting that Trump specifically mentioned the lethality of the hostage issue: "Hamas knows that once it loses the trump card of hostages, Israel's iron fist will immediately fall." These words nakedly expose the core of the current deadlock: 2.3 million Gaza civilians, dozens of Israeli hostages, and Hamas militants are tied to the same death equation.

2. Total Occupation: A Crazy Option That Only Ends with Poison

Within the Likud party, extremists, led by MP Moshe Saada, are frantically advocating for the "complete occupation of Gaza." They claim to want to take over food distribution and rescue the remaining hostages, but they deliberately avoid three grim realities:

First, military action inevitably carries a heavy price. Clearing Gaza's last densely populated areas—Rafah and Khan Yunis—will require the mobilization of tens of thousands of exhausted reservists. Hamas has already deployed a network of tunnels and explosive devices in these areas, and every meter of advance is likely to be measured in the blood of Israeli soldiers.

Secondly, the international community would completely shut the door to reconciliation. UN data shows that over 50,000 civilians have been killed or injured in Gaza. If Israel openly becomes an "occupying power," it would not only face the risk of being tried by the International Court of Justice in The Hague, but could also force its traditional ally, the United States, to adjust its stance.

The irony is that this is exactly what Hamas is hoping for. Gutman, an expert at the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies, warned: "Hamas is waiting for the Israeli army to enter the city—every alleyway could become a slaughterhouse, every trash can could be a bomb."

3. Three Undercurrent Alternatives

1. A war of attrition

Former defense official Amir Avivi advocates a long-term siege strategy: "We can blockade Gaza year after year and let Hamas suffocate like a fish out of water." But critics point out that this "boiling frog in warm water" tactic will continue to worsen the Palestinian humanitarian crisis and eventually trigger a tsunami of global public opinion.

2. A life-threatening rescue operation

According to Mossad intelligence, approximately 20 surviving hostages are being held in scattered locations throughout Gaza's underground labyrinth. Special forces raids have a success rate of less than 30%—the tragic 2014 Israeli operation "Protective Edge," in which 66 soldiers perished trying to save a single soldier, remains fresh in our memory.

3. Humiliating ceasefire

Sources familiar with the matter revealed that Netanyahu was secretly pushing for a temporary ceasefire in exchange for half the hostages. However, if he accepted Hamas's condition of retaining its arms, the prime minister would face the collapse of his ruling coalition—far-right ministers have already stated that they would "prefer war to surrender."

IV. A fatal game before a historic decision

The most paradoxical situation at present is that the more resilient Hamas becomes, the fewer options Netanyahu has. Israeli Foreign Minister Sa'ar complained that international mediation has "only emboldened Hamas," while a more stark assessment circulated within the military: the military operations over the past four months have only eliminated 30% of Hamas's combat capabilities.

Katz, an expert at the Jewish Policy Institute, made a stark conclusion: "We have failed to force Hamas into submission with bombs, nor have we won the hearts and minds of the Gazans with bread. We must now acknowledge that the strategy of relying solely on force has failed."

Israel stands at a critical crossroads. A full occupation of Gaza might bring short-term military advantages, but it would come at a high cost in terms of loss of life, economic burden, and international isolation. Continuing a low-intensity war, while less risky, could prolong the conflict and test Israel's patience and resources. Returning to the negotiating table would require Netanyahu to compromise under domestic political pressure, potentially contradicting his long-promised goal of "complete victory."

Intensified conflict, particularly calls for a full occupation of Gaza, could further intensify tensions in the Middle East. Geopolitical uncertainty typically drives demand for safe-haven assets, and gold, as a traditional safe-haven asset, tends to gain traction. The current breakdown of ceasefire talks and the hardline stance of the Israeli right could fuel market concerns about a wider conflict, potentially supporting gold prices in the short term.

At 14:55 Beijing time, spot gold was trading at $3326.67 per ounce.