“Go in with full force and finish it,” Netanyahu says Trump told him

“Go in with full force and finish it,” Netanyahu says Trump told him — a sharp escalation in pressure as Gaza talks falter

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told ministers this week that U.S. President Donald Trump had urged him to reject partial ceasefire deals with Hamas and instead “go in with full force” and “finish” the war in Gaza, according to Hebrew media reports and Israeli briefings — a disclosure that intensified debate in Israel about strategy, raised fresh diplomatic tensions in Washington and complicated fragile ceasefire negotiations.

Netanyahu was quoted by Israel’s Channel 12 and reported by Israeli outlets as telling the security cabinet that Trump had urged an all-or-nothing approach — rejecting piecemeal hostage-for-prisoner deals in favour of a decisive military campaign to crush Hamas. “Forget the partial deals… Go in with full force and finish this,” Netanyahu told ministers, according to those reports. 

Context: a divided cabinet and a stalled negotiating track

The comment came amid a bruising security-cabinet meeting in which top Israeli security officials and ministers appeared sharply divided over whether to accept partial hostage-release deals brokered by mediators or to pursue a major operation to seize Gaza City. Military leaders have warned that a full-scale urban campaign carries heavy risks for hostages, soldiers and civilians, while hard-line coalition members and some in the cabinet have argued that only military pressure will dismantle Hamas. 

Several Israeli outlets said the cabinet debate follows weeks of intensive U.S.-led mediation that produced proposals reportedly calling for phased hostage releases and a temporary cessation of major operations — ideas that Netanyahu and some ministers have resisted unless they secure guarantees for the release of all hostages and a durable demilitarization of Gaza. Hamas, for its part, reiterated this week that it was prepared to consider a comprehensive deal, saying it could free hostages in exchange for an end to the war — a claim Jerusalem dismissed as insufficient. 

Trump’s posture and Washington’s role

Trump has repeatedly positioned himself as a close ally of Israel while also saying publicly that he wants the war to end; his reported exhortation for a decisive offensive — as relayed by Netanyahu — underscores the unusual directness of U.S. involvement in tactical discussions. The White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the Netanyahu quotation, and U.S. officials have at times pushed for negotiated pauses tied to hostage releases even while stressing Israel’s security needs. 

Military and humanitarian stakes on the ground

The fighting around Gaza City has intensified as Israeli forces press operations said to be aimed at dismantling Hamas’s remaining strongholds. Israeli military statements this week put the forces in control of large parts of Gaza City as strikes and ground operations continued; Palestinian health authorities reported mounting civilian casualties and deepening humanitarian distress in the enclave. Human-rights groups and several governments have warned that a wide urban offensive would likely worsen civilian suffering and complicate aid deliveries. 

Domestic political fallout in Israel

Netanyahu’s public invocation of Washington’s pressure — and his reported rejection of incremental deals — has sharpened domestic political tensions. Military leaders, including the IDF chief of staff, have urged caution and voted at times in favour of considering hostage-exchange arrangements they believe would lower immediate risks to captives; families of hostages and protesters in Israel have meanwhile pressed for decisive action to secure the remaining captives’ release. The debate highlights a wider fault line in Israeli policymaking between political imperatives, military assessments and humanitarian concerns. 

Hamas response and the diplomatic trail

Hamas said it remained open to a comprehensive deal that would see all hostages released in return for an end to the war — a renewed offer that mediators and some capitals seized on as a possible way to break the impasse. Jerusalem, however, called Hamas’s statements “spin,” and reiterated the conditions it insists on for any end to hostilities: the full release of hostages, the disarming of Hamas, demilitarization of the strip, Israeli security control and a new civilian administration. That gap between the parties’ public positions illustrates the narrow bridge negotiators must build to secure a deal. 

International reaction and the risks of escalation

Reaction among Israel’s international partners was cautious. European and Arab capitals urged restraint and pressed for urgent humanitarian access; U.S. officials have been balancing public show of support for Israel with private entreaties to limit civilian harm and to prioritise hostage releases. Analysts warned that a large urban offensive would raise the risk of a broader regional escalation and would complicate reconstruction and long-term stabilisation plans for Gaza. 

Analysis — why the Netanyahu quote matters

Netanyahu’s publicising of Trump’s alleged instruction is significant for three reasons.

First, it frames U.S. involvement not only as strategic backing but as operational pressure — real or perceived — pushing for maximal military outcomes. If accurate, the comment suggests Washington may be prepared to accept a higher short-term humanitarian and diplomatic cost in return for what it sees as a decisive outcome; if inaccurate or politically amplified, it nonetheless signals that Israeli leaders are using external backing to justify their preferred course. 

Second, it increases bargaining friction. By publicly rejecting partial deals and invoking U.S. pressure, Netanyahu has hardened negotiation stances on both sides — Jerusalem has raised its threshold for acceptable terms, while Hamas’s renewed offers may be treated with scepticism. That dynamic lowers the chance of quick, incremental progress and raises the probability that mediators will need to produce a more comprehensive package to bridge differences. 

Third, it ratchets political risk at home and abroad. Domestically, the disclosure deepens rifts between elected leaders and top military commanders and fuels public protests by hostage families; internationally, it forces partners to recalibrate messaging — balancing support for Israel’s security with urgent calls for humanitarian safeguards. The political optics could constrain diplomatic flexibility and make any military escalation costlier in reputational and material terms.

What to watch next

• Whether mediators (Egypt, Qatar, the U.S.) can present a revised package that addresses Israel’s security and hostage demands while offering Hamas an acceptable exit ramp. 

• Any formal White House clarification about whether Trump urged the position Netanyahu attributed to him, and whether Washington will press Israel to accept phased deals tied to hostage releases. 

• Movement in the Israeli security cabinet — in particular, votes or written approvals that would change the trajectory from limited operations to a full Gaza City ground campaign. 

• Humanitarian indicators on the ground (casualty counts, aid deliveries, displacement) that would signal the immediate costs of any major offensive.