The Israeli military is carrying out a widespread operation in northern Gaza, issuing evacuation orders and blocking food supplies, just weeks after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was reported to be mulling a plan to besiege the area to starve Hamas and force it to release hostages.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) this week launched the operation following intelligence that it said showed “the presence of terrorists and terror infrastructure in the area of Jabalya in the northern Gaza Strip, as well as efforts by Hamas to rebuild its operational capabilities in the area.” In practice, the renewed offensive has been far more widespread than the Jabalya refugee camp.

The operation comes at a time when the Israeli government is known to be considering several plans to reset the war in Gaza.

Eiland last month proposed forcing all civilians out of northern Gaza, including Gaza City, and then cutting off all supplies to the area. The goal, he said, was to force a reset in the war and upend Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar’s calculus. “The reality today in Gaza is that Sinwar is really not stressed,” he said in a video released at the time.

On Monday, the Israeli military’s Arabic-language spokesperson ordered all Palestinians in Gaza’s northern-most communities – Beit Hanoun, Jabalya, and Beit Lahia – to leave and relocate to Al Mawasi, an Israel-declared “humanitarian area” in southern Gaza that has nonetheless come under intense aerial bombardment for months.

The military on Saturday added additional mandatory evacuation zones, dropping flyers and posting on X, ordering people in the Nazla area and more areas of Jabalya to leave.

The military “is operating with great force against terrorist organizations and will continue to do so for an extended period,” Avichay Adraee said on X. “You must evacuate the area immediately via Salah al-Din Street to the humanitarian zone.”

Most intense action

“Virtually the entire area is under evacuation orders, and thousands of families have been forced to flee amid intense airstrikes and military operations on the ground,” WFP said in a statement on Wednesday. “With the main aid crossings into northern Gaza closed and WFP-partner kitchens forced to shut down, WFP is no longer able to distribute food in any form to families that desperately need it.”

“Even the basic necessities of life for the besieged people are unavailable,” Ibrahim said. “There is no safe drinking water, no adequate or healthy food, no medicine, no treatment, and no hospitals. They are working at minimum capacity and are exhausted. Even the safe places are bombed with shells and rockets.”

Dr. Hussam Abu Saifiya, director of the Kamal Adwan Hospital in northern Gaza, said the facility was informed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Tuesday that medical staff and patients must evacuate the hospital “within 24 hours.” They were not told where to go, he said. Al Awda and the Indonesian hospitals have also been ordered to leave, according to local officials. Hospital officials say Israel’s intense bombardment of the area makes it impossible to leave safely.

Meanwhile, seven attempts this week by the World Health Organization to reach northern Gaza were “denied or impeded,” Director-General Dr. Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said Thursday.

“The team was unable to carry out the medical evacuation of critical patients from Kamal Adwan, Al-Awda and Indonesian hospitals to Al-Ahli and Al-Shifa, due to delays of over 10 hours at checkpoints,” he said in a statement on X.

Ukraine’s incursion into Russia’s Kursk region is now entering its third month, with scores of settlements still firmly under its control.

The operation marked the first time foreign troops entered Russian territory since World War II – embarrassing the Kremlin and proving to Kyiv’s backers and the rest of the world that Ukraine’s military was not perpetually on the back foot.

Some nine weeks later, Ukraine’s advance has stalled, and neither side has made major gains or counterattacks in recent days.

The endgame is unclear. Analysts believe Kyiv is trying to use its initial momentum for a morale boost and a potential bargaining chip, while Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to downplay the entire incursion and limit the resources Russia’s war machine devotes to countering it.

What’s the latest on the ground?

Ukraine has maintained a foothold in Kursk of about 786 square kilometers (300 square miles), according to the latest assessment by the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), a think tank in Washington, DC.

Ukraine’s main foothold is around the Russian town of Sudzha and its military is trying to establish a second foothold around Veseloe village. Ukraine has not disclosed how many troops it has sent to the region.

Russia has deployed a reasonably large number of troops – estimated at 40,000 – to defend and counterattack in Kursk, but analyst Mark Galeotti described the initial force as “built from wherever they can find,” with Russia using conscripts and reservists at the outset of the incursion.

Moscow has since deployed more experienced forces, but not as many resources as Russian civilians in Kursk would perhaps want.

As fighting in the area continues, Russian authorities say more than 100,000 civilians have been displaced, while many others find themselves living behind Ukrainian lines.

“Over time, there is a degree to which the Kursk operation has become normalized,” Galeotti said. “We shouldn’t assume that Russians have just come to accept it… I think Putin has managed to postpone judgment, but I don’t think it’s been completely waived.”

Why hasn’t Russia’s response been stronger?

Russia is trying to avoid diverting any resources from the frontlines of its full-scale invasion of Ukraine to fight in Kursk.

Although the incursion was initially a shock to both the government and ordinary Russians, “the Kremlin has played this down,” according to John Lough, an associate fellow at Chatham House’s Russia and Eurasia Program. “The strategy is to distract the population from what’s happened, which is undoubtedly a major embarrassment, and to create the impression that this is not serious.”

Putin’s government has characterized it as a “raid” and even downplayed their counterattack as a “counterterrorism mission.”

One Russian military blogger put the normalization into stark words, saying: “Most of Russia has already got used to the fighting near Kursk… Those who have nothing to do with the Kursk region are rather sluggishly interested in what is happening.”

Frontlines are moving only slightly, but the fighting is reportedly fierce, with Russian forces deploying numerous drones, barrel artillery and aerial bombers, according to the Ukrainian commander.

“They don’t hesitate to drop a bomb on a tree line if they assume we have troops there,” Ukrainian battalion commander “Kholod” said. He claims Russia has now sent a powerful group of troops and combat brigades to where his unit is fighting in Kursk, and argued the Russian counterattack was staved off by Ukraine’s drone and mine attacks.

What has Ukraine achieved?

The incursion into Kursk likely had multiple goals, analysts say, including giving Ukraine a narrative win.

“Their goal was to demonstrate to Ukraine’s Western allies that the Russians are vulnerable and that there are limits to their ability to deploy combat power,” said Lough, adding that the incursion also highlighted how “Russia’s red lines are rhetorical.”

Yet Ukraine’s goal of diverting troops from the eastern frontline to Kursk has so far failed.

Kursk could still be a bargaining chip for negotiations in the future, though, experts said.

“By taking this territory, they immediately ruled out the possibility of both the Russians and the Western allies saying, ‘Now it’s time to stop. Let’s have a ceasefire,’” Lough said.

Focus still on eastern Ukraine

Meanwhile, the primary focus of the war remains on the frontlines in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region, where its troops are fighting to retain control of the strategic city of Pokrovsk.

Rather than focus resources on liberating their own territory, the Russian military has expanded its assaults on multiple fronts in Ukraine, including in key areas of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia.

“It seems to be a very high priority for the Kremlin to advance as far as possible in Donbas, regardless of the losses,” Lough added. “There is a sort of window that is about to close, because you get to this time of year when the roads turn to mud.”

Russia’s daily attacks on Ukraine continued Thursday, with several people killed in the regions of Odesa, Kherson and Donetsk.

It was the perfect feel-good story, just in time for Christmas.

On December 20 last year, the United States secured from Venezuela the release of 10 US citizens – six of them wrongfully detained – in exchange for a close ally of authoritarian President Nicolas Maduro and a commitment from Caracas that it would stop detaining Americans to use as negotiating pawns.

“The administration has made abundantly clear the expectation that additional Americans are not detained, and has secured commitments along those lines,” a cheerful US official announced at the time.

That deal, which also included the extradition of a former military contractor known as “Fat Leonard” who orchestrated the largest corruption scandal in US Navy history, was hailed as a thawing of relations in the long-running standoff between the countries that has seen the US impose sanctions on Venezuela and accuse its leader of illegally usurping power, abusing human rights and trafficking drugs.

But fast-forward to nearly a year later and the vibe has turned more Halloween trick than Christmas treat.

Venezuela recently announced it had detained at least four US citizens, along with a handful of other foreign nationals, alleging they were part of an international conspiracy masterminded by the CIA and Spanish intelligence to overthrow Maduro.

That claim has been strongly denied by both the US and Spanish governments.

The US State Department has said the claims are “categorically false” and intimated that the detentions are linked to American criticisms of Venezuela’s disputed presidential election, which Maduro claims to have won despite widespread skepticism. The United States “continues to support a democratic solution to the political crisis in Venezuela,” the State Department said, pointedly, when commenting on the allegations.

So, is there anything to Venezuela’s claims? And if not, what does Maduro hope to gain by returning to an old playbook?

Hollywood script and a convenient bogeyman

The details of the alleged plot read like the script of a Hollywood thriller. Maduro’s interior minister Diosdado Cabello claims the detained foreigners – who also included two Spaniards and a Czech – were part of a shadowy unit who traveled to Venezuela to kill Maduro, apparently motivated by the up to $15 million reward the US Justice Department offered in 2020 for information leading to his arrest or conviction.

According to Cabello, the plot not only involved the CIA but was led by an active duty US Navy Seal, and involved a shipment of 400 (now seized) US-manufactured rifles and other firearms.

Two other US citizens, Cabello claims, were “hackers” intent on disrupting Venezuela’s chronically inefficient power service. (Not the first time Cabello has cried foul over blackouts; he alleged “terrorist actions” by the opposition were behind a late-August blackout that affected at least nine Venezuelan states and dozens of cities including the capital Caracas.)

Intriguingly, White House spokesperson John Kirby confirmed that the man Caracas identified as the alleged ringleader – Wilbert Castañeda – is an active service member in the US Navy whom, Kirby said, went to Venezuela on “personal travel.” Other media have reported that Castañeda, who is a dual Mexican-US citizen, used to serve as a Navy Seal but was stripped of his status sometime in the past.

Given the nature of the allegations, Venezuela’s claims are almost impossible to independently verify.

But then skeptics might say that’s exactly the point – that for Maduro, the CIA is merely a convenient, tried-and-tested bogeyman.

Maduro has in the past also alleged, without proof, that the US government and former US President Donald Trump were behind a 2018 assassination attempt in which an explosive-laden drone detonated mid-air during one of his speeches (an ‘attack’ prosecutors initially tried to pin on then-Colombian President Juan Manuel Santos). Maduro has also alleged, again without evidence, that the CIA and Washington in general were to blame for an insurrection in April 2019, and in September of the following year his government detained US citizen Matthew Heath on allegations of spying on oil refineries in the state of Falcon. Heath was later released in a prisoner exchange, and the US government has always denied involvement in any of the alleged schemes.

All that said, Maduro knows there is an audience receptive to such narratives, precisely because the CIA does have a well-documented history of meddling in the region. And it’s likely not lost on him that the US was aware of a plot to overthrow his predecessor, Hugo Chavez, weeks before a coup d’etat was attempted in 2002.

‘Loose dogs’, or a threat from within?

Still, even among those in the Venezuelan government who believe the security services have stumbled on some kind of plot, there are some who are skeptical of Cabello’s claims of CIA involvement.

“I think these are more loose dogs than a real involvement from the US government, because everyone knows that removing Maduro by force would only escalate the conflict around Venezuela,” said a government source who, like other people consulted for this article, asked not to be named due to the confidential nature of the topic.

“But you cannot underestimate the allure of the ($15 million Department of Justice) reward especially for crazy adventurers, or do you really believe a Navy Seal on active duty travelled to Venezuela for a summer romance?” the source said.

One scenario that doesn’t seem to be under consideration in Caracas’ corridors of power is whether a plot could have originated from within the country.

That may sound surprising, given Maduro has alienated vast swathes of the population with his election ‘victory’ and subsequent crackdown on the opposition. He has also likely alienated some of those within his own government with his habit of chopping and changing key personnel on a whim.

But while it’s not impossible to imagine former Chavistas plotting to bring Maduro down, a more likely explanation may simply be that the Venezuelan leader has cooked up the whole story for political leverage against his old foe, the US.

If so, what does Maduro think he has to gain?

A negotiating tactic?

The obvious answer leads back to the election. In October last year, before the release of “Fat Leonard” and Co, Maduro had promised the US that Venezuela’s election would be free and fair. And as recently as six months ago, the economic community in Caracas was hoping it would be at least fair enough for the US to lift its remaining oil sanctions and bring Venezuela back into the fold of the world’s democracies.

The subsequent electoral farce, and Maduro’s desertion of his commitments to restore democracy, pulverized those hopes and made it clear that any further steps toward reconciliation would have to be painfully negotiated by diplomats.

It would seem Maduro sees the newly detained Americans as pawns to be used in those negotiations, with a view to quieting US criticisms of the election, and as leverage in any sanctions negotiations.

It’s an approach that sends a calculated message to US President Joe Biden, whose administration has prioritized the release of US citizens unjustly detained abroad – having reached similar deals with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the releases of WNBA star Brittney Griner and the Wall Street Journal journalist Evan Gershkovich.

But beyond Biden, the detentions are also a message to the new Commander in Chief, be it Kamala Harris or Donald Trump.

Since the disputed vote in Venezuela, the State Department has only minimally acted against the country, imposing personal sanctions on 16 individuals and calling for Venezuela to release the full voting ballots to clarify the result.

While the US has imposed economic sanctions on Venezuela’s oil exports for years, a special authorization allowing oil company Chevron to operate in the country is still valid despite the international outcry this summer.

Whoever wins the US election in November will have the fate of the detainees weighing on them when they are faced with deciding whether to continue that minimal approach or to turn the screw.

And they can forget any hope that the detainees’ fate can be left to the courts.

“You cannot even talk of a trial, to be honest,” said a lawyer who represented US citizens wrongfully detained in Venezuela in the past. “In most cases, there’s no file with the charges presented against your client, you don’t have access to the investigation, there are no witnesses, and you cannot present new evidence, all of those proceedings happen in a court, but they’re a farce.”

“It’s frustrating, you basically go to court, and you know nothing ruled there will make any difference for your client,” said another lawyer, whose client was released after spending more than two years in jail without being sentenced.

So, what’s Maduro’s bottom line?

Even for those convinced that Maduro has cooked up the plot to gain leverage with the US, there’s one mystery left: his preferred endgame.

In previous negotiations over prisoner exchanges, Maduro was able to obtain the release of his alleged money fixer, Alex Saab, and of two of his wife’s nephews who were serving time for trying to smuggle 800 kilograms of cocaine into the United States.

He was also able to secure the withdrawal of some of the oil sanctions the US imposed on Caracas in recent years.

This time around, with none of his close associates in US hands, it’s unclear what Maduro could ask at the bargaining table other than legitimacy and further sanctions withdrawal.

Likewise, it’s unclear how a new US administration would entertain the idea of giving in to – and being seen to give into – an authoritarian bully.

Hostage negotiation is an awkward topic for any government, none more so than the United States, which has in the past made a point of refusing to engage with kidnappers.

On the other hand, the US may decide the freedom of its citizens are worth whatever limited concessions Maduro is seeking.

As one of the people involved in last year’s negotiations put it: “Free societies decide that no innocent man should be in jail. When you accept that a criminal walks free but no detainee is innocent, that is real freedom.”