He was speaking after Hamas laid out a series of demands in response to an Israel-backed ceasefire proposal.

Mr Netanyahu said negotiations with the group were “not going anywhere” and described their terms as “bizarre”.

Talks are continuing to try to reach some sort of deal.

“There is no other solution but a complete and final victory,” Mr Netanyahu told a news conference on Wednesday.

“If Hamas will survive in Gaza, it’s only a question of time until the next massacre.

Israel was expected to take issue with Hamas’s counter-offer, but this response is a categorical rebuke, and Israeli officials clearly see an effort by Hamas to end the war on its terms as utterly unacceptable.

Senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told the Reuters news agency that Mr Netanyahu’s remarks “are a form of political bravado”, and show he intends to pursue the conflict in the region.

An Egyptian official source told the BBC that a new round of negotiations, mediated by Egypt and Qatar, is still expected to go ahead on Thursday in Cairo.

Egypt has called on all parties to show the necessary flexibility to reach a calm agreement, the source said.

And Mr Netanyahu’s rejection of a “delusional” plan are in stark contrast to remarks from Qatar, which described Hamas’s response as “positive”.

Hamas put forward its counter-offer to a ceasefire proposal on Tuesday.

A draft of the Hamas document seen by Reuters news agency listed these terms:

• Phase one: A 45-day pause in fighting during which all Israeli women hostages, males under 19, the elderly and sick would be exchanged for Palestinian women and children held in Israeli jails. Israeli forces would withdraw from populated areas of Gaza, and the reconstruction of hospitals and refugee camps would begin.
• Phase two: Remaining male Israeli hostages would be exchanged for Palestinian prisoners and Israeli forces leave Gaza completely.
• Phase three: Both sides would exchange remains and bodies.

The proposed deal would also see deliveries of food and other aid to Gaza increase. By the end of the 135-day pause in fighting, Hamas said negotiations to end the war would have concluded.

Around 1,300 people were killed during the Hamas attacks on southern Israel on 7 October last year.

More than 27,700 Palestinians have been killed and at least 65,000 injured by the war launched by Israel in response, according to the Hamas-run health ministry.

Israeli forces to push into Rafah

Mr Netanyahu also confirmed on Wednesday that Israeli forces have been ordered to prepare to operate in the southern Gaza city of Rafah – where tens of thousands of Palestinians have fled in order to escape the fighting.

Expanding the conflict into Rafah would “exponentially increase what is already a humanitarian nightmare” in the city, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres warned.

“We are afraid of the invasion of Rafah,” one displaced person at the Rafah Crossing, near the border with Egypt, told BBC Arabic.

“We sleep in fear and sit with fear. There is no food, and the weather is cold.”

The Israeli leader’s comments are a blow to a sustained push by the US to reach a deal that its top diplomat, Antony Blinken, described as “the best path forward” – even though he cautioned there was “still a lot of work to be done”.

During a news conference on Wednesday, Mr Blinken said there were “some clear non-starters” in Hamas’ counter-proposal. But, he added: “We do think it creates space for an agreement to be reached, and we will work at that relentlessly till we get there.”

Sharone Lifshitz, whose parents were among those kidnapped in southern Israel on 7 October and taken to Gaza, told the BBC’s Newshour programme that Mr Netanyahu’s rejection of the Hamas ceasefire terms was “almost certainly a death sentence to more hostages”.

Ms Lifshitz’s 85-year-old mother, Yocheved, was subsequently released but her father, Oded, remains in captivity.

“My own father is 83, he’s frail, he cannot last longer,” she said.

“I don’t know if the prime minister thinks about him, or if he already accounts for him as somebody who would return in a coffin.”

Mr Netanyahu’s stance also highlights the continuing, fundamental mismatch between the US and Israel’s plans for Gaza’s future.

He is insisting on an entity where Israel maintains overall security control, and Gaza is run by local bodies with no connection to Hamas or any other group.

Washington’s vision of the future includes a horizon with a Palestinian state.

The urgent question now is whether something can be salvaged to keep these talks going to achieve another exchange of hostages and prisoners, and a desperately needed humanitarian pause, to allow more aid into the Gaza Strip.

The session of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Friday is part of a case brought by South Africa alleging that Israel is committing genocide.

Both countries testified when the case opened two weeks ago. Israel has vehemently rejected the allegation.

A ruling against Israel is not enforceable by the court but would be politically significant.

More than 25,000 Palestinians – mostly women and children – have been killed and tens of thousands injured, according to the Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza, since Israel began its offensive, triggered by an unprecedented attack on Israel by the group.

The Hamas attack on 7 October killed about 1,300 people, mainly civilians. The attackers also took about 250 people back to Gaza as hostages.

South Africa, which strongly supports the Palestinians, asked the court to issue nine provisional measures, including a halt to military activity by Israel, while it considers the accusation of genocide. A ruling on the latter is not expected for a long time, possibly years.

Israel reacted with outrage to the genocide allegation, accusing South Africa of distorting the truth. It said it had a right to defend itself and was targeting Hamas fighters, not Palestinian civilians.

It asked the judges to dismiss South Africa’s request which it said was based on “grossly distorted” and baseless allegations of a non-existent genocide.

In reaching a ruling on Friday, the 17 judges – 15 permanent justices, plus one each from South Africa and Israel – must answer two questions:

Firstly, whether South Africa has met the basic test to show that its claim against Israel can be dealt with under the UN's 1948 Genocide Convention. The convention - to which Israel and South Africa are signatories - defines what constitutes genocide. At this preliminary stage of the case, the bar is relatively low.
Secondly, whether there is a plausible risk of irreparable harm to the Palestinian people in Gaza if Israel's military action continues.

Also, the judges are not limited to South Africa’s specific requests. The panel could simply instruct Israel to ensure its actions comply with international law and to ensure that it does not do anything to impede deliveries of food, water or medicines.

The ICJ, though, only has the power to issue advisory opinions. And while its rulings are in theory legally binding, they are not enforceable by the court. If Friday’s ruling go against Israel, it is almost certain to be ignored.

It would, however, place additional political pressure on Israel to work towards a ceasefire, and will intensify pressure on Israel’s strongest international allies to do what they can behind the scenes to find a resolution and guarantee humanitarian assistance gets to where it is needed.

ALSO READ:

• Khan Younis: UN says nine killed at Gaza shelter as fighting rages

• In pictures: 100 days of war in Israel and Gaza

The resolution, put forth by Russia, called for a humanitarian ceasefire, the release of hostages, aid access, and the safe evacuation of civilians in the war-torn region.

Out of the Council’s 15 members, the Russian-led draft received five votes in favour (China, Gabon, Mozambique, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates) and four against (France, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States). Notably, Ghana was the sole African country to abstain, while Gabon and Mozambique voted in favour. Other abstentions included: Albania, Brazil, Ecuador, Malta, and Switzerland.

For a resolution to be adopted, it requires at least nine affirmative votes, with none of the five permanent members issuing a veto.

Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia expressed regret over the resolution’s failure, attributing it to what he termed the “selfish intention of the Western bloc.”

He emphasized the urgency of addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and urged unified action.

However, US Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield criticized the resolution for not addressing Hamas’ actions, arguing that it failed to condemn the group’s terrorist activities.

She underscored the need to hold Hamas accountable for civilian casualties and the dire situation in Gaza.

Riyad Mansour, the Permanent Observer of the Observer State of Palestine to the UN, implored the Security Council to adhere strictly to international law and emphasized the gravity of the situation for Palestinians.

Israeli Ambassador Gilad Erdan characterised the moment as pivotal for the Security Council, asserting that Hamas shares an ideology akin to the Nazis. He called on the Council to designate Hamas as a terrorist organisation and hold it accountable for the situation in Gaza.

Additionally, he advocated for full support of Israel’s right to self-defence and the immediate release of all hostages.