Not long ago, I heard a story about a person who suffered from a nagging headache and went to seek his doctor's advice. After a brief medical examination, the doctor said, "Don't worry, there's a medical procedure that will completely eliminate the headache." Upon hearing this good news, the patient asked, "What's the procedure?" To which the doctor replied: "I'll cut off your head."
Following Trump and Netanyahu's press conference and the declaration of intent to transfer the Palestinian population in Gaza, I was reminded of this joke. The main points of the declaration, published after midnight on February 5th Israel time, include the permanent relocation of Gaza Strip's population to new locations in Jordan, Egypt, or elsewhere for their rehabilitation, and U.S. control over the Gaza Strip. The U.S. would build a development zone in the Gaza Strip that would provide jobs and transform the area into "the Riviera of the Middle East." According to the U.S. President, no Israeli settlements would be established in the Gaza Strip because Israelis have no business there. Instead, the area would be populated by "people of the world" and also Palestinians. Trump distanced himself from his previous support for a Palestinian state and threatened that "if all hostages are not released, we will be more violent." Additionally, Trump said he would soon announce a position regarding Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria and signed an order reinstating the "maximum pressure" policy on Iran. In Israel, Smotrich, Ben Gvir, Lieberman, and others rushed to welcome the announcement. In contrast, Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia oppose it.
In light of these developments, it must be stated clearly: there is no doubt that the current reality in the Gaza Strip requires new solutions, but this declaration is expected to exacerbate the problem and is akin to "cutting off the head." If implemented, it will lead to widespread regional escalation that will harm the rights and security of both Jews and Palestinians.
The New Transfer
Many questions remain open regarding the declaration made by Netanyahu and Trump. Who are the "world population" that will populate Gaza? How will Palestinians be relocated from there and how will they be rehabilitated? Will American soldiers be stationed in Gaza? Where will the funding come from? And how will the hostages be released if Hamas has expressed its opposition? And many more questions.
Given this, two possible scenarios can be outlined. The first and more likely scenario is that this is an impractical declaration. Too many countries and regional players oppose it, and therefore the U.S. will have to decide whether it wants to deepen its involvement in the Middle East to impose the plan. Given past experience, there is a significant probability that Trump will change his mind.
The second scenario is that Trump will decide to enforce the implementation of the plan at all costs, and for this purpose, he will employ economic and perhaps military leverage. One scenario is that large portions of the Gaza Strip population will not evacuate voluntarily, and harsh measures will be taken to force them to leave. In this nightmare scenario, it's possible that a large group in Israeli society will refuse to cooperate with the move, and the entire region will undergo unprecedented processes of radicalization. Historical experience from 1948 teaches us that refugees who did not return to their homes crowded into refugee camps and launched endless terror attacks on Israeli cities for several generations – including the October 7th attack. Moreover, the declaration presented last night occurs under more severe conditions than those that existed during our War of Independence. In 1948, the Zionist movement initially agreed to the UN partition plan and even declared its intention to grant equal citizenship to the Palestinian population that remained within Israel's borders. Now the Israeli government preemptively rejects any type of security framework for establishing a Palestinian state, and there is no scenario where we would agree to grant citizenship to Palestinian refugees in our territory. At this point in time, even the future of Palestinians in the West Bank is shrouded in uncertainty.
Therefore, the aforementioned proposal could have far-reaching consequences. The remaining hostages will be abandoned to their fate in the Gaza Strip, and it's likely that any version in which the plan is implemented will create radicalization and comprehensive regional opposition to Israel. Trump is expected to leave the White House in four years, and we don't know who will come after him. We might find ourselves more isolated than ever. Human history has already taught us that whenever there is a widespread violation of human rights, the certain result is loss of stability and security.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with U.S. National Security Advisor Mike Walsh; and with Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Whitcoff. Photo: Avi Ohayon, GPO (Government Press Office).
Defend Ourselves by Ourselves?
After the terrible terror attack on October 7th, we were forced to defend ourselves. This was and still is our moral and ethical duty. Most Israelis rightly understand that we cannot accept further strengthening of terrorist organizations. But what some of us have yet to understand is the limitations of our power. The absence of a proper political alternative to Hamas rule in the Gaza Strip for so many years, especially since October 7th, is the main reason for Hamas's strengthening.
But instead of using the military momentum to create a long-term political alternative to Hamas rule, we operated according to a different security equation whereby we must cause the enemy great damage, and even capture new territories, to cut off threats to our security. This approach suffers from four strategic failures:
First, the current policy ignores the limitations of IDF military personnel and geographical deployment. Our forces are already spread across many fronts - in the West Bank, parts of Syria, Lebanon, and the Gaza Strip. The amount of reserve duty our soldiers perform exceeds the possible economic and psychological capacity. Moriah Asraf from News 13 published that these things were said to Netanyahu by Central Command Chief Avi Blut in the cabinet meeting: "To be more offensive, we need soldiers, there isn't enough personnel. Victory in Gaza and Lebanon affects the West Bank." Moreover, the logic that capturing additional territory will increase our security ignores distant threats - like the Houthis in Yemen or Iran's nuclear program - that cannot be dealt with through ground presence. These threats require an international and regional coalition, whose building becomes impossible under current conditions.
Second, the growing international isolation damages our strategic resilience. Normalization efforts with Saudi Arabia have been halted, we are subject to partial arms embargoes from several countries, IDF soldiers must fear visiting various places in the world for fear of arrest, and our attempts to limit humanitarian aid to Gaza have only strengthened Hamas. This policy distances us from the principles of the Declaration of Independence and the international support that enabled the establishment of Israel.
Third, Israel has no ability to continue financing this strategy. The Nagel Committee, which recently submitted its conclusions, determined that to transition to a security policy of cutting off threats at their inception requires an additional 133 billion shekels to the budget beyond the additions already given. According to the analysis by researchers at the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), this represents a 50% increase to the annual defense budget, which would constitute about 5.5% of Israeli GDP. Theoretically, this expense could be met if Israeli society managed a responsible economic policy of reducing expenses and opening trade routes in the region and worldwide. However, given that various Israeli governments rely on minority groups, and given our international and regional status, it's difficult to understand how we can maintain responsible economic policy over years.
Fourth, the proposal presented last night will not enable the release of hostages and the transition to the second phase of the deal. They will be abandoned to their terrible fate in the Gaza Strip, and no military pressure or humanitarian starvation will change this. Although according to polls more than 70% of Israelis want to implement the deal, nevertheless minority groups in society manage to dictate government policy. Our current system of government does not allow for a different outcome.
These four strategic failures make it clear that we don't have enough resources to continue with the existing policy. Therefore, we need expanding external assistance. The current war expresses a new phase where for the first time, the U.S. is forced to send soldiers to protect us directly. Immediately after the October 7th attack, former President Biden sent an aircraft carrier to the region to protect us, and further along the way U.S. pilots and air defense soldiers actively participated in battles defending Israel's skies. Now, if President Trump's new plan is implemented, it will be the U.S. that separates us from Egypt. This means that in a broad historical view, we are becoming dependent on the U.S. Similar to the Jewish people's historical past during the Second Temple period, we are again witnessing the takeover of government policy by extreme groups in a way that no longer allows us to "defend ourselves by ourselves." Can we raise our children in this good land for generations under such circumstances?!
A tour organized by the "Anachnu" (We) Movement in Jerusalem, May 2024. Photo: Anachnu Movement.
The Solution: Hostage Deal and Normalization
These days we are at a historic crossroads. Instead of the current destructive path, we can navigate the ship to safe harbor.
First, we must sign a normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia and agree to strive for the establishment of a Palestinian state in the long term. As part of this move, we must formulate a regional strategy for military or diplomatic confrontation with Iran's nuclear program, the Houthi threat, and the new Syrian regime.
Second, we must implement in Gaza a security framework similar in characteristics to the arrangement we signed in Lebanon. After signing the arrangement in Lebanon, General Joseph Aoun was elected president of Lebanon, and Hezbollah's control over the Lebanese state weakened. The IDF even withdrew from parts of southern Lebanon to allow the Lebanese army to deepen its deployment in the area. While it's clear that the arrangement in Lebanon won't hold up over time, most of us understand that this is the best arrangement that can be achieved right now despite its shortcomings. Therefore, it's incomprehensible why we are willing to cooperate with the Lebanese government but refuse to do so with the Palestinian Authority.
Third, we must proceed to the second phase of the hostage deal and release all our hostages. No one should be left behind. The claim that the hostage deal will empower terrorism is indeed correct, but equally, we must admit that any other alternative will lead to an equal number of casualties. Since the beginning of the IDF's military maneuver in the Gaza Strip, more than 400 of our fighters who risked their lives to protect us have been killed. Therefore, if we are destined to fight, we must do so for saving lives, the cohesion of Israeli society, and hope for a better future for our children.
Fourth, the majority in Israeli society from right and left must wake up and re-establish the Israeli coalition that founded the State of Israel and change the system of government. The left and center-left have the duty to shake off old paradigms and agree to discuss new and long-term frameworks for a Palestinian state. Some settlers can and should be brave partners in these frameworks. We must engage in education, economy, and deep and long-term cultural change in both peoples alongside the security process of establishing the Palestinian state. We cannot separate the peoples or be satisfied with endless negotiations. On the other hand, the sane Israeli right bears the responsibility to understand the limitations of power, cease being partners to strategies of conquest and expulsion, and return to cooperating with moderate forces in Israeli society. All Israelis bear the responsibility to think outside the box and find the way to a new Israeli partnership.
Even in these difficult days of 'Blood, Sweat & Tears,' our movement is committed to continuing to struggle to establish a new Israeli partnership in Israel. Only thus, when Israeli society changes from within, can we take our fate in our hands and reach safe harbor.
Comments