Israeli proposal details possible plan to rule Gaza after Hamas
The proposal, in the form of a 32-page academic paper titled 'Gaza Security and Recovery Program, How Should The Day After Look Like,' was authored by the Israel Defense and Security Forum — a group of over 35,000 Israeli security force reservists — and the well-established think tank Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs.
The study was presented to the Israeli government at an unknown date between its creation and now, and represents one of the future options currently under consideration by Israel for the Gaza Strip, according to officials who talked to Euronews.
The proposal depicts what 'the day after' should look like in the scenario of the fall of Hamas. It entails economic reconstruction, building infrastructure and, as the authors of the study say, 'uprooting a murderous ideology,' also labeled as a process of 'de-nazification'.
'In order to prepare for the new state of affairs, even though the results of the military operation have not yet been achieved, it is necessary to prepare an orderly plan for the control of the Gaza Strip after the fall of Hamas,' the document reads.
The plan explicitly excludes the sovereignty of Palestine, or more specifically the Palestinian Authority (PA), or the presence of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) as a source for humanitarian aid.'No less serious is the foolhardy idea of establishing a Palestinian state in Gaza," the document reads.However, it is not said in the document whether Israel intends to annex the Strip, although it is clearly stated that Israeli Security Forces (IDF) want to have a greater say in the overall administration of Gaza's affairs.The document's authenticity was confirmed by one senior government official who talked to Euronews on the condition of anonymity to avoid interfering with the government's work, as well as Ohad Tal and Simcha Rothman, two Knesset members of the far-right National Religious Party, which is part of the ruling coalition.'The contents in this paper are part of the plans the government is looking at, they are on the table,' the senior government official confirmed to Euronews.The official specified that it is not a "finalized plan," however, it is "definitely part of the scenarios that are on the table"."This plan is on the table and consistent with the direction the government is going," Tal confirmed.Rothman told Euronews that, while the plan remains a "moving target," the framework outlined criteria, such as "elimination of Hamas, no PA (Palestinian Authority) presence in Gaza, no Palestinian state, no UNWRA, (are) consistent with my approach and to the best of my knowledge, with the approach of the government."Euronews contacted the office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for comment, but has not received a response by the time of publication.The paper says the new entity, initially managed by the IDF, should establish a new mechanism for reconstruction, economic development, aid management and 're-education' of Gaza's society.Some parts of the proposal obtained by Euronews and the Israeli government's actions announced at the beginning of May might be going in the same direction.On 5 May, the Israeli government gave the green light to the IDF to start a massive operation to take control of the whole Gaza. The decision came shortly after the military announced the mobilization of tens of thousands of reservists.On the same day, Netanyahu announced that further displacement of the 2.1 million Gaza residents has to be expected as a result of the massive ground operations that have started.The detailed study dates back to roughly two months after 7 October 2023, when Hamas militants attacked Israeli communities at the border with Gaza, killing around 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostage.The Israeli military says it has killed some 20,000 Hamas combatants, while also reporting around 3,000 dead and wounded among its soldiers.In the proposal, there is no reference to the Israeli hostages.Hamas' terrorist attack triggered the Israel-Hamas war in the Strip, in which 52,000 Palestinians lost their lives, according to the latest figures from the Hamas-run Gaza health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilian and combatant deaths.However, two sources familiar with the document, who spoke to Euronews under the condition of anonymity, confirmed that the study's conception predates Hamas' 7 October attack, but it was imagined more for the West Bank, rather than for Gaza.The proposal is divided into three different stages, where the first two are considered the most important, where the Israelis are foreseen to extensively take over and manage the Strip, creating a new entity from scratch.Even though the document envisages a third, long-term stage in which there is space left for the self-determination of those residing in the Strip, it would happen only after a complete erasure of the current Hamas-run Gaza network is finalised.'It would be wrong to put the cart before the horse, and it would be similarly wrong to predetermine, for the Gazan population and its leadership its political future,' since the focus for Israel is not Palestinians' self-determination but rather 'ending Hamas rule,' the document says.In the scenario of the fall of Hamas, the IDF would aim to temporarily take over the whole Gaza Strip, having free movement on the ground while obtaining complete control of the 12-kilometer border between Gaza and Egypt, including the Rafah crossing.The IDF has already partially done what is mentioned in the proposal, creating a buffer zone alongside some portions of the border. Since early April, the Israeli military has already taken control of roughly half of Gaza.To widen the buffer zone, the IDF systematically demolished all infrastructure, making the portion of the territory uninhabitable.A 'buffer zone along the border with Israel' must be established, where the 'Palestinian traffic will not be permitted,' the document says.In this first stage, 'It may be necessary to impose martial law', the document reads, with the IDF taking over all the civilian affairs, until a new 'mechanism' is established. This period could last a few months up to a year, according to the study.In the second phase, the Israeli government would establish five administrative autonomous councils. The proposal suggests these should be called 'Northern Gaza Strip, Gaza City, Central Gaza Strip, Khan Yunis and Rafah'.The councils would be tasked with managing civilian life in Gaza after meeting certain preconditions, such as not being related to 'terror-Palestinian factions', recognising the state of Israel and taking part in a re-educational plan also called the 'de-nazification' process.Control over education is a key part of the study, according to which the councils are meant to have a 'meaningful supervision' of what is happening not only in classrooms but also during extracurricular activities in which Israel would have greater say.Israel would also establish an International Managerial Directorate (IMD) for aid, reconstruction and supervision of the administrative councils.It would be formed not only by the Israeli government, which should be the major player, according to the document.In a significant and complex part of the proposal, the IMD would include the US, some European countries 'such as Germany, France, the UK and Italy' as well as 'pragmatic Sunni countries.'In the document, Israel suggested it should make the IMD the only source of aid for the local administrative councils. The assistance, such as direct 'aid money to economic growth and reconstruction of infrastructures' would be conditional on specific criteria, including the implementation of re-educational plans.'In any event, aid and reconstruction will be given in congruence with the principle of the plan and of the de-radicalization and denazification process in the education system, the media and society,' says the document.Israel already publicly proposed to manage aid flow to Gaza, as detailed in the document obtained by Euronews.Since 2 March, aid flow has stopped for Gaza residents, creating a situation that the UN described as a catastrophe, since people are running out of food and water.In early April, UN Secretary-General António Guterres said that 'Gaza is a killing field, and civilians are in an endless death loop.'The UN criticised the Israeli proposal to control humanitarian aid in Gaza by routing it through military-run hubs, warning it would endanger civilians and aid workers, cut off vulnerable populations from aid, and increase forced displacement.Israel has repeatedly accused Hamas militants of abusing the aid influx for their personal gain and to further strengthen the group.In the proposal, the Israeli government was suggested it should put in place a blacklist of organizations that 'must not receive aid,' or cannot operate.The UN is one of the intergovernmental organizations which Israel does not want in the Gaza Strip. However, the document leaves open the possibility for the presence of the UN agency for refugees, UNHCR.The document says Israel should favor the deployment of a team modeled after the Multinational Force and Observers in Sinai, a peacekeeping organization established in 1982 with US support to monitor the demilitarisation of the Sinai Peninsula under the 1979 Egypt-Israel peace treaty.Once the other phases are completed, a third phase in which the Palestinians can self-determine is presented as a possibility, even though it is not detailed in the proposal.'The proposed plan puts no actual obstacle before the Palestinians' ability to achieve self-determination once they recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people and abandon the path of terrorism,' the document says.The study says it would be premature to decide Gaza's political future, as Israel's priority is ending Hamas' rule, not Palestinian self-determination.The European Union is the primary donor to the Palestinians and supports a future for Gaza under the leadership of a reformed PA and with the presence of UNRWA.The proposal heavily criticizes the European Union for its positions and says that it should not take part in the reconstruction.'There is no intention of including the European Union as a partner, but only a small number of European countries. We recommend including the countries that are most influential in Europe and that currently support Israel in its war against Hamas: countries such as Germany, France, the UK, and Italy,' the study says.The document goes even further, saying that its implementation does not need international cooperation, although it might help.'This plan does not depend on recognition or international cooperation. Israel can carry out the plan in Gaza by itself, or with only a handful of partners and/or supporters. But broad recognition and cooperation would undeniably help the plan to succeed more quickly and efficiently,' it states. — Euronews
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
8 hours ago
- Arab News
Netanyahu's inconsequential visit to Washington
It might have been naive to believe that the meeting in Washington this week between America's President Donald Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was going to lead to an announcement of a ceasefire agreement in Gaza between Israel and Hamas. After all, there have already been many false dawns. But having observed the terrible humanitarian tragedy that has unfolded in the territory over the past 21 months, who can blame any decent human being for hoping and praying for this nightmare to finally come to an end? It is for those who create the obstacles, or who are not using the full weight of their influence to stop this human suffering, to answer the question of what is preventing them from ending a war that no one is winning, and which is only causing immense hurt while harming the prospect of any future peace between the two peoples. Netanyahu arrived in the US in a very different state of mind compared with his previous visits since the war started. He was much more confident. He is now convinced that Israel's show of force in Iran, with Tehran's proxies considerably weakened, and his success in pulling in the US to participate in an attack on Iran's nuclear installations, have considerably elevated his status in Washington. Astonishingly, he also managed to drag Trump into an interfering role in the legal proceedings against him. The US president described Netanyahu's corruption trial a witch-hunt, which it most definitely is not, and even threatened to halt American aid to Israel if it was not brought to an immediate halt. The Israeli prime minister's visit to Washington was part of his attempts to secure his political survival and revival. Trump seemed to play his part, and even took part in a piece of grotesque theater in which Netanyahu presented him with a nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize. Trump, who previously pledged he would be 'very firm' with Netanyahu about ending the war in Gaza, on this occasion, and for no apparent reason, completely refrained from putting any pressure at all on the Israeli leader. While the immediate hopes for a ceasefire agreement were dashed, Israeli and Hamas negotiating teams were still engaged in proximity talks in Doha in an effort to resolve their differences, and Trump expressed cautious optimism when he declared that the negotiations to end the war in Gaza had been 'going along very well.' Israeli sources told journalists that 90 percent of outstanding issues have been resolved but the negotiations require more time. While the ability to reach an agreement on most issues is always a positive development, it ultimately means very little because in negotiations of this nature nothing is agreed until everything is agreed — and what remains unsettled includes those issues that are crucial to both sides, including an Israeli agreement to end the war, whether Israel will maintain a presence in the Gaza Strip, and whether the leadership of Hamas will be exiled. These sticking points will determine whether or not a ceasefire deal can be reached. Meanwhile, time is running out for the people of Gaza, and very quickly. Netanyahu's trip to Washington reflected his determination to remain in power, and possibly to avoid justice by derailing his corruption trial. Yossi Mekelberg What should obviously worry Gazans, and also those who believe in human rights and the rule of law, is that they have suffered immensely, even before the war began and immeasurably since. They have for months also been subjected to speculation about their possible removal from Gaza altogether. Other reports warn of the prospect of hundreds of thousands of them being pushed into the south of the territory. The very fact that the 'option' of a so-called 'voluntary migration' was even discussed with Netanyahu and his delegation in Washington is disturbing. The euphemisms of a 'humanitarian city' and 'voluntary migration' serve to sedate and deceive decent people around the world, or ease their consciences, when what is actually being suggested are most probably acts tantamount to horrendous war crimes on a huge scale. When Netanyahu says in Washington, 'If people want to stay, they can stay, but if they want to leave, they should be able to leave,' he is being disingenuous. Nearly two years of war have rendered Gaza almost uninhabitable, and instead of suggesting it be rebuilt, Israel's prime minister, with the support of the US, is saying that its residents might be better off going somewhere else. One cannot imagine a lower level of shamelessness to which this Israeli government might sink. When the war began this displacement was not one of Israel's objectives; it emerged as Israeli forces occupied most of the Gaza Strip, and then the extreme right wing in the country received a boost from Trump's misguided and tactless idea about rebuilding the territory as a 'Gaza riviera' — but not for the Palestinians. The timing of this Trump-Netanyahu summit, following the 12-day war against Iran last month, gave it a different flavor than previous meetings, as both leaders see themselves, not without reason, as victorious. The true extent of the damage to Iran's nuclear program is still unknown but one thing is not in question: Israel's initial military success, which gave its air force total freedom to operate in Iran, created the opportunity for Netanyahu to tempt Trump into getting involved to help, allegedly, finish the job using the kind of weaponry only the US possesses. On the one hand there is a sense in Washington that Netanyahu owes the American president for this assistance and should pay him back by showing more flexibility on the Palestinian issue. However, although Trump is not the type of person who ever believes he owes anyone anything, what Israel did in Iran actually gave him the chance to demonstrate determination and conviction as the US commander-in-chief and, within 24 hours, also to assert his authority by dictating to Israel that the war was over, to actually conclude it, and to suggest that decisions about the future of Iran's nuclear program should now move to the diplomatic sphere — thus becoming a peacemaker. Nevertheless, Trump has in mind a larger agenda: the expansion of the Abraham Accords to other countries within the region and beyond. But by now there is a recognition within his administration that this is not feasible without progress, firstly toward the end of war in Gaza and the reconstruction of the territory, and then to establish a genuine peace process between the Israelis and Palestinians that can lead to a two-state solution. Netanyahu and his government remain a major obstacle to this, albeit not the only one. The question now is what Trump will do. What is quickly becoming clear is that from Netanyahu's perspective the visit to Washington was part of the unofficial launch of his reelection campaign. The cracks in his coalition are growing but the war with Iran has enhanced his position in opinion polls. His trip to Washington reflected his determination to remain in power, and possibly to avoid justice by derailing his corruption trial. Trump and Netanyahu are not exactly soulmates but they do understand how they can serve each other's interests and personal ambitions. Sadly this will not necessarily help bring an end to the war in Gaza or restore regional stability.
Leaders
8 hours ago
- Leaders
US Aware of American Citizen Beaten to Death by Israeli Settlers
The US State Department unveiled that it was aware of the US citizen who was killed in the Israeli-occupied West Bank after being beaten by Israeli settlers, according to Al Arabiya. 'We are aware of reports of the death of a US citizen in the West Bank,' a State Department spokesperson said. The Palestinian Health Ministry, noted that Saif al-Din Kamel Abdul Karim Musallat, aged in his 20s, died after he was beaten by Israeli settlers on Friday evening. The ministry also said that other people were injured during an attack in a town north of Ramallah. Musallat's relatives mentioned that Israeli settlers had beaten Saif al-Din to death, according to The Washington Post. Meanwhile, the Israeli military said Israel was investigating the incident in the town of Sinjil. It also said that rocks were hurled at Israelis near Sinjil and that 'a violent confrontation developed in the area.' Escalating Violence in West Bank Approximately 1 million Israeli settlers live in illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem in violation of international law. Israel has recently detained numerous pro-Palestine activists with foreign nationalities north of Jericho in the occupied West Bank amid settlers' attacks, according to Arab News. In May, Defense Minister Israel Katz said that Israel planned to build a 'Jewish Israeli state' in the occupied West Bank, according to Al-Arabiya. Katz's remarks followed Israel's announcement of the creation of 22 new settlements in the West Bank. In this context, fifteen Israeli Cabinet Ministers from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party have recently pushed him to immediately annex the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The lawmakers have signed a petition requesting the administration 'to apply sovereignty over Judea and Samaria (West Bank) before the end of the Knesset summer session,' which ends on July 27. They also implied that the current moment is appropriate for the annexation thanks to strong US-Israeli relations and the recent military gains. Related Topics: Saudi Arabia Condemns Israeli Settlers' Violence against Palestinians Dozens of Israeli settlers storm Al-Aqsa Mosque for the second day US Sanctions UN Expert for Criticizing Israel's War in Gaza Short link : Post Views: 65
Arab News
9 hours ago
- Arab News
Gaza reveals the brutal new ethos of global geopolitics
The systematic destruction of Gaza transcends diplomatic failure and exposes a fundamental realignment in international ethical and political frameworks. This realignment is characterized by deliberate, structured complicity from dominant global powers, facilitating military operations independently verified by UN bodies, human rights monitors, and jurists as satisfying the legal criteria for genocide. Such complicity operates through four measurable channels: continuous arms transfers exceeding $18 billion documented since October 2023, recurrent diplomatic obstruction via five Security Council vetoes blocking ceasefire resolutions, methodical disinformation campaigns targeting mortality data, and the wholesale deprivation of humanitarian assistance. Officially confirmed direct fatalities now exceed 56,000, with civilians comprising over 70 percent of this figure. Yet this represents only the immediate kinetic impact. Rigorous analyses — validated by studies of siege warfare in Mosul (2016-2017) and Fallujah (2004) — demonstrate that indirect deaths from engineered famine, hospital collapses, and waterborne diseases consistently quadruple direct casualties. Applied to Gaza's density (5,791 persons per sq. km) and a 92 percent acute food insecurity rate, the adjusted mortality projection easily surpasses 250,000. It is the obliteration of some 10 percent of Gaza's pre-conflict population within 19 months, which exceeds the cumulative death tolls of Bosnia (1992-1995) and surpasses the pace of Rwanda's 1994 genocide. What is more, the denial infrastructure operates with clinical precision, beginning with systematic data suppression that dismisses Gaza Health Ministry figures — historically corroborated by the UN's Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs and Human Rights Watch — despite admissions of lacking alternative methodologies. The denial even extends to linguistic obfuscation, where over 14,000 child deaths are classified as 'collateral damage' despite targeting protocols permitting 100:1 civilian-to-combatant ratios and documented deployment of 2,000-pound bombs on designated safe zones. Simultaneously, physical erasure manifests through the destruction of 87 percent of Gaza's cemeteries and enforced mass anonymous interments, denying both life and dignity after death through the obliteration of burial rites. Together, these mechanisms transmute tacit consent into active participation in normalizing atrocities. Furthermore, the systematic inversion of ethical language serves as both instrument and symptom of collective moral abdication. Military operations documented to violate international humanitarian law, including the destruction of 72 hospitals and 85 percent of educational facilities per the UN's Satellite Center analysis, persistently receive the paradoxical designation of 'the world's most moral army.' Such linguistic corruption extends to the reframing of ceasefire demands to prevent further child casualties (12,500-plus UN-verified deaths) as antisemitic acts rather than humanitarian imperatives. Simultaneously, documented state rhetoric explicitly denying a people's existence and invoking territorial expansion from 'river to sea' — a phrase historically associated with settler-colonial projects — faces negligible diplomatic consequence, receiving merely three UN General Assembly condemnations versus 47 for comparable territorial claims elsewhere since 2020. Gaza is a live demonstration of the effective nullification of universal norms. Hafed Al-Ghwell Historical guilt over genocide is weaponized to legitimize current atrocities, despite demographic reality: 82 percent of contemporary Gaza's population descends from refugees displaced before 1948, bearing no conceivable responsibility for European crimes. It generates a grotesque paradox wherein institutions from historically perpetrator nations now systematically accuse genocide victims' descendants of bigotry — a tactic deployed in 68 percent of university protests suppressed according to American Civil Liberties Union documentation. The perversion culminates in the silencing of Shoah descendants themselves, with Jewish-led ceasefire advocacy groups such as IfNotNow facing state surveillance at five times the rate of non-Jewish organizations. The ensuing linguistic ecosystem transforms legal prohibitions into justificatory tools: Where international law prohibits collective punishment, it is reframed as 'self-defense'; where the Genocide Convention criminalizes starvation, it becomes 'sanction enforcement.' It creates a self-replicating corrosion that transcends semantics, operating as the ideological infrastructure enabling the annihilation of Gaza. Overall, the operational pattern emerging from Gaza reveals more than isolated policy failures; it constitutes a blueprint for systemic value erosion overtaking global geopolitics. When states providing 74 percent of Israel's arms imports between October 2023 and July 2025 simultaneously sanction International Criminal Court prosecutors investigating potential war crimes, they actively dismantle the judicial mechanisms created to uphold their proclaimed 'rules-based order.' This material contradiction manifests in quantifiable terms: While the US allocated $61.4 billion in emergency aid to Ukraine within 60 days of invasion, the UN's $2.7 billion humanitarian appeal for Gaza remained 67 percent underfunded after eight months of bombardment that destroyed 62 percent of housing units and 84 percent of health facilities. Moreover, the selective application of principles becomes statistically unambiguous when examining parallel crises. Sudan's conflict displaced 8.6 million civilians by mid-2025 — the largest internal displacement crisis recorded by UNHCR — while pushing 15.3 million into emergency hunger levels, according to IPC assessments. Yet donor conferences secured barely 23 percent of required funding, contrasting sharply with the $186 billion mobilized for Ukraine. The EU's migration containment expenditures demonstrate similar disparity: $4.6 billion paid to Turkiye since 2016, $1.9 billion to Libya's coast guard since 2017, and $102 million to Mauritania in 2025 alone — transactions documented by the EU's own auditors as directly reinforcing regimes with UN-verified torture rates exceeding 40 percent among detained migrants. These financial flows correlate with a 300 percent increase in Mediterranean migrant fatalities since 2020, according to IOM missing migrants data. Inevitably, Gaza has become a horrifying consequence of raw power consistently redefining ethical boundaries. Weapons shipments to conflicts violating international humanitarian law quadrupled among major exporters between 2023-2025, while referrals to the ICC decreased by 38 percent during the same period. When judicial processes face obstruction rates exceeding 90 percent for cases involving powerful states, as indicated by the ICJ's pending docket, the operational precedent becomes clear. Rules apply precisely inversely to geopolitical influence, with consequences calculated in millions of avoidable casualties. The international legal architecture, painstakingly built post-1945, faces unprecedented disrepute. The unchecked ability of powerful states to flout provisional measures from the ICJ regarding genocide risk, and to actively punish the ICC for pursuing arrest warrants, signals a dangerous erosion of much-needed accountability. When core instruments such as the Genocide Convention are rendered unenforceable against specific allies through political obstruction and threats, the entire framework loses legitimacy in the eyes of the Global South. To conclude, the clear hypocrisy is fueling a deepening rift, irrevocably damaging Western claims to moral leadership. The consequence is a world where 'might makes right' is the operational doctrine, humanitarian law is negotiable based on political alignment, and the value of human life is explicitly quantified by passport and geopolitical utility. Gaza stands as the most potent symbol of this new, brutal ethos: a live demonstration of impunity and the effective nullification of universal norms when applied to the disfavored. The lasting repercussion is the entrenchment of a global system where abdication of morality is normalized, and raw power is the sole remaining arbiter. • Hafed Al-Ghwell is a senior fellow and executive director of the North Africa Initiative at the Foreign Policy Institute of the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC. X: @HafedAlGhwell
