Netanyahu Hints at Total Israeli Control over Gaza Amid Global Warnings

The possibility of Israel assuming complete control over Gaza has emerged this week, with Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hinting at such a plan. This comes amidst strong global admonitions for restraint, while the US, by comparison, seems largely indifferent. Earlier this week, US President Donald Trump remarked it was predominantly Israel’s decision regarding the Gaza occupation. This statement led to subsequent questions about whether he was indirectly giving Israel the go-ahead; however, he chose to discuss previous US air strikes on Iran in response.

The US Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, was more forthright in his remarks. In response to Netanyahu’s proposal for Gaza, Huckabee stated that it was not America’s place to dictate Israel’s actions. His viewpoint suggested that should they seek advice, the US president would likely oblige, but ultimately the course to take was one for Israelis to decide upon alone.

There has been some internal resistance to the potential occupation plan, particularly from Chief of Staff Lt Gen Eyal Zamir. Reports in the Israeli press suggest he has expressed dissent against the notion of a full-blown occupation. Rather paradoxically, a subsequent proclamation following an Israeli security cabinet assembly did not mention a full takeover of Gaza but mentioned preparations to exert control over Gaza City.

Notably, this declaration did allude to ‘Israeli security control in the Gaza Strip’ as a key tenet out of five principles for averting the conflict. The theory of an all-encompassing acquisition of Gaza has been speculated about for quite some time. It’s hinted that the idea of overtaking Gaza entirely has been a longstanding strategic plan of Netanyahu, with the Prime Minister simply biding his time for the perfect occasion.

Furthermore, Netanyahu has hinted that Israel has no desire to maintain permanent control over the territory, but instead wishes to delegate it to ‘Arab forces,’ though the specifics of which weren’t disclosed. Regardless of this strategy’s details, the Trump administration has expressed no public disagreement with Netanyahu’s plans. This signifies a discernible shift in US foreign policy.

Before, Trump’s comments on Gaza’s future were more explicit. Earlier this year, in February, he proposed that America could play an influential part in Gaza’s redevelopment, even suggesting that Palestinians might need to be resettled beyond the confines of the territory.

The US exhibited unity with Israel while attacking Iranian nuclear facilities, but Trump was outspoken in his insistence that Israel respect the ceasefire that led to the resolution of this conflict. Additionally, dissatisfaction with Israeli strikes on Syria was also expressed – manifesting as public admonitions, and even stronger criticism behind closed doors.

Moving forward, these peace talks fell apart after just more than a fortnight. The abandonment of truce discussions with Hamas by Trump, coupled with his seeming indifference towards an extensive new Israeli military operation, may be a machination aimed at compelling the Palestinian organization into making fresh compromises at the peace table.

However, only time will tell whether this is the reality of the situation. In stark opposition to this position, recent declarations from France, the UK, and Canada on acknowledging a Palestinian state act as a counterweight. These actions were purposefully introduced to intensify the pressure on Israel to ease its military movements and apportion a peace agreement with Hamas.

This diplomatic recognition, coupled with the USA’s evident apathy towards the possibility of a drawn-out, perhaps indefinite, Israeli military presence in Gaza, leads America and its allies in divergent paths. But both gestures subtly acknowledge that maintaining the status quo is not sustainable, and prospects for negotiated peace seem more remote than ever before.

As with many of Trump’s decisions, the duration of this current tentative approach towards Gaza is uncertain. However, should Trump’s stance shift once again, Israel may have already commenced an irreversible course of action in Gaza. Thus, the geopolitical and humanitarian implications of such a move warrant careful consideration by all parties involved.