Could Israel really build settlements in Gaza?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich have signaled they are contemplating new Jewish settlements in Gaza, following a prolonged conflict with Palestinians.

On Monday, Smotrich—whose coalition participation hinges on greater authority over settlement policy—took reporters aside, saying his ministry has drafted plans for three settlements in northern Gaza, pending Netanyahu’s approval.

The following day, Netanyahu commented on right‑wing Channel 14, refusing to rule out settlements in Gaza.

He responded, “The question is whether you prefer to do or to talk,” and added, “And yes, I prefer not to address it.”

Existing Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem are considered illegal under international law.

To make room for new Gaza settlements—and which Netanyahu described as the “voluntary migration” of the remaining population, a practice widely characterized as ethnic cleansing by international jurists—Israeli forces have caused over 73,000 Palestinian deaths.

UN‑backed experts have also accused Israel of deliberately inflicting famine on Gaza’s survivors and, in recent months, of targeting children as part of its campaign in the strip.

Assessing the actual progress of any settlement plans in Gaza—where 21 illegal settlements once existed before their 2005 demolition—is challenging. The northern sector of Gaza City has been largely destroyed by extensive Israeli demolitions, targeting homes and institutions and wiping out most structures that escaped aerial bombardment.

Advocates view the vacant land as an ideal buffer zone between Israel and the Gaza Strip.

With Israeli elections approaching, suggesting a settlement plan could be politically advantageous for leaders like Smotrich and Netanyahu.

“Since Oct. 7, the Israeli public has been exposed to endless incitement to genocide,” said Neve Gordon, an Israeli professor at Queen Mary University of London. “Israelis who rely on mainstream media have little grasp of Gaza’s devastation or the suffering there.” He continued, “There are even tourist sites where Israelis go to watch bombings. Such places attract viewers for statements like Smotrich’s, which seek their support. Those people want more Gaza settlements, but we should still take the move seriously. This isn’t just rhetoric; there is a consistent, cross‑party push to resettle the Strip.”

A history of ethnic cleansing

Since Israel’s 2005 disengagement, an increasing number of religious hardliners have pushed to resettle Gaza. Analysts and historians note that settlement advocates have steadily taken over key institutions—education, media, and other government sectors—shaping public discourse.

Groups like the far‑right settler organization Nachala have openly promoted Gaza’s resettlement. During the conflict, Nachala convened a conference titled “Settlement Brings Security and Victory” to advocate Israel’s return to Gaza. The event was attended by several ministers, among them Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben‑Gvir.

Political advantage

Observers, like Orly Noy editor of the Hebrew‑language Local Call magazine, find the situation ironic. “Smotrich has been the most effective cabinet member in advancing West Bank settlers’ interests,” she noted. “He has truly reshaped policy in that arena,” she added, citing judicial, economic, and infrastructure reforms carried out under his tenure, though he receives limited credit among his own supporters.

“If you want to stand out before the election, now is the moment,” said political analyst Ori Goldberg. “This is your chance, and anyone proposing more hardship for Palestinians will face no Jewish parliamentary opposition—except for the left‑wing member Ofer Cassif.” Goldberg added, “People have tuned out; there’s almost no reaction to Gaza settlement plans, and the suffering there has become a huge black hole in public consciousness.”

Complicity

Domestically, the Israeli government faces little opposition to Gaza settlements, but internationally it must contend with strong backlash—a factor that may keep the project at the planning level.

Would building settlements in Gaza entail any genuine long‑term repercussions for Israel?

Many attribute Israel’s latitude to continued robust U.S. diplomatic and military backing, and to European financial support, which, despite occasional criticism, remains a key trading partner.

“International response to Gaza settlements,” said Hugh Lovatt, an author and fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, “has mirrored the largest settlement growth since the 1990s Oslo Accords, alongside moves that undermine the two‑state solution.”

“Despite some criticism, concrete actions have been scarce,” Lovatt remarked. “The dynamic may not shift if such settlements are built in Gaza, especially given the intense international, chiefly U.S., focus on Gaza since the latest ceasefire, compared with the relative attention the West Bank receives.”

Whether this scrutiny will curb Israel’s settlement expansion remains uncertain.

Asked whether Israel would jeopardize a bold settlement move to oppose former President Trump’s Gaza plan, Lovatt replied, “I’m not sure.” The plan, though criticized for allowing continued Israeli presence, does not address settlements.

He added, “Europe’s weak record so far could change if settlement expansion reaches Gaza, potentially prompting European states to take action.”

Source link