Netanyahu lays out plan for post-war Gaza

[Flats the Flounder]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68379646

Under his plan Israel would control security indefinitely, and Palestinians with no links to groups hostile to Israel would run the territory.
The US, Israel's major ally, wants the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority (PA) to govern Gaza after the war.
But the short document - which Mr Netanyahu presented to ministers last night - makes no mention of the PA.

He envisages a "demilitarised" Gaza; Israel would be responsible for removing all military capability beyond that necessary for public order.
There would be a "Southern Closure" on the territory's border with Egypt to prevent smuggling both under- and overground.
And "de-radicalisation" programmes would be promoted in all religious, educational and welfare institutions. The document suggests Arab countries with experience of such programmes would be involved, though Mr Netanyahu has not specified which.

What do you think of this plan? Is it reasonable? Will it succeed?

[SnowLabrador]

It won't work, but in all fairness, nothing would. Israel has doomed not only Gaza, but itself as well.

[Zinneke]

Gazantustan

[GeneralMacArthur]

It's the best they can do.

Israel will not allow Gaza to build an army to kill Jews.  That much is obvious.

For this reason, Israel must prevent Gazans from organizing into an army, from building military infrastructure, and from acquiring weapons.  This requires a physical presence in Gaza.

Obviously the international community is going to bitch and moan and say that Israel actually should leave Gaza alone and let the Palestinians pinky promise never again to reform Hamas (just like in 2005).  The pressure means Israel can't just annex Gaza and stay there indefinitely.  So instead what they need to do is create a situation where even after they leave, the odds of Hamas 2.0 are as low as possible.

How do you do this?  By enacting a cultural shift.  Get rid of all the schoolbooks that say Jews literally invented dying just to kill Arabs.  Deradicalize, deradicalize, deradicalize.  And try to present yourselves as the good guys as much as possible.  Naturally this is difficult when there will be constant attempts to form terrorist bands and kill Jews.  But you do the best you can.

I don't really see any other way around this unless the international community is willing to step in and help out.

Gaza is too much of a mess for Israel to trust the Palestinian Authority to take care of this.

[Ⓐnarchy in the ☭☭☭P!]

The fact that the IDF withdrew from northern Gaza and is in the process of withdrawing from Khan Yunis shows that it isn't a serious plan, it's just an excuse to justify prolonging the war indefinitely so that Netanyahu doesn't get removed from office or sent to jail.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

... Surprisingly sane. But implementation will have to be sincere.
If this is a seriously intended plan anyhow. Not a given.

[Angel of Death]

The rehabilitation plan will be financed and led by countries acceptable to Israel

And why exactly would the international community - and Arab states in particular - be willing to pick up the tab again without even a token prospect for any long-term solution to the overall conflict? Or is this the part where Israel effectively blackmails the world in doing so to avoid a Gazan Holodomor?

[All Along The Watchtower]

Prison for himself and sanctions on Israel?

[CityofSinners]

This plan has more holes then swiss cheese.

Who exactly are these people with no ties to groups hostile to Israel that are supposed to run Gaza? Anyone taking the job will be seen as collaborating. Which undermines their ability to actually govern and make them a target for terrorist organizations.
Without IDF protection nobody will risk taking the job. With IDF protection they will be seen even more as a front for the IDF and not be trusted.
The USA tried this in Iraq and it failed miserably.

How would you close the border with Egypt while also bringing in the necessary aid for the population?
Where are all the teachers for the "de-radicalisation" program coming from? Why would arab countries take this job without anything in return?

Why would the international community and arab countries pay for the reconstruction of Gaza without any steps towards a two state solution?

[Silent Hunter]

The fact that the IDF withdrew from northern Gaza and is in the process of withdrawing from Khan Yunis shows that it isn't a serious plan, it's just an excuse to justify prolonging the war indefinitely so that Netanyahu doesn't get removed from office or sent to jail.

How much of that is an actual withdrawal and how much of that is rotating units out so they can rest?

[Indy Texas]

The fact that the IDF withdrew from northern Gaza and is in the process of withdrawing from Khan Yunis shows that it isn't a serious plan, it's just an excuse to justify prolonging the war indefinitely so that Netanyahu doesn't get removed from office or sent to jail.

Most likely this will be the equivalent of Bush's plan for post-invasion occupation and reconstruction in Iraq: skimp on the number of troops and spend as little money as possible, to keep the voters at bay, keep from blowing up the budget, and focus the IDF's resources on what Bibi's coalition actually cares most about - the protection of the West Bank settlements. It will drag on, won't work and may result in an organization worse than Hamas coming about (see: getting rid of Saddam Hussein and getting ISIS a few years later).

It's the best they can do.

Israel will not allow Gaza to build an army to kill Jews.  That much is obvious.

For this reason, Israel must prevent Gazans from organizing into an army, from building military infrastructure, and from acquiring weapons.  This requires a physical presence in Gaza.

Obviously the international community is going to bitch and moan and say that Israel actually should leave Gaza alone and let the Palestinians pinky promise never again to reform Hamas (just like in 2005).  The pressure means Israel can't just annex Gaza and stay there indefinitely.  So instead what they need to do is create a situation where even after they leave, the odds of Hamas 2.0 are as low as possible.

How do you do this?  By enacting a cultural shift.  Get rid of all the schoolbooks that say Jews literally invented dying just to kill Arabs.  Deradicalize, deradicalize, deradicalize.  And try to present yourselves as the good guys as much as possible. Naturally this is difficult when there will be constant attempts to form terrorist bands and kill Jews.  But you do the best you can.

I don't really see any other way around this unless the international community is willing to step in and help out.

Gaza is too much of a mess for Israel to trust the Palestinian Authority to take care of this.

Israel had the opportunity to do that from 1967 until the Unilateral Disengagement in 2005—nearly forty years—and did not do so.

If Israel had really been that bothered by textbooks that reprinted Protocols of the Elders of Zion propaganda, they'd have given them textbooks that didn't say those things instead of forcing Palestinians to rely on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other sources for funding, curriculum and materials.

This didn't happen because Israel's preferred option was for there to be antisemitic canards in schoolbooks so that they could complain about the antisemitic canards in schoolbooks and cite them as another excuse for why they can't be expected to come to the negotiating table.

[GeneralMacArthur]

Israel had the opportunity to do that from 1967 until the Unilateral Disengagement in 2005—nearly forty years—and did not do so.

If Israel had really been that bothered by textbooks that reprinted Protocols of the Elders of Zion propaganda, they'd have given them textbooks that didn't say those things instead of forcing Palestinians to rely on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other sources for funding, curriculum and materials.

This didn't happen because Israel's preferred option was for there to be antisemitic canards in schoolbooks so that they could complain about the antisemitic canards in schoolbooks and cite them as another excuse for why they can't be expected to come to the negotiating table.

Do you actually believe that Israel encouraged Palestinian children to believe that Jews did 9/11, because they wanted Palestinian children to grow up hating them, so they could use that as an excuse not to come to the negotiating table (which they did come to on numerous occasions over the time period you describe)?  Like seriously, the lengths people have to go to twist themselves in knots to come up with an anti-Israel position.  Israeli textbooks don't teach their kids that Palestinians invented genital herpes or whatever.  Like this absurd, ridiculous, intentionally-manufactured hate only ever goes in one direction.

[Indy Texas]

Israel had the opportunity to do that from 1967 until the Unilateral Disengagement in 2005—nearly forty years—and did not do so.

If Israel had really been that bothered by textbooks that reprinted Protocols of the Elders of Zion propaganda, they'd have given them textbooks that didn't say those things instead of forcing Palestinians to rely on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other sources for funding, curriculum and materials.

This didn't happen because Israel's preferred option was for there to be antisemitic canards in schoolbooks so that they could complain about the antisemitic canards in schoolbooks and cite them as another excuse for why they can't be expected to come to the negotiating table.

Do you actually believe that Israel encouraged Palestinian children to believe that Jews did 9/11, because they wanted Palestinian children to grow up hating them, so they could use that as an excuse not to come to the negotiating table (which they did come to on numerous occasions over the time period you describe)?  Like seriously, the lengths people have to go to twist themselves in knots to come up with an anti-Israel position.  Israeli textbooks don't teach their kids that Palestinians invented genital herpes or whatever.  Like this absurd, ridiculous, intentionally-manufactured hate only ever goes in one direction.

Why did Israel keep giving money to Hamas all through that time period?

[Upper Canada Tory]

The fact that the IDF withdrew from northern Gaza and is in the process of withdrawing from Khan Yunis shows that it isn't a serious plan, it's just an excuse to justify prolonging the war indefinitely so that Netanyahu doesn't get removed from office or sent to jail.

How much of that is an actual withdrawal and how much of that is rotating units out so they can rest?

Yea, it seems like the partial withdrawal from northern Gaza was meant to focus troops on capturing Khan Younis and the current partial withdrawal from Khan Yunis is meant to focus troops on capturing Rafah.

[Upper Canada Tory]

The post-war Gaza plan is worth a try, but deradicalization programs and rebuilding efforts that involve other countries have mixed effectiveness, if we look at historical precedents. Also there should be a plan to get out of Gaza in the long term, or at least restore autonomy (like re-establishing the Palestinian Authority in the strip).

[AtorBoltox]

Israel had the opportunity to do that from 1967 until the Unilateral Disengagement in 2005—nearly forty years—and did not do so.

If Israel had really been that bothered by textbooks that reprinted Protocols of the Elders of Zion propaganda, they'd have given them textbooks that didn't say those things instead of forcing Palestinians to rely on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other sources for funding, curriculum and materials.

This didn't happen because Israel's preferred option was for there to be antisemitic canards in schoolbooks so that they could complain about the antisemitic canards in schoolbooks and cite them as another excuse for why they can't be expected to come to the negotiating table.

Do you actually believe that Israel encouraged Palestinian children to believe that Jews did 9/11, because they wanted Palestinian children to grow up hating them, so they could use that as an excuse not to come to the negotiating table (which they did come to on numerous occasions over the time period you describe)?  Like seriously, the lengths people have to go to twist themselves in knots to come up with an anti-Israel position.  Israeli textbooks don't teach their kids that Palestinians invented genital herpes or whatever.  Like this absurd, ridiculous, intentionally-manufactured hate only ever goes in one direction.

Why did Israel keep giving money to Hamas all through that time period?

Because if they didn't subsidize the elected government of Gaza people like you would say "Israel is starving the Palestinian people"

[Indy Texas]

Israel had the opportunity to do that from 1967 until the Unilateral Disengagement in 2005—nearly forty years—and did not do so.

If Israel had really been that bothered by textbooks that reprinted Protocols of the Elders of Zion propaganda, they'd have given them textbooks that didn't say those things instead of forcing Palestinians to rely on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and other sources for funding, curriculum and materials.

This didn't happen because Israel's preferred option was for there to be antisemitic canards in schoolbooks so that they could complain about the antisemitic canards in schoolbooks and cite them as another excuse for why they can't be expected to come to the negotiating table.

Do you actually believe that Israel encouraged Palestinian children to believe that Jews did 9/11, because they wanted Palestinian children to grow up hating them, so they could use that as an excuse not to come to the negotiating table (which they did come to on numerous occasions over the time period you describe)?  Like seriously, the lengths people have to go to twist themselves in knots to come up with an anti-Israel position.  Israeli textbooks don't teach their kids that Palestinians invented genital herpes or whatever.  Like this absurd, ridiculous, intentionally-manufactured hate only ever goes in one direction.

Why did Israel keep giving money to Hamas all through that time period?

Because if they didn't subsidize the elected government of Gaza people like you would say "Israel is starving the Palestinian people"

You think that's what motivates Benjamin Netanyahu?

[Indy Texas]

The post-war Gaza plan is worth a try, but deradicalization programs and rebuilding efforts that involve other countries have mixed effectiveness, if we look at historical precedents. Also there should be a plan to get out of Gaza in the long term, or at least restore autonomy (like re-establishing the Palestinian Authority in the strip).

Israel could have done that 20 years ago but instead they chose to fund and enable Hamas to ensure that there was no unitary Palestinian government that they would have to negotiate a peace deal with.

Now it wouldn't work anyway because the Palestinian Authority has no public legitimacy at this point (in no small part because Israel continued building illegal settlements in the West Bank which the PA had no ability to stop).

Best bet at this point would be a (Muslim) third country stepping in to administer (not Egypt; not Jordan).

[Upper Canada Tory]

The post-war Gaza plan is worth a try, but deradicalization programs and rebuilding efforts that involve other countries have mixed effectiveness, if we look at historical precedents. Also there should be a plan to get out of Gaza in the long term, or at least restore autonomy (like re-establishing the Palestinian Authority in the strip).

Israel could have done that 20 years ago but instead they chose to fund and enable Hamas to ensure that there was no unitary Palestinian government that they would have to negotiate a peace deal with.

Now it wouldn't work anyway because the Palestinian Authority has no public legitimacy at this point (in no small part because Israel continued building illegal settlements in the West Bank which the PA had no ability to stop).

Best bet at this point would be a (Muslim) third country stepping in to administer (not Egypt; not Jordan).

The Israelis did not fund Hamas, at least not in any conceivable interpretation of the notion during the timeline to which you are referring. I am perplexed as to why anti-Zionists constantly regurgitate this myth.

The Israelis did approve Qatari aid to Gaza, which was meant to be used for humanitarian purposes. It is well known that Hamas steals much of the aid that enters the Gaza Strip, but if anti-Zionist criticism of Israel for allowing the aid to enter Gaza were genuine, anti-Zionists would also oppose international funding to UNRWA - but they don't, so this argument is a pile of bollocks.

Also,  Israel did have peace negotiations with Fatah, even under Netanyahu, until Fatah decided to make a coalition with Hamas to sabotage the negotiations.

After this occurred, Hamas started kidnapping Israeli teenagers and the rest, as they say, is history.

The main reason the PA has no public legitimacy isn't because of settlements (the demographics of which don't necessarily prevent the existence of a Palestinian state anyway - settlers are only 20% of the West Bank's population), but because the Palestinian Authority has largely reduced security coordination with Israel allowing areas of the West Bank to become hotbeds for militant groups funded by Iran, with the Palestinian Authority losing control of the area as a result.

Also, Israel tried to protect Palestinian Authority rule in Gaza by helping Fatah in the 2006 elections, because they knew a Hamas victory would mean the Palestinian Authority gets overthrown, which is what happened.

Most Muslim countries don't want to deal with Gaza and have been offloading the responsibility for Gaza on Israel for decades simply because it's convenient for them, but you might even be right - if the Muslim world took responsibility for the mess they have contributed to in Gaza this conflict would easily be more solvable.

[CumbrianLefty]

... Surprisingly sane. But implementation will have to be sincere.
If this is a seriously intended plan anyhow. Not a given.

That is a diplomatic way of putting it, for sure.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

... Surprisingly sane. But implementation will have to be sincere.
If this is a seriously intended plan anyhow. Not a given.

That is a diplomatic way of putting it, for sure.

There are times I say I have a British sense of humor.

[Indy Texas]

The post-war Gaza plan is worth a try, but deradicalization programs and rebuilding efforts that involve other countries have mixed effectiveness, if we look at historical precedents. Also there should be a plan to get out of Gaza in the long term, or at least restore autonomy (like re-establishing the Palestinian Authority in the strip).

Israel could have done that 20 years ago but instead they chose to fund and enable Hamas to ensure that there was no unitary Palestinian government that they would have to negotiate a peace deal with.

Now it wouldn't work anyway because the Palestinian Authority has no public legitimacy at this point (in no small part because Israel continued building illegal settlements in the West Bank which the PA had no ability to stop).

Best bet at this point would be a (Muslim) third country stepping in to administer (not Egypt; not Jordan).

The Israelis did not fund Hamas, at least not in any conceivable interpretation of the notion during the timeline to which you are referring. I am perplexed as to why anti-Zionists constantly regurgitate this myth.

The Israelis did approve Qatari aid to Gaza, which was meant to be used for humanitarian purposes. It is well known that Hamas steals much of the aid that enters the Gaza Strip, but if anti-Zionist criticism of Israel for allowing the aid to enter Gaza were genuine, anti-Zionists would also oppose international funding to UNRWA - but they don't, so this argument is a pile of bollocks.

Also,  Israel did have peace negotiations with Fatah, even under Netanyahu, until Fatah decided to make a coalition with Hamas to sabotage the negotiations.

After this occurred, Hamas started kidnapping Israeli teenagers and the rest, as they say, is history.

The main reason the PA has no public legitimacy isn't because of settlements (the demographics of which don't necessarily prevent the existence of a Palestinian state anyway - settlers are only 20% of the West Bank's population), but because the Palestinian Authority has largely reduced security coordination with Israel allowing areas of the West Bank to become hotbeds for militant groups funded by Iran, with the Palestinian Authority losing control of the area as a result.

Also, Israel tried to protect Palestinian Authority rule in Gaza by helping Fatah in the 2006 elections, because they knew a Hamas victory would mean the Palestinian Authority gets overthrown, which is what happened.

Most Muslim countries don't want to deal with Gaza and have been offloading the responsibility for Gaza on Israel for decades simply because it's convenient for them, but you might even be right - if the Muslim world took responsibility for the mess they have contributed to in Gaza this conflict would easily be more solvable.

Why would the PA continue to cooperate with a government that refuses to stop illegal settlement construction, continues to demolish Palestinian homes and displace their inhabitants, and refuses to stop Israeli settlers from committing acts of violence against Palestinians comparable to that done to blacks by Redeemer Democrats in the post-Reconstruction South?

When there is an Intifada, more settlements keep getting built. When there isn't an Intifada, more settlements keep getting built. So what is the incentive structure for Palestinians? Israel doesn't want a peace deal because they can do pretty much whatever they want without one. A peace deal that drew solid lines on a map could possibly preclude that in the future.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There is zero reason for Palestinians to work with Israel unless Israel can commit to working towards a real peace agreement, whether that is a 2 state solution, a Bosnia and Herzegovina solution, or something else.

[Silent Hunter]

Why would the PA continue to cooperate with a government that refuses to stop illegal settlement construction, continues to demolish Palestinian homes and displace their inhabitants, and refuses to stop Israeli settlers from committing acts of violence against Palestinians comparable to that done to blacks by Redeemer Democrats in the post-Reconstruction South?

When there is an Intifada, more settlements keep getting built. When there isn't an Intifada, more settlements keep getting built. So what is the incentive structure for Palestinians? Israel doesn't want a peace deal because they can do pretty much whatever they want without one. A peace deal that drew solid lines on a map could possibly preclude that in the future.

One incentive is that the Palestinian Authority doesn't get much money without them - Palestinians are reliant on employment in Israel proper and Israel collects taxes that were going to the PA.

Both of those have effectively stopped since the war started.

[Flyersfan232]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68379646

Under his plan Israel would control security indefinitely, and Palestinians with no links to groups hostile to Israel would run the territory.
The US, Israel's major ally, wants the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority (PA) to govern Gaza after the war.
But the short document - which Mr Netanyahu presented to ministers last night - makes no mention of the PA.

He envisages a "demilitarised" Gaza; Israel would be responsible for removing all military capability beyond that necessary for public order.
There would be a "Southern Closure" on the territory's border with Egypt to prevent smuggling both under- and overground.
And "de-radicalisation" programmes would be promoted in all religious, educational and welfare institutions. The document suggests Arab countries with experience of such programmes would be involved, though Mr Netanyahu has not specified which.

What do you think of this plan? Is it reasonable? Will it succeed?

good the un has proven they can’t be trusted