May 2025. The Gaza Strip finds itself engulfed in an unprecedented spiral of despair. As the Israeli army intensifies its military offensive, detailed plans emerge for a potential prolonged occupation and a radical reconfiguration of the territory. Concurrently, the civilian population, exhausted by 19 months of conflict, is pushed to the brink of famine due to an almost total blockade of humanitarian aid, triggering alarm from the international community and repeated accusations of war crimes.
The Israeli offensive in the Strip has reached a disturbing stage since the beginning of May with the Israeli government’s approval of plans envisioning a strategy aimed at deeper and more lasting control of Palestinian territory. These decisions outline an indefinite occupation of Gaza, massive population displacements, and a drastic change in the management of humanitarian aid.
At the beginning of the month, the Israeli government voted in favor of a plan to “seize the Gaza Strip” for an unspecified period. This move, if fully implemented, would represent a vast expansion of Israeli military operations in the Palestinian territory. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu subsequently announced the green light for a plan to further expand and intensify military operations. His words suggested that Israel will not limit itself to temporary incursions but will aim to maintain control of the conquered land, paving the way for a possible complete military occupation of the enclave.
The shift from targeted incursions to prolonged territorial control would mark a turning point with profound and potentially irreversible implications for Palestinian sovereignty and the stability of the entire region.
Parallel to the military expansion plans, worrying details have emerged regarding the fate of Gaza’s civilian population. The approved Israeli plan explicitly provides for the displacement of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians towards the southern areas of the Gaza Strip. This prospect immediately raised serious alarms from the United Nations and numerous human rights organizations, which warned that such a mass displacement would amount to a forced transfer, in violation of international law, and would only exacerbate an already catastrophic humanitarian crisis. An integral part of this plan would be the creation of a “humanitarian zone” in southern Gaza, intended to accommodate the displaced.
The Israelis speak of “displacement for protection” but this conceals a blatant ethnic cleansing operation. The concentration of an already exhausted population in even more restricted areas in the south raises distressing questions about the livability of such zones and the ability to manage basic humanitarian needs. According to UN data, 69% of the Gaza Strip’s territory is already subject to Israeli evacuation orders or has been incorporated into so-called security buffer zones established by Israel in recent months.
Another crucial aspect of the Israeli plans concerns the future management and distribution of humanitarian aid in Gaza. Israel has expressed its intention to impose direct control over this vital flow, motivating this choice with accusations, uncorroborated by concrete evidence, that Hamas diverts aid for its own benefit. The outlined plan involves the use of private security companies and the designation of specific areas, protected and controlled by the Israeli army, for aid distribution. Palestinians accessing such aid would be subjected to screening procedures. There has also been talk of using facial recognition technologies and an SMS alert system to inform the population about the possibility of collecting aid. This prospect is a clear and distinct violation of the fundamental principles of international law, and the UN and major international and Palestinian NGOs have publicly denounced the Israeli plans, interpreting them as an attempt to dismantle the existing aid distribution system, managed by the UN and its humanitarian partners. Control over aid distribution represents an extremely significant lever of power in a context of siege and deprivation.
The Israeli proposal is purely a military strategy that goes against all the fundamental principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence that should govern the provision of assistance.
Finally, further fueling international concerns are the increasingly explicit discussions by some sectors of the Israeli government regarding the so-called “voluntary emigration” of Palestinians from Gaza and the potential reintroduction of Israeli settlements in the Strip. Indeed, Israeli officials have contacted several third countries regarding a plan, apparently supported by the Trump administration, to transfer the population of Gaza. This proposal immediately sparked a wave of international condemnation.
Even more directly, Israel’s far-right finance minister publicly stated that the Gaza Strip will be “entirely destroyed” and that, consequently, its Palestinian inhabitants “will begin to leave in large numbers for third countries.”
The formal Israeli announcement regarding the seizure of Gaza concretely raises the possibility of re-establishing Israeli settlements within the territory, from which Israel withdrew in 2005. The United Nations office for the exercise of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people has explicitly rejected any proposal aimed at displacing Palestinians from Gaza under the deceptive guise of so-called “voluntary migration” or “reconstruction” plans that would aim to consolidate the illegal occupation. It has also been reported that Israel has established a special government office tasked with preparing and facilitating “voluntary departure to third countries”. Documents indicate that Sudan, Somalia, and the separatist region of Somaliland have been contacted as possible destinations for Gazan Palestinians. The reactions of these countries have been mixed or outright refusals.
The use of the term “voluntary” in a context of siege, indiscriminate bombings, and such vast destruction appears blatantly misleading. The re-establishment of Israeli settlements in Gaza would constitute a serious violation of international law, perhaps definitively undermining the already faint prospects for an independent and sovereign Palestinian state.
Dan ROMEO