A profound and urgent debate is currently unfolding within Israel's highest political and security echelons, centered on the future of the Gaza Strip. The core question revolves around two stark choices: maintaining the precarious current situation or embarking on a renewed, decisive war aimed at the complete eradication of Hamas. This critical discussion is fueled by alarming reports from reserve soldiers on the ground, indicating a resurgence of the terrorist organization, which appears to be rebuilding its capabilities beneath the surface.
This analysis draws heavily from an article titled "Will Israel reoccupy Gaza?" by Amit Segal, published on February 14. Segal's insights reveal the deep divisions and complex considerations facing Israeli decision-makers as they confront the persistent challenges posed by Hamas.
The prevailing sentiment within Israel has shifted dramatically since October 7, fostering a strong aversion to any form of “containment” and a desire for total victory. However, the path to such a victory is fraught with significant dangers and complexities. The primary concern is the potential for a prolonged and costly military occupation. As Segal points out, "as long as Israel refuses to permanently occupy the Strip, a military operation has no way to deprive Hamas of its center of gravity, small arms." This suggests that even a renewed military campaign might not achieve its ultimate goal without a long-term presence, which carries its own set of profound risks.
The Dangers of Reoccupation
1. Prolonged Military Engagement and Casualties: A full reoccupation would inevitably lead to extended military operations, increasing the risk of casualties for both Israeli forces and Palestinian civilians. The urban landscape of Gaza, coupled with Hamas's entrenched infrastructure, including tunnels, would make such an endeavor exceptionally challenging and dangerous. The article notes that "Dismantling all the tunnels would take years. The IDF has been in Rafah for nearly two years and tunnels are still being discovered." This highlights the immense scale of the task and the potential for a protracted conflict.
2. International Condemnation and Legitimacy Crisis: A permanent reoccupation of Gaza would likely trigger widespread international condemnation, potentially isolating Israel on the global stage. Such a move could be perceived as a violation of international law and could severely damage Israel's diplomatic standing. The article alludes to this, stating that some senior ministers believe it is preferable to "remain permanently in 58% of the Strip and continue suffocating Hamas, rather than enter a war that would damage legitimacy and still fail to achieve the required result." This indicates an awareness within the Israeli leadership of the potential legitimacy crisis.
3. Governance and Humanitarian Burden: Should Israel reoccupy Gaza, it would likely assume responsibility for the governance and humanitarian needs of over two million Palestinians. This would be an enormous undertaking, straining Israel's resources and potentially diverting attention from other critical security concerns. The logistical and administrative challenges of managing a densely populated and impoverished territory would be immense, creating a significant burden on the Israeli state.
4. Resurgence of Resistance and Radicalization: A long-term occupation could inadvertently fuel further resistance and radicalization among the Palestinian population. History has shown that occupations often lead to increased resentment and a desire for liberation, potentially creating a new generation of militants. Even if Hamas's current leadership is dismantled, the underlying conditions that give rise to such groups could persist or even intensify under occupation.
5. Economic and Social Costs: The economic costs of a prolonged occupation would be staggering, encompassing military expenditures, reconstruction efforts, and humanitarian aid. Furthermore, the social fabric of both Israeli and Palestinian societies would be deeply affected, with potential for increased trauma, division, and instability.