Outrage Mounts Over Controversial Plan to Confine Gazans to “Humanitarian City”

Tel Aviv, Israel – A contentious proposal by Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz to establish a temporary “humanitarian city” to house the entire population of Gaza has ignited a firestorm of criticism both domestically and internationally. The plan, which emerged amidst ongoing ceasefire negotiations, suggests screening and confining nearly all of Gaza’s 2.1 million residents to a designated area in the ruins of Rafah, with strict conditions on movement.

The proposal, reportedly discussed in a meeting with Israeli reporters, envisions a 60-day ceasefire as a prerequisite for implementing the plan. During this pause, a vast encampment would be constructed to accommodate hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, with the IDF providing external security and international bodies managing the area. Aid distribution points would be established within the zone.

However, the plan has been met with fierce opposition. Human rights groups, academics, and legal experts have decried the proposal, with many drawing chilling parallels to “concentration camps.” Critics argue that such a move, which would restrict movement and potentially involve forced relocation, could constitute a grave violation of international law, amounting to ethnic cleansing and potentially genocide. Human rights lawyer Baroness Helena Kennedy KC explicitly stated that the plan, coupled with Israel’s actions, leads her to conclude that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza.

The proposal has also reportedly caused friction within the Israeli government. Reports suggest that the head of the IDF, Lt Gen Eyal Zamir, has expressed reservations, emphasizing that the army is not obligated to forcibly transfer civilians. Some accounts indicate a heated exchange between Gen Zamir and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over the matter. The strategic vacuum concerning Gaza’s future post-conflict has apparently created space for such proposals to gain traction, despite internal opposition.

Adding to the internal dissent, IDF reservist Yotam Vilk, who has served 270 days in Gaza, stated his refusal to continue reserve duty, calling the war strategy aimless and the potential displacement of civilians a “war crime.” Vilk, who is part of the Soldiers for the Hostages group advocating for an end to the war to secure the release of remaining hostages, believes the current conflict lacks a clear end goal.

Katz has also reiterated his interest in encouraging the “voluntary emigration” of Palestinians from Gaza, a sentiment echoed by some on the Israeli far-right, though prominent ministers like Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich have yet to formally endorse the specific camp proposal, perhaps indicating a wait-and-see approach to gauge its seriousness or strategic utility.

Palestinian civilians in Gaza have expressed strong rejection of the plan. Sabreen, displaced from Khan Younis, affirmed her commitment to staying on their land, stating, “We are steadfast and will remain here until our last breath.” Ahmad Al Mghayar from Rafah emphasized the desire for freedom and the right to move freely on their own land.

While public opinion polls in Israel suggest a majority of Jewish Israelis may favor the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza, the international community has largely condemned Katz’s proposal. The UK Minister for the Middle East, Hamish Falconer, called the plan “appalling” and stressed the need for civilians to return to their communities and for a pathway to lasting peace. Israel’s foreign ministry has strongly refuted the “concentration camp” allegations, calling them “deeply offensive” and asserting adherence to the Geneva Convention.

The controversial plan has also created a new obstacle in the ongoing ceasefire talks in Doha, with Palestinian sources reporting that the Hamas delegation is alarmed by the proposal, further complicating efforts to reach a resolution.

Additional reporting by Joyce Liu and John Landy