Haaretz Reports: Israel’s “Dangerous and Unrealistic” Gamble in Gaza
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz, in an article by sociologist Yagil Levy, warns that israel’s new plan for the future of the Gaza Strip is a dangerous gamble with no real or political foundation, according to reports from webangah News Agency citing Al Jazeera via Mehr News Agency.
Levy described Tel aviv’s project for Gaza as “dangerous and entirely detached from reality.” He noted that the plan, backed by then-President Donald Trump’s administration, envisions transforming Gaza into a region without sovereignty. It would be partially managed by a multinational force tasked with disarming Hamas.
The analyst pointed out that triumphant disarmament efforts in past conflicts-such as those in Northern Ireland, Mozambique, El Salvador, and post-World War II Germany-only occurred under remarkable conditions like comprehensive peace agreements, political integration, or unconditional surrender.
he argued none of these conditions exist in Gaza today: there is neither a political agreement nor stable institutions; furthermore, Hamas lacks any incentive to relinquish it’s weapons.
Haaretz forecasted that the planned return of hundreds of thousands of refugees would put them under the authority of an illegitimate external power possibly administered by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair acting as an international commissioner. This occurs while parts of Gaza are expected to remain directly controlled by Israel under the pretext of creating “security zones.”
Levy warned this scenario would likely stir increased anger and provoke armed groups operating outside any official framework. As such, he said the scheme presents serious dangers for Israel because it risks creating a buffer zone lacking real sovereignty and governed by an unmotivated international force.
The newspaper concluded this situation will pose a dilemma for Israel: Tel Aviv must either tolerate escalating chaos or resume military operations in areas allegedly controlled by this force-an outcome that could lead to both military disaster and moral scandal.
Levy viewed the project as reflecting an American naivety rooted in illusions about “social engineering” among people stripped of their sovereignty and humanity.
