[KurtFF8]

Source

Israeli minister calls for return of Jewish settlers to the Gaza Strip after the war

Israel’s finance minister, Bezalel Smotrich, has called for the return of Jewish settlers to the Gaza Strip after the war and said Gaza’s Palestinian population should be encouraged to emigrate, according to AFP.

“To have security, we must control the territory,” Smotrich told Israel’s Army Radio in response to a question about the prospect of re-establishing settlements in Gaza.

“In order to control the territory militarily for a long time, we need a civilian presence.”

The Israeli government under Benjamin Netanyahu has not officially suggested plans to evict Gazans or to send Jewish settlers back to the territory since the war broke out on 7 October.

Israel unilaterally withdrew the last of its troops and settlers in 2005, ending a presence inside Gaza that began in 1967, but maintained near complete control over the territory’s borders.

All settlements on occupied Palestinian land are regarded as illegal under international law, regardless of whether they were approved by Israel.

In case there was any doubt about whether what Israel is doing is a genocide or not, this makes it crystal clear.

[Rich]

In case there was any doubt about whether what Israel is doing is a genocide or not, this makes it crystal clear.

How in God's name is that a genocide? No one cares about genocide in the same way no one cares about the American Constitution. Obviously people care a lot about what gets labelled as genocide in the same way that Americans care a lot about labeling themselves as humble servants of the Constitution and their political enemies as usurpers of the Constitution.

[KurtFF8]

How in God's name is that a genocide? No one cares about genocide in the same way no one cares about the American Constitution. Obviously people care a lot about what gets labelled as genocide in the same way that Americans care a lot about labeling themselves as humble servants of the Constitution and their political enemies as usurpers of the Constitution.

Some key components of genocide often include: 1) mass murder of people of a specific group by a hostile state 2) seizing their land for the citizens of that hostile to colonize

[Deutschmania]

I don't feel that it's a final solution to the Palestinian question , as there was to the Jewish question , during World War 2 . However , I do think that the actions of the Israeli government constitutes ethnic cleansing . And furthermore , especially as someone who identifies with Humanistic Judaism , I wish that the shalom ( peace ) of Rosh Hashanah would be extended to the Palestinians. If only it could be so simple as to dip a slice of apple into honey and all would be made right between the Jews and all other inhabitants in the land .
https://www.wrmea.org/israel-palestine/i-saw-israels-final-solution-to-the-palestinian-problem-in-lebanon-41-years-ago.html

[Deutschmania]

From an article I just now read , both U.S. President Biden , and a prominent Reform rabbi , have condemned the remarks of Ben -Gvir .

The Biden administration condemned calls by two Israeli government ministers for Palestinians to be removed from the Gaza Strip.

Rabbi Rick Jacobs, the president of the Union for Reform Judaism, also condemned the call. The criticism comes as gaps remain between President Joe Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu over who will govern Gaza on the day after Israel’s ongoing war with Hamas, the terror group that controlled the territory prior to its Oct. 7 invasion of Israel.

While Biden has pushed for the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority to govern Gaza, Netanyahu has said that Israeli forces will remain there following the fighting.

Netanyahu’s far-right allies, meanwhile, have pushed for the rebuilding of Israeli settlements there. Bezalel Smotrich, the finance minister who also has authority over West Bank settlements, and Itamar Ben Gvir, the national security minister, have separately in recent days called for removing much of the Palestinian population from Gaza after the war.

On Monday, Ben Gvir said the war presented an “opportunity to orchestrate an immigration project, a project to encourage the immigration of residents from Gaza to the countries of the world.”

Smotrich told Israel’s Army Radio on Sunday that he hoped Gaza’s Palestinian population would drop by at least 90 percent, The Jerusalem Post reported.

“If in Gaza there will be 100,000 or 200,000 Arabs and not 2 million the entire conversation on ‘the day after’ will look different,” he said. Smotrich heads the Religious Zionist Party, which ran on a joint slate with Ben Gvir’s party in the 2022 elections.

Neither Ben Gvir nor Smotrich is part of the three-member war cabinet led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but that did not absolve the government from responsibility, said the Biden administration’s State Department spokesman, Matthew Miller.

“This rhetoric is inflammatory and irresponsible,” he said in a statement. “We have been told repeatedly and consistently by the Government of Israel, including by the Prime Minister, that such statements do not reflect the policy of the Israeli government. They should stop immediately.”

Jacobs, who leads the Reform movement, the largest U.S. Jewish denomination, also condemned the statements, noting that his movement’s opposition to Smotrich predates the war.

The Reform movement took a leading role in the United States in speaking out against planned far-reaching reforms to the judiciary championed by Smotrich and others in Netanyahu’s government. Israel’s Supreme Court this week scuttled those plans for the time being.

“We condemn Israeli Minister Smotrich’s call for ethnic cleansing,” Jacobs wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter. “Along with most major American Jewish leaders, we have refused to meet with him to sanction his politics and beliefs.”

Ben Gvir in a post published after Miller’s statement said Israel “was not yet a star on the American flag,” and suggested that settlers evacuated in 2005, when Israel withdrew, would move in to replace the Palestinians. “We will do what is right for the state of Israel: the emigration of hundreds of thousands from Gaza will allow residents of the border area to return home and live in security, and will protect Israeli soldiers.” Jewish Telegraphic Agency

[KurtFF8]

Biden's condemnation is quite meaningless as he's not only providing the military support for Israel to carry out its genocide, but also keeps trying to provide political cover for Israel.

[wat0n]

Israel's Minister of Defense outlined the long-term goals of the war:

Gallant envisions multinational force leading Gaza rebuilding, though allies have made clear it’ll be contingent on two states

By TAL SCHNEIDER and JACOB MAGID
Today, 10:07 pm

Presenting his plan for post-war Gaza, Defense Minister Yoav Gallant outlines a “four-cornered civilian square,” including Israel, the Palestinians, a multinational task force and Egypt.

Israel “will provide information to guide civilian operations” and also carry out inspection of goods entering Gaza in order to ensure that no weapons are smuggled into the enclave, Gallant says.

A Palestinian entity in charge of governing Gaza will build on existing administrative mechanisms to help restore operations in the Strip, Gallant says.

A multinational force led by the United States in partnership with Israel’s European and Arab allies will take responsibility for the reconstruction of Gaza after the war, the defense minister envisions.

Those allies have repeatedly made clear, however, that their support for the reconstruction of Gaza is conditioned on the Palestinian Authority being the governing body that reunites the Strip with the West Bank and that the process be part of a broader initiative aimed at an eventual two-state solution.

Gallant carefully avoids mentioning the PA at all in his plan, amid Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s repeated rejection of the body led by President Mahmoud Abbas.

US and Israeli officials have told The Times of Israel that Netanyahu’s aides have privately expressed their support for an “RPA” or “reformed PA,” eventually governing Gaza, while the premier himself has not spoken publicly about this idea amid fears of alienating far-right ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir.

Gallant’s description of “existing administrative mechanisms” is similar to Netanyahu’s talk of a “civil administration” — both terms widely understood to mean PA-affiliated bodies.

But more unpopular than talk of a PA-controlled Gaza Strip after October 7 would be an Israeli commitment to move toward a two-state solution, and Gallant did not specify how Israel plans to recruit allies abroad to help it rebuild the Strip without taking steps toward Palestinian statehood.

As for the fourth corner of Gallant’s civilian square, the defense minister highlights Egypt, which he says will remain a major actor, given that it border with Gaza. “We maintain an ongoing dialogue with Egyptian partners about interim and long-term solutions,” he says.

[Pants-of-dog]

So Israel wants the status quo and also for western countries to pay for the damage caused by Israel.

[wat0n]

The status quo doesn't include Hamas governing Gaza.

This would help restart the peace process.

[Pants-of-dog]

The status quo doesn't include Hamas governing Gaza.

If Hamas is the current governing administration in Gaza, then it is.

But Israel wants some puppet governor, as settler colonialism often does, so in that respect, Israel wants change.

The point is that Israel wants to keep its opportunities open when it comes to future settlement, since it cannot openly start settling immediately without being found guilty of war crimes.

[wat0n]

If Hamas is the current governing administration in Gaza, then it is.

But Israel wants some puppet governor, as settler colonialism often does, so in that respect, Israel wants change.

The point is that Israel wants to keep its opportunities open when it comes to future settlement, since it cannot openly start settling immediately without being found guilty of war crimes.

Or maybe Israel wants to defeat a government that carried out a massacre against its population on October 7. I know you justify it, you wish it was repeated as many times as possible, but this seems like a big issue.

Another thing Gallant said is that reconstruction would be overseen by a joint US-Arab international force so this narrative makes even less sense. Israel would not keep a military presence inside Gaza under his vision, at least.

[Pants-of-dog]

Or maybe Israel wants to defeat a government that carried out a massacre against its population on October 7.

Maybe, but it is irrelevant.

What we are discussing is Israel’s plans for Gaza.

Another thing Gallant said is that reconstruction would be overseen by a joint US-Arab international force so this narrative makes even less sense. Israel would not keep a military presence inside Gaza under his vision, at least.

That is not what the quoted article says.

It would be done by a consortium of Israel’s allies, and the IDF would control the borders and presumably still occupy the territory in a military fashion as it does now.

[wat0n]

Maybe, but it is irrelevant.

What we are discussing is Israel’s plans for Gaza.

It is not irrelevant for Israel to aim to prevent another massacre.

That is not what the quoted article says.

It would be done by a consortium of Israel’s allies, and the IDF would control the borders and presumably still occupy the territory in a military fashion as it does now.

No, the IDF would control the borders but it would not rule over the territory. How would Israel send settlers to Gaza without boots on the ground?

[Pants-of-dog]

It is not irrelevant for Israel to aim to prevent another massacre.

This is not an action or a policy. It is a justification for an action or policy.

The justification for the action is irrelevant.

The action is what we are talking about.

No, the IDF would control the borders but it would not rule over the territory.

A puppet government would be installed, according to the quoted article.

How would Israel send settlers to Gaza without boots on the ground?

Yes, exactly.

The current massacre of civilians by the IDF is one way to get boots on the ground. Then there will be a period of “stabilization” and “rebuilding”, where boots will have to stay there on the proverbial ground. Then, since the underlying material context has not changed and settler colonialism will still be en vogue, the IDF will continue to be invited in by the puppet government to quell violence.

And so on. Until settlers move in.

[wat0n]

This is not an action or a policy. It is a justification for an action or policy.

The justification for the action is irrelevant.

The action is what we are talking about.

The justification is not irrelevant. For example, you justify the October 7 massacre and now pretend us to believe this is irrelevant?

A puppet government would be installed, according to the quoted article.

No, a government sponsored by the international community would be installed.

Yes, exactly.

The current massacre of civilians by the IDF is one way to get boots on the ground. Then there will be a period of “stabilization” and “rebuilding”, where boots will have to stay there on the proverbial ground. Then, since the underlying material context has not changed and settler colonialism will still be en vogue, the IDF will continue to be invited in by the puppet government to quell violence.

And so on. Until settlers move in.

Actually this would be done primarily by the international force, with the IDF intervening only if necessary. There's no other way for the international community to manage the reconstruction.

[KurtFF8]

It is not irrelevant for Israel to aim to prevent another massacre.

As Israel literally carries out massacres every single day.

[wat0n]

As Israel literally carries out massacres every single day.

No, not really.

But please let me know when Israeli soldiers take Palestinian women as trophies.

[Pants-of-dog]

The justification is not irrelevant.

The justifications for ethnic cleansing in Palestine are “defense” and “security”.

Do the ends justify the means for you?

No, a government sponsored by the international community would be installed.

Lol. No.

In terms of “the international community”, it will be a government sponsored by Israeli allies who have already aligned themselves with the interests of the Israeli government.

Actually this would be done primarily by the international force, with the IDF intervening only if necessary. There's no other way for the international community to manage the reconstruction.

I have no idea how any of this is plausible. It seems like a pie in the sky idea where you also expect Palestinians to hold your hand and give you flowers and maybe share a soft drink and/or important lesson with you.

How do you see the angles? That means “how do you envision the different players benefiting in their different ways from this scenario in a way that they do not already”?

As for female Palestinians taken as trophies, Israel currently has 32 female prisoners detained for political reasons, and 160 kids. This is almost as much as the hostages taken by Hams.

[wat0n]

The justifications for ethnic cleansing in Palestine are “defense” and “security”.

Do the ends justify the means for you?

No, and no ethnic cleansing is taking place.

Although I understand why you would think that: You do believe the ends justify the means, in this case the end (the massacre of as many Israelis as possible) justify the means (making accusations of ethnic cleansing up). All based on Marx's maxims about Jews.

Lol. No.

In terms of “the international community”, it will be a government sponsored by Israeli allies who have already aligned themselves with the interests of the Israeli government.

So what you are saying is that it would be an internationally sponsored government that would invite Israelis to settle Gaza?

I have no idea how any of this is plausible. It seems like a pie in the sky idea where you also expect Palestinians to hold your hand and give you flowers and maybe share a soft drink and/or important lesson with you.

How do you see the angles? That means “how do you envision the different players benefiting in their different ways from this scenario in a way that they do not already”?

Winners:

US: Gets rid of an Iranian ally that can be used to destabilize the region.

Sunni Arab states: Also get rid of an Iranian ally, one that also represents an independent threat to their governments. Particularly for Egypt.

Moderate Palestinians: Can finally reunify, restrictions can be lifted and can negotiate with Israel.

Moderate Israelis: Can finally have someone to negotiate peace with.

Losers:

Irredentist Israelis: Would not be able to use Hamas' rule over Gaza as an excuse to suggest negotiations are pointless.

Irredentist Palestinians: Would be unable to launch any major armed actions against Israel or anyone else for that matter.

Iran, Qatar, Turkey: They lose an ally and therefore influence over the Palestinians and to a lesser extent Israel.

What I don't get is how exactly would Israeli settlers be able to move into Gaza without Palestinian consent. Doing this requires a permanent Israeli military presence to provide security to the settlers (exactly like in the West Bank) and that's already been ruled out by Gallant.

As for female Palestinians taken as trophies, Israel currently has 32 female prisoners detained for political reasons, and 160 kids. This is almost as much as the hostages taken by Hams.

By "political reasons" you mean stabbings, shootings and worse? Very weird way to define it.

[KurtFF8]

No, not really.

Yes, really. Have you really not been following the news about the daily massacres?

But please let me know when Israeli soldiers take Palestinian women as trophies.

The IDF has taken tons of innocent Palestinians hostage indeed, many are women.