Israel's military will "take control" of Gaza City under a new plan approved by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's security cabinet, touching off a wave of criticism Friday from both inside and outside the country.

Nearly two years into the war in Gaza, Netanyahu faces mounting pressure to secure a truce to pull the territory's more than two million people back from the brink of famine and free the hostages held by Palestinian militants.

Israel's foe Hamas denounced the plan to expand the fighting as a "new war crime", while staunch Israeli ally Germany took the extraordinary step of halting military exports out of concern they could be used in Gaza.

Under the newly approved plan to "defeat" Hamas, the Israeli army "will prepare to take control of Gaza City while distributing humanitarian assistance to the civilian population outside combat zones", the premier's office said Friday.

Before the decision, Netanyahu had said Israel planned to seize complete control of the Gaza Strip, but did not intend to govern it.

"We don't want to keep it," the premier told US network Fox News on Thursday, adding Israel wanted a "security perimeter" and to hand the Palestinian territory to "Arab forces that will govern it properly without threatening us".

Israel occupied Gaza from 1967, but withdrew its troops and settlers in 2005.

READ MORE: https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250808-israel-to-take-control-of-gaza-city-after-approving-new-war-plan

================

US global advisory firm Boston Consulting Group (BCG) modelled the resettlement of around a quarter of all Palestinians to other countries, including Somalia, as part of plans for postwar Gaza, the Financial Times has reported.

In February, US President Donald Trump suggested moving more than 2 million Palestinians out of the war-torn enclave into neighboring countries to turn it into the “Riviera of the Middle East.”

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has praised the idea, said on Thursday that the Jewish state will commit to a full military takeover of Gaza, to later hand it over to a transitional Arab government.

BCG’s postwar redevelopment model for Gaza envisioned relocating approximately 25% of its population to multiple nations, including Somalia and the breakaway region of Somaliland, “despite civil conflict and high levels of poverty in the region,” the FT wrote on Thursday, citing people familiar with the proposal.

Washington has held preliminary talks with Somaliland about a broader deal that would establish a US military base there in exchange for the recognition of sovereignty, the FT wrote. Accepting relocated Palestinians was one of points discussed, according to the newspaper.

BCG first developed its relocation model in March, working for a group of Israeli businessmen who were devising plans for postwar Gaza, the newspaper wrote. It reportedly allowed for a number of scenarios and estimates for the cost of what was described as a “temporary relocation program.” 

The advisory firm’s calculations were included in slides intended for the US administration, other governments and “stakeholders,” the FT reported. The slide deck envisaged that the majority of the relocated Palestinians would not return. BCG earlier this year disavowed the controversial project and said it had fired the employees who worked on it.

Key regional players have refused to participate in Trump’s relocation plan, which has been criticized by a number of Washington’s European allies, including France, Spain, and Germany. The UN has stated that the move would amount to ethnic cleansing.

https://www.rt.com/africa/622643-us-model-resettling-palestinians/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

The Endgame in Gaza
The U.S. may not be able to influence the outcome of the Israel–Gaza war, but it can work to avoid some of the consequences.

by Jude Russo

The world is a big, complicated thing, almost unfathomably old and full of surprises. There’s only so much you can expect from frail human agency in such a wild place.

So that’s why we need to speak, realistically, about what’s going to happen in Israel–Palestine. American popular opinion may be souring on Israeli operations in the Gaza Strip; there may be real horror afoot there. But what happens has little to do with American popular opinion, or humanitarian concerns, or justice. Israel is going to annex Gaza. It is going to herd the Gaza Palestinians into the “humanitarian city” at Rafah. It will, more slowly, finish the work of annexing the West Bank. There is no interest in the two-state solution in Israel, and little more in Washington, and I somehow doubt that France is going to send troops to back their diplomatic posturing. It would take direct American intervention to prevent these things, and the American people have little will for intervening on the ground, let alone “for Hamas,” which is how such a move would be perceived. Nor would such a move be prudent. We need fewer Americans in the Middle East, not more.

There are simply no plausible alternatives. Palestinian refugee populations have been enormously destabilizing to their host countries, and there’s no appetite in the region for them to be relocated. Egypt is desperately poor and run by a fragile junta; they have no interest in taking a large, disruptive Palestinian population. Jordan already has almost more Palestinian refugees than it can handle. The Gulf States? No room, no inclination. The pipe dream of relocating the Palestinians to Libya is so removed from reality that it boggles the mind: Libya is not a country, but an arena for a long-running civil war, and such a relocation would depend on American sealift capacity—logistically difficult and politically unimaginable. And then, once they’re there, what next? Libya barely has the infrastructure to serve its current inhabitants. Starving outside Tripoli is not appreciably better than starving outside Gaza City. It is staggering that allegedly functional adults outside of care homes could float such a preposterous fantasy with a straight face.

So it’s going to happen, will we, nil we. What are we going to do about it is the relevant question. It’s not going to be popular with the rest of the neighborhood. If we would like to salvage what we can of our diplomatic leverage—and, realistically, we must start relying on diplomacy more and strength less in the Middle East if we want to make even a bare gesture toward contesting the Indo-Pacific—it’s necessary to put daylight between U.S. and Israeli policy. Ending military aid is the no-brainer first step. Israel is quite capable of fulfilling its war aims in Gaza without the carousel of corporate welfare for American defense contractors. Recognizing the Palestinian state would not change facts on the ground, but would be a handy piece of paper to hide behind when dealing with other regional actors. Similarly, insisting on humanitarian conditions would be worthwhile PR, although American leverage to enforce them will be minimal. Telling Mike Johnson to stop visiting illegal West Bank settlements might be in order, too. (Indeed, the executive branch could stand to be a little more jealous of its constitutional monopoly on foreign relations—why do congressmen get to freelance in sensitive diplomatic zones from Jerusalem to Taipei?) Israel would remain vastly superior to its neighbors in force of arms, but the U.S. would no longer have to deal with the constant diplomatic difficulty of being seen as the underwriter of Israeli aggression while trying to broker its own retrenchment from the region. 

There are a variety of ugly things happening all over the world all the time. The difference between those episodes and Israel–Palestine is that the Burmese “democratic” government (or whatever remnant of it is still hiding from the junta) does not expect the U.S. to support its program of making the Rohingya a thing of the past, and the U.S. is not constantly pulled by a perverse magnetism and 20 years of bad policy into every squabble in Southeast Asia. (Not anymore, anyhow.) The American soul, nursed on decades of the ideology of “the good superpower,” is sick at the idea that nothing can be done to stop brutality, especially somewhere that has so obsessed our national consciousness for so long. But it is time to grow up.

The U.S. can’t make Israel do anything in particular. But it can separate Israeli policy from American policy. Washing our hands and walking away is, grimly, the best plausible way forward for American national interests. This part of the world has little to do with us, and moral horror is not the basis for sound policy. What will happen will happen. It is our job now to make sure it’s not a problem for America.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-endgame-in-gaza/

READ FROM TOP.

YOURDEMOCRACY.NET RECORDS HISTORY AS IT SHOULD BE — NOT AS THE WESTERN MEDIA WRONGLY REPORTS IT.

         Gus Leonisky

         POLITICAL CARTOONIST SINCE 1951.

STOP SUPPLYING WEAPONS TO ISRAEL WOULD BE A START.....