Israel's first occupation of Gaza was a disaster. Going back would be even worse

Before Ariel Sharon became Israel’s 11th prime minister in March 2001, the former general had earned notoriety for his forceful backing of illegal Jewish settlements on Arab land from Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula to the West Bank. Yet even “the Bulldozer” eventually came to baulk at the costly, violent and unsustainable occupation of the Gaza Strip , pulling Israeli settlers and soldiers out in 2005. This unilateral disengagement was not done out of compassion for the 2.2 million Palestinians living in Gaza at the time. Only two years later, Israel imposed an indefinite blockade on the enclave, trapping and impoverishing its civilian population. Nevertheless, Mr Sharon had correctly deduced that maintaining a troop presence in Gaza was a dangerous and unaffordable security risk. Israeli conscripts – badly needed to quell Palestinian resistance in the West Bank – were sidelined into facilitating the settlement dreams of religiously inspired ultra-nationalists , many of them foreign-born. As international pressure and condemnation mounted, it was clear even to militarists like Mr Sharon that the Israeli state had more to lose by appeasing fewer than 10,000 settlers than by ending its almost 40-year occupation of the coastal enclave. Now, almost 20 years after withdrawing troops from Gaza, Israel’s current government seems intent on walking back into the same trap laid by extremists. A meeting of Israel’s security cabinet on Sunday reportedly endorsed military plans to capture and hold the ruined territory while moving its remaining Palestinian population south into a purported safe zone. Israel’s ultra-nationalist Finance Minister, Bezalel Smotrich, was more candid about what he and his supporters want to see: a victory in which Gaza is "entirely destroyed" as Palestinians "start to leave in great numbers". This chimes with the stated position of several leading Israeli politicians who have made no secret of their desire to re-establish Jewish settlements on Palestinian land in Gaza. Whereas Mr Sharon eventually concluded that such a project was not worth the security risks and political losses that came with it, Mr Smotrich and his allies, the revanchist political inheritors of the exiled and embittered Gaza settler movement, seem determined to not only repeat this mistake but to compound it. Should such an unconscionable scenario come to pass, new Israeli settlements would be built – literally – on the remains of the tens of thousands of Palestinians killed in more than 18 months of indiscriminate, collective punishment for the Hamas attacks of October 7, 2023. This is nothing to say of how neighbouring Arab states such as Egypt and Jordan will react to a new wave of Palestinian refugees, many of whom would have been displaced by Israel more than once. That leading Israeli figures feel comfortable in putting forward such ideas amid a weeks-long blockade of humanitarian aid into Gaza and shortly before next week’s commemoration of Nakba Day is as inflammatory as it is audacious. It may be the case that the international outcry it has generated – France and China are among the foreign governments that have expressed concern about Israel's latest moves – might lead to a re-think, especially as US President Donald Trump prepares to visit the Middle East. If there is any potential for hope, it is in the fact that plans to retake, occupy and clear Gaza of its people are simply too egregious for an international community that has grown frustrated at Israeli impunity. Mr Trump’s trip to the region will be an opportunity to impress upon the US leader the need to avoid this further calamity, not only in Gaza but in the West Bank, where areas of Palestinian autonomy have been divided by Israeli soldiers and settlers into a collection of powerless bantustans. In April 2004, Mr Sharon said his disengagement plan would “create a new and better reality for the state of Israel”. He was only half right. An end to settlement activity, an end to military occupation and an end to the displacement and starvation of Palestinians would do more to create that “better reality” for Israel by opening the way to a negotiated settlement. Embracing a permanent return of settlement and troops will put a peaceful future on hold, perhaps permanently.