By announcing on Thursday, August 7, his decision to deploy the Israeli army to occupy the entirety of the Gaza Strip, Benjamin Netanyahu set Israel on a path with incalculable and potentially tragic consequences. Not only for the one million residents of Gaza City, who could face forced evacuation to an unknown destination within an already devastated territory, but also for the Israeli hostages, now exposed to the worst possible risks, and for the Israeli soldiers drawn into a guerilla war fueled by the occupation. Not only for Israel, whose indefensible action would further deepen its diplomatic isolation, but also for the already faint hopes for a regional political settlement, which would be wiped out. The Israeli prime minister's announcement was not intended to pressure Hamas in ongoing negotiations. He has refused that route for months, fearing it would shatter his governing alliance.
It must be stated clearly: Netanyahu's plan for a take over – imposed in spite of opposition from military leaders – is the occupation of a foreign territory and appears neither legal, nor legitimate, nor coherent. "Driving out Hamas" to guarantee Israel's security nearly two years after the terrorist attack of October 7, 2023, as the prime minister claimed? The rise and dominance of the Islamist militia in Gaza were themselves a consequence of the previous Israeli occupation; it is hard to see how another takeover by Israel would eliminate them.
To occupy the Gaza Strip without wanting to "keep" or "govern" it, with the aim of "hand[ing] it over to Arab forces that will govern it properly"? By reoccupying Gaza, however, Israel would inherit all the responsibilities of an occupying power – responsibilities it currently refuses to assume in areas under its control, at the cost of a terrible humanitarian disaster. As for the "Arab forces" cited by the prime minister, they exist only in his imagination: which Arab country would willingly throw itself into such a quagmire to serve as a proxy for Israel?
The strategic relevance of an occupation is equally questionable. In a country – Israel – where the army forms the backbone of the state and where major decisions are traditionally made jointly by military and political leaders, Netanyahu's decision to override the formal opposition of the top military hierarchy – who warned him about the dire consequences of an occupation both for the hostages and over questions of responsibility, military losses and the exhaustion of reservists – marks a deep rupture.
While opinion polls show that Israelis prioritized freeing the hostages and rejected further military escalation, nations concerned both for the fate of Palestinians and for Israel's security must do everything in their power to dissuade Netanyahu from carrying out his plan.
France "firmly condemned" the Israeli government's plan for Gaza, and Germany, traditionally very discreet, announced the suspension of its arms exports that Israel could use in Gaza. But only truly coordinated political sanctions targeting the ruling coalition in Jerusalem could halt Netanyahu's march toward the abyss.
Translation of an original article published in French on lemonde.fr; the publisher may only be liable for the French version.