(Translated with ChatGPT)
According to Prime Minister Netanyahu, Trump’s plan for Gaza’s future is "the first good idea I’ve heard, an outstanding idea." What exactly this idea entails is not entirely clear, as the White House quickly moved to obscure and whitewash it. However, as Netanyahu presented it, it is merely about allowing Gazans who wish to leave to do so, giving them the option to return if they choose, and in their absence—simply rebuilding Gaza. He asks, "What’s wrong with that?"
This spin is not just misleading but deliberately deceptive, as it ignores what Trump actually proposed while still promoting the idea of transferring two million people. Considering that rebuilding Gaza will take between 10 to 15 years—even if its residents are assured they can return—in practice, this amounts to erasing Palestinian life in Gaza.
It is hard not to be captivated by the fantasy that Israelis and Jews will wake up to a new reality in which a society committed to our destruction and a people who glorify a culture of celebrating Jewish deaths simply disappear. The Israeli media, for now, is ignoring the "temporary" clause added by the White House spokesperson to the plan, instead filling itself with analyses of potential locations where Gazans could be relocated and so-called expert assessments of the feasibility of each alternative. The idea of finding some remote place in Africa or Europe for Gaza’s residents reminds me of the desperate searches a hundred years ago for a national homeland for the Jewish people—ideas that may have been intellectualized but ignored the fact that the Jewish people already had a homeland. So do the Gazans.
It is understandable why we might be tempted to latch onto this idea, but what is unacceptable is ignoring its moral consequences. The pursuit of security and self-defense is a moral obligation, but morality also demands that even just wars, wars of self-defense, be conducted justly, distinguishing between combatants and civilians—both during and after the fighting. The idea of mass transfer of the Palestinian people living in Gaza is in violation of international law and morally shocking. It contradicts the core values of Judaism and Zionism, and Israel and Jews worldwide must reject it unequivocally.
Most people agree that Trump’s dystopian plan to turn Gaza into the Middle East’s new "resort destination" is unfeasible. Without American soldiers on the ground and without American funding, the costs and the dirty work remain in the hands of some imaginary "other" entity. However, focusing on the question of feasibility distracts from the central issue. The question is not what is possible, but what is right—right for Israel, right for the Jewish people, and right for humanity.
As a Jew and an Israeli, it is strange to find myself fighting for the Palestinians to stay in Gaza, even though they pose a threat to Israel. They are our enemy. I have no sympathy for Hamas, and I have no doubt that they have not abandoned their goal of murdering Jews whenever and wherever possible. We are committed to liberating Gaza from Hamas rule because there is no future for Gaza or Israel unless this goal is achieved. But as we face a cruel enemy, I do not want to adopt their cruelty. The mass transfer of people from their homes and land is not how we fight or resolve conflicts—our moral condemnation must be clear and firm.
Our conflict with the Palestinian people has lasted for decades. But the war in Gaza, with all its challenges, has created an opportunity to establish a new order in Gaza and expand peace in the Middle East. The government is silencing the discussion about it not because it is impossible, but because the current coalition does not aspire to implement it. This is a plan aimed at replacing Hamas with a police and governmental force composed of moderate Arab states committed to peace with Israel, along with Palestinians who share that vision. Choosing Trump’s dystopian alternative instead of focusing our efforts on a serious plan is an unforgivable act.
Indeed, this plan carries many risks and challenges. However, it is not only more realistic than Trump’s real-estate-style vision for Gaza but also based on a moral standard that should guide us. President Trump may see himself as a friend of Israel, but he does not meet the moral standards that Israel and the Jewish people must uphold. The fact that the Israeli prime minister follows him is a badge of shame.
Peace is not achieved by the total elimination of the enemy. It requires neutralizing the enemy’s ability to harm us, but then summoning the courage for both sides to see each other, recognize each other’s rights, and begin building a better future together. Israel’s greatest achievement in the war has been fulfilling the first phase. We must celebrate this victory and seize the opportunities that have emerged from it. It is still unclear whether Israel and the Palestinians are ready to explore the next steps, but what is clear is that we must direct our efforts in that direction.
==Article end==
I like the first line in the last paragraph. A literal "If you kill your enemies they win".
According to Prime Minister Netanyahu, Trump’s plan for Gaza’s future is "the first good idea I’ve heard, an outstanding idea." What exactly this idea entails is not entirely clear, as the White House quickly moved to obscure and whitewash it. However, as Netanyahu presented it, it is merely about allowing Gazans who wish to leave to do so, giving them the option to return if they choose, and in their absence—simply rebuilding Gaza. He asks, "What’s wrong with that?"
This spin is not just misleading but deliberately deceptive, as it ignores what Trump actually proposed while still promoting the idea of transferring two million people. Considering that rebuilding Gaza will take between 10 to 15 years—even if its residents are assured they can return—in practice, this amounts to erasing Palestinian life in Gaza.
It is hard not to be captivated by the fantasy that Israelis and Jews will wake up to a new reality in which a society committed to our destruction and a people who glorify a culture of celebrating Jewish deaths simply disappear. The Israeli media, for now, is ignoring the "temporary" clause added by the White House spokesperson to the plan, instead filling itself with analyses of potential locations where Gazans could be relocated and so-called expert assessments of the feasibility of each alternative. The idea of finding some remote place in Africa or Europe for Gaza’s residents reminds me of the desperate searches a hundred years ago for a national homeland for the Jewish people—ideas that may have been intellectualized but ignored the fact that the Jewish people already had a homeland. So do the Gazans.
It is understandable why we might be tempted to latch onto this idea, but what is unacceptable is ignoring its moral consequences. The pursuit of security and self-defense is a moral obligation, but morality also demands that even just wars, wars of self-defense, be conducted justly, distinguishing between combatants and civilians—both during and after the fighting. The idea of mass transfer of the Palestinian people living in Gaza is in violation of international law and morally shocking. It contradicts the core values of Judaism and Zionism, and Israel and Jews worldwide must reject it unequivocally.
Most people agree that Trump’s dystopian plan to turn Gaza into the Middle East’s new "resort destination" is unfeasible. Without American soldiers on the ground and without American funding, the costs and the dirty work remain in the hands of some imaginary "other" entity. However, focusing on the question of feasibility distracts from the central issue. The question is not what is possible, but what is right—right for Israel, right for the Jewish people, and right for humanity.
As a Jew and an Israeli, it is strange to find myself fighting for the Palestinians to stay in Gaza, even though they pose a threat to Israel. They are our enemy. I have no sympathy for Hamas, and I have no doubt that they have not abandoned their goal of murdering Jews whenever and wherever possible. We are committed to liberating Gaza from Hamas rule because there is no future for Gaza or Israel unless this goal is achieved. But as we face a cruel enemy, I do not want to adopt their cruelty. The mass transfer of people from their homes and land is not how we fight or resolve conflicts—our moral condemnation must be clear and firm.
Our conflict with the Palestinian people has lasted for decades. But the war in Gaza, with all its challenges, has created an opportunity to establish a new order in Gaza and expand peace in the Middle East. The government is silencing the discussion about it not because it is impossible, but because the current coalition does not aspire to implement it. This is a plan aimed at replacing Hamas with a police and governmental force composed of moderate Arab states committed to peace with Israel, along with Palestinians who share that vision. Choosing Trump’s dystopian alternative instead of focusing our efforts on a serious plan is an unforgivable act.
Indeed, this plan carries many risks and challenges. However, it is not only more realistic than Trump’s real-estate-style vision for Gaza but also based on a moral standard that should guide us. President Trump may see himself as a friend of Israel, but he does not meet the moral standards that Israel and the Jewish people must uphold. The fact that the Israeli prime minister follows him is a badge of shame.
Peace is not achieved by the total elimination of the enemy. It requires neutralizing the enemy’s ability to harm us, but then summoning the courage for both sides to see each other, recognize each other’s rights, and begin building a better future together. Israel’s greatest achievement in the war has been fulfilling the first phase. We must celebrate this victory and seize the opportunities that have emerged from it. It is still unclear whether Israel and the Palestinians are ready to explore the next steps, but what is clear is that we must direct our efforts in that direction.
==Article end==
I like the first line in the last paragraph. A literal "If you kill your enemies they win".
