Israel Will Pay a Heavy Price for Netanyahu’s Intransigence on Palestine

Bibi Netanyahu’s has rejected the American-led plan for the future governance of Gaza and the creation of a Palestinian state in Gaza and the West Bank. If this decision stands, it will be a costly mistake with potentially disastrous long-term consequences for the State of Israel. 

The American-led plan envisions that after a transitional phase, Gaza will eventually be governed by a reformed and revitalized Palestinian Authority (PA). During the transition, security would be provided by a United Nations peacekeeping force led by the United States with experienced troops from countries acceptable to both Israel and the Palestinians. As soon as practicable, this force would give way to newly trained PA officials, which would unify governance of the West Bank and Gaza for the first time since 2007. Implementation of the plan depends on the support of Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Arab states in the region to fund the reconstruction of Gaza, train PA security forces, and regulate Gaza’s border with Egypt. Support of the Sunni Arab states is contingent on Israel agreeing to the creation of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, otherwise these countries would appear to their populations to be complicit in the continued Israeli occupation of the Palestinians and neglect of Gaza’s civilians. If Israel withdraws its troops from Gaza and agrees to this pathway to a Palestinian state, Saudi Arabia will agree to full normalization of relations with Israel, a step that would open the door other Muslim-majority nations around the globe establishing relations with Israel as well. 

Last week, Netanyahu released his plan for Gaza, which implicitly rejects almost every aspect of the American-led proposal. Netanyahu calls for “indefinite” Israeli military control of Gaza with day-to-day governance responsibility turned over to “Gazans without links to Hamas.” The plan would also create an Israeli controlled buffer zone along the Gaza border with Egypt and Israel, essentially shrinking the size of already densely populated area and placing Israeli troops directly on Egypt’s border. Netanyahu continues to be openly hostile towards the creation of a Palestinian state and his plan states that any change in the status of West Bank and Gaza can only be achieved through negotiations between the parties, a process that has been frozen for over a decade.

The costs to Israel of following Netanyahu down this path and rejecting the alternative backed by the United States, Saudi Arabia, the European Union, and most of the international community would be immense.

First, Israel would be stuck governing Gaza and its two million inhabitants indefinitely without any aid and assistance from the rest of the world. The notion that Gazans without ties to Hamas would somehow emerge to satisfy a governance role is a fantasy, as they would be seen to be collaborators with Israel and therefore have no legitimacy with Gazans. If Israel remains in control, there will also be no international funding for the reconstruction of Gaza. Who does Netanyahu believe will fund this reconstruction while also meeting the immediate needs of Gazans for housing, education, and health care in a region that is now mostly a pile of concrete rubble and population that experts say is on the verge of starvation? There is no political will among Israeli taxpayers to provide adequate funding for this massive endeavor. Yet, Israel would remain responsible for the squalid conditions that will almost certainly persist in Gaza. Besides a massive moral failing, the humanitarian situation in Gaza will be a festering wound to Israel’s international standing and image that will be virtually impossible to heal.  

Maintaining full governance responsibility for Gaza will also be a security nightmare for Israel. While it is true that the Netanyahu plan provides the IDF free reign to continue attacking the remnants of Hamas, Israel is discounting how hostile the civilian population will be to Israel’s military re-occupation of Gaza and any governing institutions that Israel creates. One can look to the American experience in Iraq to understand that what Israel is proposing is a recipe for a mass insurgency that will be extraordinarily difficult for Israel to contain as long as it remains the governing power in Gaza. Indeed, Israel’s effort to govern Gaza will make Israel’s occupation of southern Lebanon in the 1980s, which Israel was forced to abandon because it became so costly and unpopular, seem like a cakewalk. 

The failure to adopt the American-led plan for Gaza will also substantially increase the costs of maintaining the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. Public opinion polls show that West Bank Palestinians’ support for armed resistance against Israel has skyrocketed since the October 7 attack and the subsequent Israeli invasion of Gaza. There is already a low-level civil war taking place in the West Bank between the Palestinians and Israeli settlers. These trends will only continue to worsen as Israel insists on indefinite occupation of the West Bank without any meaningful process to move towards a two-state solution. The PA will also continue to lose legitimacy among West Bank residents to the detriment of Israel because it relies on the PA for security assistance. The degradation of the PA will place increasing burden on Israeli security forces to address the West Bank while they are already under strain due to their obligations in Gaza. Increased conflict between West Bank Palestinians and Israeli security forces, not to mention actions of the hostile Israeli settlers, could easily spark a third intifada. The last one resulted in the deaths of over 1,000 Israelis and over 3,000 Palestinians.

The level of international isolation that Israel would experience if it remains indefinitely in Gaza and refuses to move towards a two-state solution would also be devastating. Israel was given broad leeway to attack Hamas in response to October 7, but this international goodwill has almost completely evaporated as Israel’s military tactics have had a catastrophic impact on Gaza’s civilian population. Now only the United States is willing to prevent a UN Security Council resolution calling for a permanent cease-fire. If Israel prolongs the suffering of Gaza’s civilians by rejecting the only plan that has a chance of providing the funding and political legitimacy needed to improve the plight of innocent Gazans, it will lose even more international support. The popularity of the Palestinian cause will continue to grow, not only among American college students, but throughout the world. Israel will face a future with heightened anti-Israel activity in international forums and tribunals, stronger and more effective economic boycotts, and reduced public support for security assistance, even in the United States and other strong allies.

Netanyahu’s rejection of the American-led plan would also forsake substantial security and economic benefits for Israel.

First of all, getting the Saudis and the Gulf states deeply involved in the governance of Gaza and reform of the PA will spread the burden of confronting Hamas and other forms of Palestinian radicalism. Once Israel leaves Gaza and the new Saudi-backed PA takes over, Hamas is no longer just Israel’s problem. Indeed, the Saudis are likely to support a hard PA crackdown on Hamas due to Hamas’ connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and support from Iran. This same dynamic should revitalize the PA’s security operation against terrorist groups active in the West Bank as well. As the broker of the arrangement, the United States’ credibility for providing Israeli security will also be on the line, which will result in counterterrorism resources for the PA as well as diplomatic pressure on the PA to subdue groups hostile to Israel.

The second substantial benefit that would accrue to Israel through acceptance of the American-led plan would be normalized relations with Saudi Arabia. Prior to the Israeli invasion of Gaza, the Saudis appeared ready to enter into a normalization agreement with only some minor concessions to the Palestinians. However, the price for normalization is now Israeli acquiescence to a Palestinian state in the near term. Netanyahu’s strategy of going around the Palestinians by developing direct relations with Arab states in the region – which began with the Abraham Accords in 2020 – is no longer viable. After the carnage of civilians in Gaza, neither the Saudis nor the Abraham Accords countries can be seen to be cooperating with Israel without enduring harsh backlash from their own populations.

However, if normalization with Saudi Arabia proceeds – as I believe it would quite rapidly if Israel were to accept the American-led plan – Israel would reap not only the substantial economic benefits of regional economic integration, but also the security benefits of an expanded alliance network to confront Iran. Indeed, it is Iran and its regional “axis of resistance” that presents the substantial long term security threat to Israel, not the remnants of Hamas and the terrorist organizations in the West Bank (both of which would be marginalized by the end of the Israeli occupation of territory captured in 1967). Normalization with Saudi Arabia would create a strong alliance between the United States, the Sunni Arab states in the Middle East and North Africa, and Israel to confront Iran and promote regional stability. But without normalization, Israel will be left to protect itself from Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian militias, the Yemeni Houthis and Iran on its own, with whatever assistance the United States is still willing to provide after being snubbed in its effort to implement the two-state solution. The choice between these two futures should be an easy one for Israel.

I am well aware of the trauma Israel has experienced from the terrorist attacks and Hamas’s holding of hostages for over four months. Indeed, there should be no movement towards resolving any long-term issues regarding the Palestinians until the hostages are all safely released.

But the anger Israelis are feeling towards Palestinians due to the actions of Hamas should not cloud Israel’s judgment about its future. The one thing that the October 7 attacks made abundantly clear is that Israel will never have genuine security while it is continuing to control the lives of people who desire self-determination and human dignity. The myth that Netanyahu has spun for decades that Israel could continue to enjoy prosperity and security while subjugating the Palestinians in perpetuity has been destroyed. There must be a new paradigm going forward. 

Former Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban often quipped that the Palestinians never “miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” But if Israel turns its back on the American-led plan that is being formulated for a two-state solution with the financial and security backing of Sunni Arab countries and the United States and the blessing of the United Nations, then it is Israel that will be missing an historic opportunity. Accepting the plan would be taking a risk for peace but rejecting it will almost certainly lead to a grim future for the Jewish State.