Israel’s Gaza City Takeover Plan Ignites Global Fury and Jeopardizes Palestinian Statehood

In a significant escalation of the Israel-Hamas conflict, Israel’s security cabinet, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, approved a plan on August 8, 2025, to take control of Gaza City, the largest urban center in the Gaza Strip with an estimated population of one million. The operation, described as a phased military takeover, aims to disarm Hamas, secure the release of hostages, demilitarize the region, establish Israeli security control, and create an alternative civilian administration excluding both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. This move, coupled with recent settlement expansions in the West Bank, has drawn widespread domestic and international condemnation, with critics warning it could irreparably harm prospects for a Palestinian state.

The approved plan focuses on Gaza City as the initial phase of a broader strategy, with Israeli media suggesting a gradual approach rather than a full occupation of the entire Gaza Strip. The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) are mobilizing tens of thousands of reservists, with satellite imagery showing a significant buildup of troops and equipment near Gaza’s borders. The operation includes:

– Evacuation and Displacement: Civilians in Gaza City are expected to be displaced to southern areas, potentially Al-Mawasi, with evacuation notices likely to be issued. The IDF claims it will provide humanitarian aid to civilians outside combat zones, though specifics remain vague. The controversial Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), backed by Israel and the US, may oversee aid distribution, despite criticism from the UN and aid agencies for its militarized approach.

– Military Strategy: The plan involves encircling Gaza City, conducting ground raids, and reinforcing IDF units in northern Gaza. The IDF already controls approximately 75% of the Gaza Strip, with Gaza City, parts of central Gaza, and coastal areas like Al-Mawasi remaining outside full Israeli control. The operation is expected to feature intense military action, including airstrikes and demolitions, as seen in recent assaults on Gaza City’s Zeitoun neighborhood.

– Timeline: Reports indicate the evacuation of Gaza City could be completed by early October 2025, followed by a ground offensive and siege targeting Hamas militants remaining in the city.

The plan has faced significant pushback within Israel and globally:

– Domestic Resistance: Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, the army’s chief of staff, reportedly opposed a full Gaza takeover, citing risks to the remaining 20–24 hostages believed to be alive and the strain on Israel’s military resources. The Hostages Families Forum and many Israelis, backed by public opinion polls favoring a ceasefire to secure hostage releases, have condemned the plan as reckless.

– International Condemnation: The international community has reacted strongly:

– United Nations: The UN has warned that the operation violates international law, predicting “massive forced displacement” and increased civilian deaths. The UN Security Council, excluding the US and Panama, convened an emergency meeting on August 9, 2025, to address the crisis.

– Western Allies: Germany suspended military exports to Israel that could be used in Gaza, with Chancellor Friedrich Merz calling the plan’s alignment with legitimate aims “increasingly difficult to understand.” The UK’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer labeled the escalation “wrong,” while Belgium, Italy, Australia, and New Zealand issued joint calls for Israel to reconsider.

– Arab and Muslim Nations: Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran, and Indonesia accused Israel of ethnic cleansing and genocide, with the Palestinian Authority describing the plan as an “unprecedented provocation” and a “fully-fledged crime.”

– United States: The US response has been notably restrained, with President Donald Trump stating that the decision is “pretty much up to Israel.” US Ambassador Mike Huckabee echoed this sentiment, though Trump expressed frustration with Hamas’s refusal to negotiate a “reasonable settlement.”

– Hamas’s Response: Hamas condemned the plan as a “new war crime,” vowing “fierce resistance” and warning that Israel’s occupation would face significant challenges. The group accused Netanyahu of prioritizing personal interests over hostage safety.

The Gaza City plan, combined with recent Israeli actions in the West Bank, is seen as a deliberate effort to undermine prospects for a Palestinian state. On August 20, 2025, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich announced the approval of 3,401 new settlement homes in the E1 area of the occupied West Bank, explicitly stating the move was intended to “erase the Palestinian state.” This, alongside the Gaza operation, directly challenges the two-state solution, which envisions an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip with East Jerusalem as its capital.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) declared Israel’s presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory unlawful in its July 19, 2024, advisory opinion, citing violations of international law, including the prohibition on acquiring territory by force and the Palestinian right to self-determination.

Critics argue that the Gaza City plan and settlement expansions risk further entrenching this illegal occupation, potentially constituting war crimes and crimes against humanity, such as forced displacement and starvation.

– Humanitarian Crisis: Gaza’s 2.1 million residents, 90% of whom are already displaced, face worsening conditions. The plan could displace up to one million people from Gaza City, exacerbating famine and malnutrition. Reports indicate 1,760 Palestinians have been killed seeking food since May 2025, with the healthcare system operating at less than 20% capacity due to shortages.

– Strategic Risks for Israel: Former Israeli security officials argue that further military action is unlikely to eliminate Hamas’s ideological influence, despite its reduced military capacity. The operation risks increasing Israeli casualties, alienating allies, and further isolating Israel diplomatically, especially as the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes.

– Ceasefire Talks: The plan jeopardizes ongoing ceasefire negotiations, with Hamas accepting a 60-day truce proposal to release half of the remaining 50 hostages, but Israel’s escalation has stalled progress. Hamas accuses Netanyahu of derailing talks for political gain.

The Gaza City plan risks further destabilizing the Middle East, with Jordan and Egypt refusing to support an occupation-backed administration in Gaza. Growing international support for Palestinian statehood, with countries like the UK, Canada, and France planning to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September 2025, highlights Israel’s increasing diplomatic isolation. The US’s ambivalence under Trump may embolden Israel but risks straining relations with other Western allies.

For Palestinians in Gaza City, who have endured 22 months of war with over 61,000 deaths, the plan represents a continuation of displacement and suffering. Residents like Mahmoud Abdel Salam Ahmed express despair, noting there is “nowhere left to flee” in the besieged Strip. The operation is widely viewed as an attempt to cement Israeli control and eliminate hopes for self-determination.

Israel’s approval of a plan to occupy Gaza City on August 8, 2025, marks a critical escalation in the Israel-Hamas conflict, with preparations for a phased military takeover, mass civilian displacement, and controversial humanitarian aid mechanisms. Coupled with West Bank settlement expansions, the move is seen as a direct challenge to Palestinian statehood, drawing condemnation from the UN, Western allies, and Arab nations.

While Israel frames the operation as essential to defeating Hamas and securing hostages, critics warn of humanitarian catastrophe, increased violence, and further diplomatic isolation. The UN Security Council’s response and stalled ceasefire talks will be pivotal in determining the conflict’s next phase.