President Donald Trump sparked global controversy when he announced his intention to “evacuate Gaza and rebuild it.” His critics quickly denounced the idea, arguing that such an action could constitute a war crime: the forced transfer of a civilian population is indeed legally and morally unacceptable.
However, the widespread opposition not only to forced evacuation but also to the possibility of allowing people to migrate voluntarily due to humanitarian distress raises serious questions about the true motives of the countries resisting this move. Circumstances suggest that these nations are willing to perpetuate Palestinian suffering, keeping them trapped in Gaza’s dire conditions in order to sustain the ongoing threat to Israel.
Just like any human being worldwide, Palestinians should have the right to seek a better future elsewhere.
Hamas has turned Gaza’s residents into human shields, digging hundreds of kilometers of tunnels beneath homes, streets, and neighborhoods. As a result, Israel’s war against terror infrastructure has led to massive destruction of civilian areas: entire neighborhoods have been wiped out, countless buildings have collapsed, and critical infrastructure – such as water and electricity – has ceased to function.
Rebuilding Gaza could take years and require enormous international resources. While Hamas funneled vast sums into tunnel construction, civilians were left without protection, vulnerable to attacks, and bearing the brunt of the conflict.
Approximately two million people live in Gaza, and many of them would leave if given the chance. In a region devastated by ongoing disaster, the situation mirrors scenes from Syrian cities during the civil war – when millions fled their homes, and many found refuge in Europe and other countries.
Yet, when it comes to Gaza’s residents, the massive scale of destruction has not been met with a response from the international community that would allow them to choose a different future. On the contrary, during the war, Egypt and other Arab states flatly refused to accept Palestinian refugees, even as it became clear that their suffering was immense and their risk of harm severe.
Leaders across the region and the world rightly assert that forcibly transferring a civilian population is unjustifiable. Yet, many of these same leaders also oppose the voluntary migration of Gazans seeking refuge.
This refusal raises fundamental questions: Are certain actors deliberately perpetuating the suffering of Gaza’s residents as a political tool against Israel? The historical precedents are hard to ignore: for 77 years, Palestinian refugees and their descendants have been denied citizenship in Arab states.
The international community has also played a role in preserving Palestinian statelessness, establishing UNRWA (UN Relief and Works Agency) – a dedicated UN agency exclusively for Palestinian refugees. This makes them the only refugee group in the world with a separate agency maintaining their status rather than integrating them into host societies.
It seems that the conflict’s surrounding players are determined to keep Palestinians in perpetual refugee status, ensuring that the struggle remains locked in an endless cycle of hostility.
CRITICISM OF Trump’s policy is understandable and expected. Forced displacement violates fundamental human rights and must not occur. However, it is crucial to distinguish between forced expulsion and offering a fair opportunity for voluntary migration based on humanitarian needs.
With life in Gaza becoming increasingly unlivable, the international community should open safe pathways for those who choose to leave in search of a better future. Preventing Gazans from emigrating freely and being accepted by other countries is also a human rights violation – one that endangers those still trapped in Gaza.
The 'Binding of Gaza'
This “Binding of Gaza” serves as a painful reminder that an entire population is being held hostage by narrow political interests that benefit neither Israelis nor Palestinians. The international community must reassess the fundamental difference between forced displacement and free choice, doing everything in its power to allow Gazans – just as it would for any population caught in a war zone – the right to seek safety and a better future beyond Gaza’s borders.
This is a basic human right and a moral obligation of the world toward those caught in an endless cycle of suffering, destruction, and death.
The writer is the director of the Jewish People Policy Institute and a law professor at the Peres Academic Center.