Aa
  • Read, Watch, Listen
  • TJI Series
  • Community Action
  • Events
  • Zedi
Follow us and continue the conversation
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube
Test yourself with the TJI Quiz!

Adjust size of text

Aa

Follow us and continue the conversation

  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube

Your saved articles

You haven't saved any articles

What are you looking for?

Original reporting, insightful analysis and diverse views, delivered straight to your inbox

  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube
Your support fuels our mission to inform, entertain and inspire.

The Jewish Independent is bound by the Standards of Practice of the Australian Press Council. If you believe the Standards may have been breached, you may approach The Jewish Independent or make a complaint to the Australian Press Council in writing at www.presscouncil.org.au. The Council may also be contacted on 1800 025 712.

  • Our Story
  • Contact us
  • Our Team
  • Support us
  • Guidelines
  • Pitch your idea
  • Republishing us
  • Community Action
  • Our Awards
  • LinkedIn
  • Instagram
  • FaceBook
  • X
  • YouTube
Aboriginal FlagTorres Strait Islanders Flag

The Jewish Independent acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the Traditional Owners and Custodians of Country throughout Australia. We pay our respects to Elders past and present, and strive to honour their rich history of storytelling in our work and mission.

© The Jewish Independent 2026All Rights Reserved
Website design and development by Your Creative, MelbourneTerms & ConditionsPrivacy Policy
HomeRead, Watch, ListenIsrael
Israel Hamas WarOpinionIsraelWorld

Population transfers are wishful thinking and a recipe for grievance

The idea appeals to those on the extreme right, which might help win elections, but is disconnected from reality.
Colin Shindler
Print this
Displaced Palestinians Arrive In The Northern Gaza

Palestians walk to cross the Netzarim Corridor on January 27, 2025 (Abood Abusalama/Middle East Images/ABACAPRESS.com)

Published: 10 February 2025

Last updated: 13 February 2025

Prime Minister Netanyahu was only informed about Donald Trump’s ideas about relocating the Palestinians of Gaza on the day before his meeting with the president. It also came as a surprise to US Secretary of State Rubio and most of Netanyahu’s delegation.

Even Netanyahu seemed bemused at this turn of events. As the Trump look-alike in the Israeli satirical program, Eretz Nehederet, put it: “We’re gonna find the Palestinians a great home; we gonna call it Gazaville” – as he pointed to Greenland and Panama.

Even so, the desire to leave Gaza is not a Trump fantasy. It is estimated that some 300,000 Palestinians have left Gaza since Hamas’s takeover in 2007. The Arab Barometer poll, conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in the weeks before the killings of October 7, found that 44% of young people in Gaza (aged 18 to 29) have considered emigrating.

It is estimated that some 300,000 Palestinians have left Gaza since Hamas’s takeover in 2007.

It appears that Trump’s ideas emerged a couple of weeks ago when his Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, visited the Netzarim Corridor in Gaza and subsequently conveyed his dark impressions of its barren moonscape. Trump’s economic vision of a future Gaza was seeded by a paper, published last July by Joseph Pelzman, a professor at George Washington University, which had reached the president’s aides.

It argued that “the Hamas experiment”, since Israel’s unilateral withdrawal in 2005, has proven to be a complete failure. It has left Gaza in a devastating bankruptcy. To solve this bankruptcy problem, we suggest an approach based on the classic Build – Operate – Transfer (BOT) framework. The countries that invest in this project will become equity shareholders with a 50-year lease. The civil administrators that will be brought into Gaza will develop an economic model based on the principle of ‘private provision of public services’.”

Perlzman painted a picture of a three-sector Gaza economy, based on tourism, agriculture and high tech. It would be a society, governed by the rule of law, possessing an independent airport, port facility and power station. A light railway, on the Israeli model, would be constructed for Gaza.

All well and good – but the fundamental question of what to do with up to two million displaced people at present was not addressed. Trump’s entry into the question simply led to the usual confusion, deception, deflection and puzzlement.

While Trump described a Gazan Disneyland, the global reaction to the plan was profoundly negative because it implied either a voluntary or involuntary transfer out of Gaza and either a temporary or permanent exile. Outsiders, particularly in the Arab world, interpreted Trump’s words as meaning “ethnic cleansing”. On one level, this was a tried and tested Trump exercise in causing outrage to gain leverage before retreating – a transactional pas de deux, three steps forward, two back.

The orchestrated outrage conjured up an imagery of a new Nakba for the Arabs. The expulsion of Jews and Christians by the Caliph Umar from most of Arabia at the very beginning of the Muslim era in the year 641 was never mentioned. Simultaneously, a remembrance of the departure from the mythical but symbolic Anatevka in Fiddler on the Roof was uppermost for many Diaspora Jews.

Even so, an angry Egypt hinted that it was prepared to abrogate its peace treaty with Israel, signed by Begin and Sadat in 1979. The hostages’ families worried that it would impede the release of their loved ones. Representative Jewish organisations in the Diaspora genuflected and thanked President Trump for his stand against Hamas – and balanced this with a mild disapproval of his plan.

The Trump idea was enthusiastically endorsed by Netanyahu’s public relations people in the international media, arguing that a two-state solution had had its day. They said that it had not worked despite multiple efforts over the years. The blame was put solely on the Palestinians – yet both Netanyahu and Hamas have attempted to scupper a two-state solution during the past 30 years.

Both the Israeli Right and the Palestinian Islamists view the Gaza conflict as a continuation of the war of 1948.

Partition into two states is anathema to many on both sides of the current conflict. Jewish and Palestinian nationalism arose during the same period of history with claims over the same territory. The logical solution would be partition rather than a Greater Israel or a Greater Palestine – and an everlasting war. Both the Israeli Right and the Palestinian Islamists, however, have viewed the Gaza conflict as little more than a continuation of the war of 1948. The Gaza conflict today is one between the rejectionists of partition.

For many Zionist thinkers, the very idea of the transfer of the Palestinian Arabs was tantamount to wishful thinking. Herzl confided the idea to the privacy of his diary. Jabotinsky looked to the Greek-Turkish exchange of 1923 in which hundreds of thousands were forced to leave their homes. The Peel Commission of 1937 suggested a partition into two states but that 225,000 Palestinian Arabs would have to move from the Jewish State to the Arab state. 

During the war of 1948, most Palestinian Arabs fled in “a psychosis of flight” for fear of what might be their fate at the hands of the Jews. Yet some were indeed expelled. In a lecture in 1950, Yigal Allon, one of the leading IDF commanders in the war, commented that the expulsions of Palestinian Arabs from Lydda and Ramle in the path of advancing hostile forces, weakened and eventually halted their assault.

Allon said the process of Arab flight was “a positive process…a justified case of no-choice, not only momentarily in the heat of battle, but justified over time”. Other Israelis found such an approach unacceptable.  

How would Israelis today react today if Trump’s words were translated into reality? It is likely that as in 1948, there would be dissent. Any mention of “transfer” was previously a taboo in public discourse. Yet its very consideration today is in itself a sign of the times.

Last Saturday’s return of hostages in such an emaciated state will further diminish any identification with “the other”. No imagery of the devastation of Gaza is shown on Israeli television.

Any mention of 'transfer' was previously a taboo in public discourse. Its consideration today is in itself a sign of the times.

A year ago, the prominent Israeli writer, David Grossman wrote: “Gershom Scholem, the renown Kabbalah scholar, coined a phrase, saying: ‘All the blood flows to the wound’. (After 7 October) the fear, the shock, the fury, the grief and humiliation and vengefulness, the mental energies of an entire nation — all of those have not stopped flowing to that wound, to the abyss into which we are still falling.” (New York Times, March 1, 2024)

Benny Morris, the Israeli historian of the 1948 exodus, further commented that “the dehumanisation …is already there”.

Both Benny Gantz and Yair Lapid, leaders of the political opposition in Israel, responded with “an open mind” approach to Trump. It is clear that they and Netanyahu are positioning themselves for a future election with the opinions of the Israeli electorate in mind.

 Aryeh Deri from the religious Shas party, a veteran of Israeli politics, took the adulation of Trump one step further, by labelling him “the messenger of God”.

Given all the self-evident obstacles, it is unlikely that Trump’s sketch of a plan will be enacted even if it has been a welcome distraction for many on the Israeli Right. Even so, it appears that despite the idol worship for Trump and the president’s silence on future Jewish settlement in Gaza, it has not stabilised Netanyahu’s disintegrating government in the eyes of the Israeli public.

Opinion polls indicate that a party led by Naftali Bennett would still win the next Israeli election and a different Israeli government would then take a serious approach to the problems of Gaza.

You might also like
  • The Altalena should be a warning, not a political weapon
    Shahar Burla
  • Turkey emerges as military threat to Israel
    Dror Doron
  • Because of my Zionist values, I’m joining an Arab party
    Yoav Segalovitz
logomark.67a07ee3
We believe in the free flow of information

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, by using our Creative Commons licence

You might also like

    Ibrahim Khatatbe
    NewsIsrael

    Abuse by IDF soldiers humiliates Muslim Palestinians

    Ben Lynfield 3
    Ofer_Winter_2026
    Israel Votes 2026AnalysisIsrael

    Who is Ofer Winter and could he upset Netanyahu’s election?

    Shahar Burla
    Protest
    AnalysisIsrael

    Western ‘Palestinianism’ colonises everything – and hurts Palestinians

    Andres Spokoiny 3

About the author

Colin Shindler

Colin Shindler

Colin Shindler is an emeritus professor of Israel Studies at SOAS, University of London. He is the author of several books about Israel: the latest "A Forever War: Israel, Palestine and the Struggles for Statehood" was published in 2026.

More from the author

AnalysisWorld

Diaspora leadership must be candid about its disillusion with Netanyahu

AnalysisWorld

Burnham and Miliband will have trust issues with future Israeli government

AnalysisWorld

If Andy Burnham becomes UK PM, what will that mean for Middle East policy?

AnalysisIsrael

UK Jews talk of leaving for Israel but few actually do

Comments1

  • Avatar of Ian Light

    Ian Light10 February at 09:23 pm

    Migration from areas of deprivation and danger to life are many in human history . Millions of Syrians have fled the civil war in that Land ,one million to Germany many in 2018 granted by Chancellor Angela Merkel in part to create an image of Germany as a great humanitarian State so as a way of repenting for its horrible historical sins as in the Holocaust and the many other crimes against Humanity in WW2 . Forced Transfer is a crime but voluntary emigration is a essential Humane Right .