Washington Rebuffs Calls for Palestinian Resettlement while Rejecting the Rights of Expelled Jews to Return to Their Homes

The United States has vociferously denounced statements made by Israeli Ministers Bezalel Smotrich and Itamar Ben Gvir, who advocated for the resettlement of Palestinians outside of Gaza while calling on Israel to permit the restoration of Gush Katif communities eradicated in the 2005 Disengagement.

The remarks, which include encouraging the emigration of Gaza’s residents and the return of Jewish settlers to the territory, have ignited a diplomatic firestorm. State Department spokesman Matthew Miller branded the rhetoric as “inflammatory and irresponsible,” asserting a firm U.S. stance that Gaza is Palestinian land destined to remain so, with the vision of a future free from Hamas’s control and terror threats against Israel​​​​.

Miller’s comments underscore U.S. policy towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, emphasizing the need for a peaceful future that benefits both communities and the wider region. This reaction from Washington comes amidst a backdrop of heightened tensions and violence, with the ongoing Gaza war resulting in thousands of casualties and widespread displacement. The U.S. insists that the inflammatory remarks do not reflect the official policy of the Israeli government, as reiterated by Israeli officials including the Prime Minister​​​​.

Many Israelis view the 2005 disengagement and subsequent expulsion of Jewish settlers from Gaza as a strategic blunder, believing it led directly to the dire security situation epitomized by the catastrophic events of October 7. They argue that this withdrawal emboldened extremist groups and created a power vacuum that was quickly filled by Hamas, setting the stage for escalated conflicts and humanitarian crises.

Many Israelis advocate for an extended demilitarized buffer zone as a necessary strategy to ensure long-term security and peace. They argue that such a zone would act as a protective barrier against future raids and incursions, reducing the risk of sudden attacks and providing a buffer to absorb and mitigate security threats. This approach is seen as a pragmatic solution to prevent the infiltration of armed groups and weapons, ultimately safeguarding lives and fostering a more stable environment for negotiations and peace-building efforts.

Critics argue that the U.S. singling out Israeli politicians for their controversial statements is inappropriate, especially considering Israelis generally refrain from blaming President Biden for the extreme views expressed by members of the “Squad” in Congress. They suggest that just as Israel respects the diversity of opinions within American politics without attributing fringe views to the entire administration, the U.S. should similarly understand that individual Israeli politicians’ statements don’t necessarily reflect the broader government’s stance.