As Gaza truce takes shape, what will happen to Palestinians who collaborated with Israel?

Israel refuses to evacuate Gazan militias it armed during war, sparking debate over their safety and future once the fighting ends.
3 min read
09 October, 2025
Last Update
10 October, 2025 11:29 AM
Abu Shabab's group operated alongside Israeli forces in Rafah [Getty]

With a Gaza ceasefire deal agreed between Hamas and Israel, questions are mounting over the fate of collaborators and militia members who worked alongside Israeli forces, after reports that the army has rejected a proposal to evacuate them once the war on Gaza comes to an end.

According to a report in Israel Hayom, an internal security discussion exposed deep divisions between the Israeli army and the Shin Bet over what to do with the so-called "supported militias" operating in Gaza.

The paper said the Shin Bet had proposed transferring members of these units to closed camps within the Gaza envelope after the fighting ends, as a temporary measure "to protect them and maintain security control".

However, the army reportedly opposed the plan. The head of the Southern Command argued that "the potential danger these individuals pose to Israeli civilians outweighs any obligation to provide them protection," citing intelligence warnings that some of the militia members had already fled after receiving "promises of amnesty from Hamas".

Israel Hayom said the army's position reflected growing unease about the presence of such groups near Israeli population centres and the risk of infiltration once Gaza's combat phase ends.

Militias under Israeli supervision

Over recent months, Israel has established or supported several armed groups inside Gaza to operate parallel to its own forces and under the supervision of the Shin Bet.

Israel's Channel 12 reported that these units were not equipped with standard Israeli military weapons but rather with arms seized from Hamas stockpiles or from Hezbollah caches in southern Lebanon. Their equipment was designed to resemble "spoils of war" rather than official Israeli issue.

The most prominent of these formations is the group led by Yasser Abu Shabab, which operates mainly in eastern Rafah and has reportedly received direct protection from Israeli forces.

Haaretz described the group's activities as including intelligence gathering, monitoring areas cleared of Hamas and Islamic Jihad fighters, and helping maintain order in zones crowded with displaced civilians in southern Gaza.

A contentious alliance

Abu Shabab and his followers have long denied accusations of collaboration, insisting they "do not work with Israel".

In interviews cited by NDTV and Euronews, Abu Shabab said his goal was "to protect Palestinians from Hamas terror" and claimed his weapons were "simple arms collected locally".

But Hamas and other Palestinians have labelled him a traitor. Earlier this year, a court in Gaza gave Abu Shabab ten days to surrender, charging him with "treason, collaboration, and forming an armed militia".

The group's leadership, along with several other groups not affiliated with Hamas, accused his forces of looting UN aid convoys and coordinating with Israeli units during military operations.

According to Le Monde and AP, Israeli officials privately acknowledge that such militias were encouraged to undermine Hamas’s control and gather intelligence during the ground campaign.

However, analysts say their existence now poses a moral and logistical problem for Israel as the war winds down.

Fear of retribution

With Gaza still devastated and no clear post-war authority in place, hundreds of Gazans linked to these militias now fear revenge attacks if Israeli troops withdraw.

The Israel Hayom report said some intelligence officers advocated limited evacuation for "high-risk collaborators", but that the army command blocked the idea, arguing that any organised extraction could inflame local anger and create political fallout.

Human rights groups warn that Israel has a duty under international law to protect civilians who aided its forces if they face a serious risk of reprisals.