Gazans fear forced expulsion as Katz, Ben-Gvir revive talk of 'voluntary migration'

For Palestinians in Gaza, the latest Israeli talk of ethnically cleansing the enclave's population sounds less like a new proposal than a revival of an old threat — one that is once again being packaged as "voluntary migration".

The idea has returned to the centre of Israeli political discourse through statements by Defence Minister Yisrael Katz and a detailed proposal reportedly being prepared by National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who has made the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza a key part of his political agenda.

Speaking at a conference hosted by Ynet and Yedioth Ahronoth on Tuesday, Katz claimed there was "no real solution for Gaza ultimately without this emigration".

He said Israel was "organised and prepared to remove them - by sea, by air, and by every possible means", but was waiting for US approval and for destinations to be identified.

Katz also claimed that US President Donald Trump's controversial Gaza proposal had not been cancelled but was merely "frozen".

He suggested its implementation would depend on Washington's position and Hamas's adherence to the ceasefire agreement.

He further claimed, without providing a source, that 80 per cent of Gaza's residents wanted to leave and that Hamas was preventing them from doing so.

From rhetoric to a political project

Ben-Gvir's proposal appears to take the idea a step further by attempting to turn displacement into an organised state-backed project.

According to Yedioth Ahronoth, his "Disengagement 710" plan would seek to encourage 250,000 Palestinians to leave Gaza during its first year, 1.11 million within three years and around 1.86 million within seven years.

The proposed programme would provide those leaving with assistance covering destination countries, legal status, documents and visas, travel costs, initial accommodation, vocational training and employment. Support could reportedly continue for up to 24 months.

Ben-Gvir has named Turkey, Ethiopia, the Democratic Republic of Congo and several Arab countries as potential destinations.

The plan is estimated to cost around US$3.5 billion to establish and operate, with an additional funding framework that could reach US$16.6 billion, according to the Israeli newspaper.

Ben-Gvir's Otzma Yehudit party reportedly wants the project to become a condition for joining the next Israeli government, including the creation of a dedicated government office for what it calls "voluntary emigration".

Yet major obstacles remain. There is no clear indication that the countries mentioned are prepared to receive large numbers of Palestinians, while the United States has not publicly offered unequivocal backing for the project. Palestinian, Arab and international opposition would also make implementation highly contentious.

The renewed push comes as most of Gaza's population continues to live amid widespread destruction and displacement, while Israel maintains military control over large parts of the Strip.

For Palestinians, the distinction between "voluntary" and forced displacement is becoming increasingly difficult to accept.

They argue that when homes, livelihoods and basic infrastructure are destroyed, while movement and reconstruction remain heavily restricted, leaving can become less a matter of choice than an outcome imposed by circumstances.

For Gaza residents, however, the political feasibility of such a plan is not their only concern. A deeper fear is that prolonged devastation could gradually turn an imposed reality into what Israel portrays as a "voluntary" decision.

Mohammed Abu Jabal, a resident of central Gaza, rejects the idea outright.

"How can emigration be voluntary when we live among the rubble, have lost our homes and livelihoods, and fear for our lives every day?" he told The New Arab. "They want to destroy the place and then tell us that those who leave chose to leave."

"I will not leave Gaza. Even if my house is destroyed, I will stay here and rebuild it," he said. "The problem is not with the Palestinian who wants to live with dignity, but with the occupation that wants to make life impossible and then presents leaving as an option."

Between refusing displacement and fearing the future

But absolute rejection of displacement does not mean Palestinians are free of fears about what lies ahead.

Ahmed al-Arabeed, displaced multiple times during the war, told TNA his main concern was not just Israel implementing a displacement plan, but that Gaza's conditions could worsen to the point where people feel they have no options.

"I don't want to leave Gaza, and I don't want my children to leave, but I fear what will happen in the coming years," he said.

"When we hear the Israeli Defence Minister talking about ready-made displacement plans, and then hear about a plan aimed at expelling more than a million people, we ask ourselves: What will happen to us if the pressure continues?" he asked.

"People might be willing to endure hunger and destruction to remain on their land," he added. "But the fear is that life itself will become impossible, and people will gradually be driven to consider leaving."

For Samir Abu Shaaban, responsibility also extends beyond Israel. He argues that Palestinian division and Arab inaction have weakened Palestinians' ability to influence their own future.

"We cannot hold Israel solely responsible for what we have reached," he said. "The Palestinian factions, with all their differences and divisions, have allowed the Palestinian decision-making process to become weak and have let Israel control people's lives and their future, while the Arab position has been powerless to stop this."

"What is needed today is a unified Palestinian position that protects people from displacement, and a genuine Arab position," he added. "Continued Arab inaction will only embolden Israel to impose its vision."

Fatah spokesperson Iyad Abu Zneit described Katz's remarks as "dangerous", saying Israel has "ready and successive plans for displacement and extermination".

He pointed to Israeli military control over approximately 70 per cent of Gaza, arguing that confining Palestinians to the remaining areas forms part of a broader policy aimed at pushing them out.

Displacement and Israel's election calculations

Palestinian political analyst Akram Atallah told TNA that the renewed focus on displacement cannot be separated from Israel's domestic political calculations, particularly as the country heads towards elections.

But he warned against dismissing the proposals as mere electoral rhetoric.

Israel, he argued, is seeking to keep displacement among the options available for Gaza's future. Describing the process as "voluntary" does not change the conditions under which Palestinians would be making such a decision.

"The destruction of Gaza's living environment continued military control and restrictions on movement and reconstruction could make leaving appear to be a choice while effectively removing meaningful alternatives," Atallah explained.

He believed that Ben-Gvir's detailed targets and financial estimates aimed to turn displacement into a political project, pressure Netanyahu from the right, and keep the issue on the future Israeli government's agenda.

"The greatest danger lies not only in declaring a displacement plan but in creating conditions in which Palestinians are presented with two choices: remain in a devastated and besieged Gaza, or leave in search of safety," he said.