By SCM Foreign Desk
JERUSALEM — In a blunt declaration that directly undermines international peace frameworks and highlights growing fractures within Israel’s governing coalition, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir announced that Israel intends to establish Jewish settlements across the entirety of the Gaza Strip, flatly proclaiming, “Gaza is ours.”
The firebrand minister’s comments represent the most explicit layout yet of the far-right’s post-war vision for the Palestinian territory. Speaking to supporters, Ben-Gvir contrasted current military realities with the political landscape of recent years.
”If we had said three years ago that we would control 70 percent of Gaza, no one would have believed it,” Ben-Gvir said. “So I say today: there will be a Jewish settlement in all of Gaza. Gaza is ours.”
The statement comes at a time of extreme volatility. Right-wing activist groups, backed by several coalition lawmakers, have recently organized mass demonstrations and symbolic marches near the Gaza periphery, demanding a permanent return to the coastal enclave. In response to rising tensions and the potential for unauthorized civilian border crossings, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have repeatedly designated regions around the strip as closed military zones.
A Radical Vision Enters the Mainstream
Ben-Gvir, a settler himself who leads the ultranationalist Jewish Power party, has a long history of incendiary rhetoric. However, his latest remarks underscore how ideas once confined to the fringes of Israeli politics are increasingly being treated as actionable policy objectives by senior members of the government.
For months, Ben-Gvir and his ideological ally, Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, have advocated for the “voluntary migration” of Palestinians out of Gaza and the re-establishment of Gush Katif—the bloc of 21 Jewish settlements that Israel evacuated in 2005 during its unilateral disengagement from the territory.
But Ben-Gvir’s new assertion goes significantly further than merely rebuilding what was lost in 2005. By claiming ownership over the whole enclave, the minister is signaling an intent for total, permanent displacement and occupation—a scenario that the United Nations, the European Union, and Israel’s closest ally, the United States, have repeatedly warned would be catastrophic and unlawful.
The Threat to Global Diplomacy
The open declaration of settlement expansion inside Gaza creates an immediate diplomatic crisis for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The Prime Minister has repeatedly told international partners, including the White House, that Israel does not intend to permanently resettle Gaza, aware that doing so would utterly derail U.S.-backed regional normalization efforts and breach international law.
Yet, Netanyahu’s political survival remains tightly bound to far-right ministers like Ben-Gvir and Smotrich. The domestic friction is palpable:
The Far-Right Block: Threatens to collapse the government coalition if any long-term peace plan limits Jewish expansion or allows Palestinian governance in Gaza.
The Defense Establishment: The IDF remains focused on immediate security maneuvers and containment, actively blockading border zones to prevent radical settler groups from creating illegal outposts that would draw resources away from operational needs.
The International Community: Legal bodies like the International Court of Justice continue to scrutinize Israel’s operations, with statements from sitting ministers often cited by critics as evidence of intent to execute forced displacement.
Background: A Deepening Divide
The debate over Gaza’s future is deeply rooted in the historical trauma of the 2005 disengagement. For the Israeli right, the removal of settlements from Gaza is viewed as a historic mistake that directly enabled the rise of militant factions. The current conflict has been seized upon by nationalist factions as a strategic opportunity to reverse history.
As military operations stretch on, the humanitarian situation for Gaza’s millions of displaced residents grows grayer, compressed into shrinking designated zones.
Simultaneously, the rhetoric of total ownership from figures within the Israeli cabinet makes a negotiated two-state solution or any coherent post-war stabilization plan look increasingly out of reach.
Ben-Gvir’s declarations may not represent the formalized policy of the entire Israeli state, but as a sitting National Security Minister, his words carry weight—shaping the expectations of his voters and signaling to the world that the fight for Gaza is, for some, a war of permanent acquisition.
.
