The Military Operation in Jabalia and Post-War plans

The northernmost areas of the Gaza Strip—Jabalia, Beit Hanoun, and Beit Lahia—have been experiencing intensified military escalation and a new spike in the ongoing humanitarian crisis since the Israeli army announced on October 2 its third military operation in Jabalia since the war began last year. This new operation involves a heavy use of firepower and aerial and artillery bombardment, alongside other intimidation tactics such as tight sieges, evacuation orders, encirclement, and the destruction of remaining infrastructure. 

While Israel has outlined the operation’s goals as targeting Palestinian factions of fighters, regional and international concerns have grown due to the ambiguity of Israel’s intentions and the uncertainty surrounding its vision for the post-war period. There are fears of extremist elements in the Israeli government seeking to occupy northern Gaza and rebuild Israeli settlements there. This concern is particularly heightened in light of several documents supporting Israel’s operational and security control in the Strip, such as the “Document of Principles” and the “Generals’ Plan.”

This paper aims to analyze these plans in connection with Israel’s military actions on the ground and their political, geographical, and demographic implications for the Gaza Strip. 

The Third Military Operation in Jabalia

The city of Jabalia was among the first areas the Israeli army entered during the early months of the war. Israel invaded it again at the beginning of May 2024 in an operation that lasted around 20 days. Both times, the Israeli army faced challenges in establishing operational control over the town and its refugee camp due to the forceful opposition of Palestinian factions, particularly when compared to other parts of the Strip that have become quieter. Today, Jabalia remains one of the main strongholds of Hamas in northern Gaza. Hence, Israel has launched its third military operation there.

While Jabalia is being bombed by Israel, neighboring towns in northern Gaza are facing an unprecedented crisis since the outbreak of the war due to Israel purposefully hindering the delivery of humanitarian aid. Meanwhile, Israel’s intensified military operations is preventing displaced northern residents now living in the south from returning to their homes, even after the humanitarian ceasefire that took effect in November 2023. These circumstances have prompted several countries, with Jordan playing a notable role, to adopt alternative humanitarian response methods, including air-dropping aid, particularly to the beleaguered residents of northern Gaza.

In March 2024, the United States attempted to facilitate aid delivery by establishing a temporary maritime pier in Gaza, though the Pentagon later announced its removal in May 2024. Meanwhile, international and UN organizations continued to warn of the risks of food insecurity across the Gaza Strip, especially in the northern region.

The escalation of military operations is unfolding amidst this continuing humanitarian crisis and heightened risks as winter approaches, which has been exacerbated by Israeli tactics and military pressure. Residential areas, as well as hospitals and shelters, are within the Israeli army’s operational zones. In addition, residential blocks have been specifically targeted. On October 12, Israeli forces destroyed an entire block of homes and apartment buildings using an explosive robot.

The situation is further aggravated by a complete blockade imposed by Israel since late September, according to UN reports. No food or medical supply trucks have been allowed to enter northern Gaza, a fact recently acknowledged by U.S. Vice President Kamala Harris. This blockade places approximately 400,000 Palestinian residents under siege, as confirmed by Philippe Lazzarini, the commissioner-general of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).

Furthermore, aid distribution is fraught with significant risks. On October 14, Israeli artillery targeted the UNRWA’s food distribution center in a Jabalia refugee camp, known as the Camp Supplies Center, resulting in the death and injury of dozens of displaced Palestinians. 

Timing of the Operation: Indications and Context

While Israel’s military operation in northern Gaza coincides with increased discussion about the “Generals’ Plan” to clear clear Palestinians from the northern part of the Gaza Strip to allow for settlements, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has not officially or explicitly endorsed the plan. However, concerns persist about its implicit implementation, as it has become a topic of debate between the United States and Israel. 

During his October 22 visit to Israel, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken pressed Netanyahu and Strategic Affairs Minister Ron Dermer to provide assurances that the current military operation in northern Gaza is not an on-the-ground application of the General’s Plan. According to reports, the prime minister denied this, but American officials remain concerned since Netanyahu refused to declare this publicly. The United States views Israel’s actions as potentially isolating northern Gaza, raising fears that the residents there could effectively become targets. 

The military operation is accompanied by a series of actions and statements from Israeli officials that suggest its timing and context reflect Israel’s serious intentions to alter the geographic and demographic reality of northern Gaza. This differs from previous operations, which were primarily framed around Israel’s declared military objectives.

The operation coincides with a heightened discourse about settlement expansion. On October 16, Gadi Eizenkot, the Israeli War Council’s former chief of staff, was informed that the Israeli government had expressed intentions to build a settlement in Gaza. On October 21, a group of extremists, in collaboration with Israel’s ruling Likud party, held a “Preparing for the Re-Settlement of Gaza” conference attended by Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, Housing Minister Yitzhak Goldknopf, and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir. And on October 23, quoting the leader of the Israeli settler movement Nachala, The Wall Street Journal reported that 700 Israeli families have registered to move into six potential residential settlements in Gaza.

Despite Netanyahu’s denials, there appear to be persistent efforts and intense pressure on the Israeli government from extremist ministers to establish a foothold in the Gaza Strip. These efforts are framed under the pretext that settlement construction is essential for ensuring the security of areas surrounding Gaza. On October 22, Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich explicitly stated, “There will be no security without settlement.”

Israel’s Military Operation and the Post-War Landscape

The current military operation in northern Gaza is unfolding amid uncertainty surrounding both Israeli and U.S. visions for Gaza’s future after the war. There is no clear agreement on a ceasefire or the exchange of prisoners and detainees. This lack of clarity contrasts with U.S. President Joe Biden’s plan, announced May 31, for a three-phase process aimed at achieving Gaza’s recovery and reconstruction. In the absence of progress toward such a resolution, several Israeli and U.S. plans have gained momentum, aligning closely with the ongoing military actions in northern Gaza.

The Document of Principles for the Post-Hamas Era

Proposed by Netanyahu and approved by his Security Cabinet on February 22, this document emphasizes Israel’s goal to eliminate the military capabilities of both Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It addresses both the security and civil spheres in Gaza, focusing on maintaining Israeli control over all borders of Gaza with Israel and Egypt, transferring administrative responsibility in the region to local actors, and replacing the UNRWA with other agencies or bodies.

The General’s Plan

Presented by former National Security Council head Giora Eiland to Netanyahu and the Ministry of Defense in September 2024, this plan aims to exert pressure on Palestinian factions and its fighters in northern Gaza, which Israel estimates to number around 5,000 fighters, and to attempt to establish a new administration in those areas.

According to a copy of the plan obtained by the Associated Press, the solution for northern Gaza is limited to two options: compel the militants to surrender or face death. The plan is divided into two phases. The first phase begins with evacuating northern Gaza of its civilian population into southern Gaza, thus clearing the area north of the Netzarim Corridor Israel established to divide northern and southern Gaza. The second phase involves turning northern Gaza into a closed military zone governed by Israeli military regulations, thus imposing a blockade on any access to essential resources for the area and isolating it from the rest of the Gaza Strip. Any resident choosing to remain in the area would be considered a combatant and could be targeted for death. 

The Humanitarian Bubbles Plan

The military operation in Jabalia and the surrounding areas aligns with the concept of closed communities or humanitarian bubbles. This plan aims to create protected zones to facilitate the delivery of aid. The Israeli government discussed this proposal officially submitted by Global Delivery Company (GDC), which includes among its staff former Israeli military officers and agents from the U.S. military and intelligence community, on October 22.

In a statement released October 21, GDC revealed that it had held extensive discussions with the Israeli Ministry of Defense, the Israeli army, and the prime minister’s office regarding the available methods for implementing the plan. GDC President Moti Kahana stated that Netanyahu had recommended to the Ministry of Defense that it begin applying the plan.

 Under the plan, once the Israeli army declares northern Gaza free of fighters and armed factions, GDC will begin establishing protected, enclosed communities surrounded by a separation wall. These areas will be off-limits to residents living outside them, with entry controlled through biometric identification. The company claims that this approach is the most effective way to ensure the safe delivery of aid, preventing theft or exploitation by fighters.

Three Approaches to the Post-War Period

Given the outlined plans, principles, and divisions, the ongoing military operation appears to be part of enforcing Israel’s vision on the ground as a de facto reality. It reveals Israel’s view of the post-war period, particularly regarding the following four approaches.

Geographic Division of the Gaza Strip

Israeli actions during the war align with the geographic changes imposed on the Gaza Strip, dividing it into three areas: northern, central, and southern Gaza. These geographic engineering efforts have created this division as a de facto reality. The Netzarim Axis, a zone of occupation that Israel established to separate northern Gaza from Wadi Gaza, measures approximately 6.5 kilometers (4 miles) wide and includes three main routes: one for heavy tanks and armored vehicles, another for light vehicles, and a high-speed route for rapid movement.

Additionally, operational control has been enforced in contact zones, such as the Philadelphi Route in the south and along the northeastern border of the Gaza Strip, which spans about 60 kilometers (4 37 miles) along the Gaza envelope

Social Engineering

Since the outbreak of the war, Israel has repeatedly moved entire populations of people in the Gaza Strip, effectively shifting the population density to the Mawasi area, which is now brimming with approximately 1.4 million displaced residents. This has resulted in a decrease in population density in northern and central regions.

It is evident that Israel aimed to control the reverse movement of displaced individuals as they attempt to return to their homes, either during or after the war. This strategy facilitates Israel’s ability to manage communities in northern Gaza and determine who is permitted to return and who is not. This concept underpins the “humanitarian bubbles” that Israel plans to establish in collaboration with private security companies.

Security Companies as Alternatives to Law Enforcement

There is increasing discussion about the future role of private security companies in managing key facilities in the Gaza Strip, ensuring security, and distributing aid. This idea emerged in May this year when the Israeli government engaged in talks with American security firms to manage the Rafah Crossing. The concept gained traction with discussions around assigning GDC the responsibility for maintaining security in northern Gaza after the conclusion of combat operations.

This approach serves as an alternative to the refusal of Arab states to send police forces to restore order in Gaza, as well as the Israeli army’s inability to fulfill this role effectively due to its lack of capacity for non-combat community management.

However, the roles of these private American companies are tied to various multilateral arrangements, including the necessity of obtaining U.S. congressional approval to operate in Gaza. There are also complexities that may arise from this arrangement, particularly the potential for these companies to be viewed as part of an occupation, which could prompt armed resistance against them. For instance, GDC faced attacks from the Taliban in Afghanistan and Blackwater, an American private military contractor, has encountered assaults in Iraq since 2003.

Moreover, concerns about the neutrality of these companies are heightened by their leadership structure, which includes former Israeli and American officials such as Stuart Seldowitz, a former advisor in the Obama administration who was arrested in November 2022 on charges of a “hate crime,” although those charges were dropped in June 2024. Gotham Government Relations, a U.S. lobbying firm, severed its ties with Seldowitz due to the allegations against him.

Conclusion

All plans, actions, and geographic and social engineering efforts indicate that Israel is determined to continue its occupation of the Gaza Strip indefinitely, maintaining control over its security and administrative affairs. It is likely that these plans serve as a legal cover for this presence under the pretext of distributing aid.

Finally, whether these plans are feasible or not, they fall within the framework of conflict management rather than resolution. This implies that they will not put an end to the threats faced by the Israeli army within the Gaza Strip nor to those affecting the areas surrounding Gaza or the companies that may be involved in managing security operations there. Since the sustainability of these solutions is questionable, they remain partial and temporary measures that do not amount to strategic steps.