Israel’s Interior Minister Moshe Arbel, a prominent figure in the ultra-Orthodox Shas party, recently announced that efforts to evacuate Palestinians from the Gaza Strip were proceeding with notable success. Speaking at a conference on April 7, he revealed that 16 flights had already departed from Ramon Airport in southern Israel, ferrying Gazans to unspecified destinations. He expressed confidence that this figure would soon climb, reflecting optimism about a contentious initiative that has stirred both domestic and international debate.
This evacuation scheme is a cornerstone of a broader plan, first floated by US President Donald Trump in February and now energetically championed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Under this proposal, the United States would assume control of Gaza, offering its residents the option to relocate to third countries while the war-ravaged territory undergoes reconstruction, envisioned as the “Riviera of the Middle East.”
Netanyahu’s determination to see this plan through has only hardened, despite mounting global criticism and signs that Trump’s initial enthusiasm may be fading. There were reports last month that Netanyahu had directed Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, to scour the globe for nations willing to accept significant numbers of displaced Gazans. Countries such as Somalia and South Sudan were reportedly approached, though no firm agreements have emerged.
Last week, Defence Minister Israel Katz took a further step, announcing that Yaakov Blitshtein, a senior official in the defence ministry, had been appointed to oversee what Katz termed the “voluntary immigration” of Gaza’s residents. Katz outlined a collaborative effort with foreign governments and international organizations to facilitate this process, framing it as a pragmatic response to Gaza’s dire circumstances.
Interestingly, following a meeting with Trump in the Oval Office on April 7, Netanyahu insisted that the migration program was entirely voluntary. He argued that it provided a humanitarian lifeline for Gazans, whose homeland has been reduced to rubble after 18 months of conflict triggered by Hamas’s October 2023 attack on Israel.
“It’s going to take years to rebuild Gaza,” said Netanyahu, suggesting that offering residents a chance to leave was a compassionate alternative to indefinite displacement within the territory. Yet Trump, whose initial proposal had sparked the idea, appeared less committed. He reportedly described it as “a concept I had” before pivoting to discuss US tariffs, border security, and negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program, leaving Netanyahu to carry the torch alone.
This dynamic was further on display during Netanyahu’s recent visit to Hungary, where a senior Israeli diplomatic source said that Israel was engaged in “serious talks with several countries” to advance the relocation effort. The source emphasised that Israel was “not abandoning Trump’s vision,” even as neighbors like Egypt and Jordan—initially floated by Trump as potential destinations—categorically rejected the idea. Both nations have insisted that peace requires Palestinian statehood, not mass displacement, with Egypt citing concerns about domestic stability and the risk that Gazans might never return.
Netanyahu’s steadfast pursuit of this plan is emblematic of a broader rightward shift, a trajectory analysts increasingly attribute to Trump’s tacit support. Historically, western leaders exerted significant pressure to temper Netanyahu’s more aggressive impulses. Joe Biden, during his four-year tenure, reportedly pressed for restraint on numerous occasions, though his efforts often yielded little success. Europe, too, has been quick to voice disapproval. Yet today, the landscape has shifted dramatically.
Trump has shown little inclination to echo his predecessor’s admonishments. At their April 7 meeting, Trump lauded Netanyahu as “a brilliant leader” but remained conspicuously silent on Israel’s latest military offensive in Gaza. Among the incidents Trump declined to address were a strike on ambulances and a fire truck that killed 15 emergency workers, and an April 3 bombing of a school-turned-shelter that left dozens dead, including children.
Netanyahu seems to be capitalizing on this “expanded room to maneuver.” Trump’s refusal to comment on the escalating violence—following a tenuous two-month ceasefire—has further emboldened the Israeli leader, freeing him to pursue both military and political objectives with fewer external constraints. This freedom is particularly evident in Netanyahu’s handling of Gaza, where the evacuation plan has drawn sharp criticism.
Defence Minister Katz claimed that “at least 40 percent of Gaza’s residents are interested in migrating,” citing internal ministry assessments, though he offered no concrete evidence to substantiate this figure. The United Nations has warned that the scheme could constitute ethnic cleansing and violate international law, amplifying concerns about its legality and practicality.
Domestically, Netanyahu’s position has never been stronger. He has effectively neutralized nearly all challenges to his far-right coalition, a resilience bolstered by a loyal base that views his actions as decisive rather than authoritarian. This domestic stability has fueled his renewed push to overhaul Israel’s judicial system, a controversial plan to curb the judiciary’s independence that once provoked sharp rebukes from Washington.
Observers suggested that Trump’s own public attacks on American judges and legal institutions might be seen by Netanyahu as a green light for his own efforts. Indeed, Netanyahu has adopted similar rhetoric, repeatedly accusing his opponents of forming a “deep state” intent on undermining his leadership—a phrase that echoes Trump’s frequent grievances.
Europe, long a vocal critic of Netanyahu’s policies, has been relegated to the sidelines. Trump’s disruptive trade policies, headlined by an erratic and unpredictable tariff war, have left European leaders scrambling. They have already been worried about the Trump administration’s disdain for NATO and warm ties with Russia.
Europe, in any case, is no longer united. For instance, Hungary, under Prime Minister Viktor Orban, is a staunch ally of Trump, Putin, and Netanyahu. Netanyahu recently enjoyed a warm reception in Hungary from Orban, who announced closer ties with Israel and also his intention to pull Hungary out of the International Criminal Court, which in November issued arrest warrants against Netanyahu. Observers now look at Netanyahu as a prime minister free to pursue his own agenda, backed by Europe’s indifference and Trump’s tacit encouragement.
Yet this trajectory is not without risks. The Gaza emigration plan remains deeply controversial, as a vast majority of Palestinians appear prepared to stay despite the destruction. International opposition, meanwhile, continues to grow. The UN’s warnings of legal breaches and ethnic cleansing carry weight, and the lack of willing host countries could render the evacuation scheme unfeasible.