Former Israeli prime minister calls Gaza 'humanitarian city' a concentration camp
"It is a concentration camp. I am sorry," the 79-year-old told The Guardian on Sunday, when asked about a plan outlined by Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz last week, which would see an initial 600,000 Palestinians held in an area built on the ruins of Rafah city.
According to Katz, Palestinians in the area would undergo security screenings and would not be allowed to leave. Eventually, the entire civilian population would be concentrated in the same location.
Katz also said Palestinians would then be encouraged to "voluntarily" leave the Gaza Strip for other countries as part of an "emigration plan".
Responding to the proposal, Olmert said: "If [Palestinians] will be deported into the new 'humanitarian city', then you can say that this is part of an ethnic cleansing," adding that ethnic cleansing was the "inevitable interpretation" of the plan.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
'When they build a camp where they 'clean' more than half of Gaza, then the inevitable understanding of the strategy of this [is that] it is not to save [Palestinians]," he said.
"It is to deport them, to push them and to throw them away. There is no other understanding that I have, at least," he added.
Israel's newspaper of record, Haaretz, reported last week that Katz's plan has the backing of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
As of 14 July, it remains unclear when construction for the proposed city would begin or whether it could proceed without international backing.
Katz envisaged that, if conditions permitted, the city would be built during a two-month pause in hostilities. Such a ceasefire is currently being negotiated between Israel and Hamas through intermediaries, but remains far from agreement.
'Concentration camp': Israel's planned new city in Rafah, explained Read More »
International law and genocide experts told Middle East Eye last week that the plans would violate multiple provisions of international law.
Under the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, populations in occupied territories "shall at all times be humanely treated" and may only exceptionally be placed under assigned residence or internment when there are "imperative reasons of security".
"A blanket decision to enclose hundreds of thousands of people in a concentration camp or zone clearly falls well outside the lawful exception and would entail an unlawful deprivation of liberty in breach of IHL and of human rights law," Eitan Diamond, a senior legal expert based in Jerusalem with the Diakonia International Humanitarian Law Centre, told MEE.
Experts also said that Katz's so-called "voluntary emigration" plan - a manifestation of US President Donald Trump's proposal to ethnically cleanse the enclave - was far from "voluntary".
"There is nothing voluntary about any emigration scheme that Israel devises in these circumstances," Martin Shaw, a prominent sociologist and author of several books on the subject of genocide, told MEE.
"The people of Gaza have been bombed out of their homes, lost their loved ones, starved and shot at when they try to get food.
"Israel will be using all this cruelty to force people to leave and to remove their right to return, as they have from previous generations of Palestinians."
Olmert says he is 'ashamed and heartbroken'
Olmert spoke to The Guardian on the same day that funerals were held in the occupied West Bank for two Palestinian men, including a US citizen, killed by Israeli settlers.
"[It is] unforgivable. Unacceptable. There are continuous operations organised, orchestrated in the most brutal, criminal manner by a large group," the former premier said.
"There is no way that they can operate in such a consistent, massive and widespread manner without a framework of support and protection which is provided by the [Israeli] authorities in the [occupied Palestinian] territories."
Olmert said that extremist figures within Israel's cabinet, who have backed violence in the occupied West Bank and Gaza and authorised settlement expansion, are more dangerous for Israel's long-term security than any external foes.
"These guys are the enemy from within," he said.
He added that growing anger at Israel internationally could not all be dismissed as antisemitism.
'I cannot refrain from accusing this government of being responsible for war crimes committed'
- Ehud Olmert, former Israeli prime minister
"In the United States, there is more and more and more expanding expressions of hatred to Israel," he said.
"We make a discount to ourselves, saying: 'They are antisemites.' I don't think that they are only antisemites, I think many of them are anti-Israel because of what they watch on television, what they watch on social networks.
"This is a painful but normal reaction of people who say: 'Hey, you guys have crossed every possible line'."
Olmert called for stronger international pressure on Israel in the absence of any serious opposition in Israel. He also criticised Israel's media for failing to report on Israeli violence against Palestinians.
He said he initially backed Israel's war following Hamas' surprise attack on 7 October, which killed around 1,200 people.
But he later became "ashamed and heartbroken" by the Israeli government's actions, which he says amount to war crimes.
"What can I do to change the attitude, except for number one, recognising these evils, and number two, to criticise them and to make sure the international public opinion knows there are [other] voices, many voices in Israel?" he said.
He said Israeli commanders had looked away as actions were taken that would "cause the killing of a large number of non-involved people".
"That is why I cannot refrain from accusing this government of being responsible for war crimes committed."
Israeli forces have killed more than 58,000 Palestinians since the war on Gaza began in October 2023, and wounded at least 138,500 more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
32 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
UN chief: 'We must never accept hunger as a weapon of war'
United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres has urged the international community to reject hunger as a weapon of war amid mounting outrage over Israeli-imposed starvation in Gaza. 'Hunger fuels instability and undermines peace. We must never accept hunger as a weapon of war,' the UN chief said via video-conference. Israel has been blocking aid from entering Gaza for several months, while baselessly blaming the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the enclave on delivery inefficiencies caused by UN aid administrators.
Middle East Eye
37 minutes ago
- Middle East Eye
Israeli settlers torch cars, vandalise property in Taybeh attack
Israeli settlers torched two vehicles and spray-painted racist graffiti in the majority Christian-Palestinian village of Taybeh in the occupied West Bank early on Monday morning. According to Anadolu Agency, one of the homes belonged to a Christian-Palestinian journalist and the other to a village council member. There are no reports of settler arrests, which are rare occurrences amid near-daily settler attacks occurring across the West Bank. Settler attacks in Taybeh have increased in recent weeks, attracting concern from Western leaders and religious figures. A visit to Taybeh from a delegation of Christian leaders and European diplomats on 14 July was followed by a visit from US ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee on 19 July. He condemned the attacks as "unacceptable". "To commit an act of sacrilege by desecrating a place that is supposed to be a place of worship, it is an act of terror, and it is a crime," said Hukabee in a statement.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump's strategy for Middle East 'peace' is built on Israeli dominance. It will fail
The Trump administration is attempting to reshape the Middle East after launching strikes on Iran last month, adopting a strategy characterised by "peace through strength" and "commerce, not chaos". While this approach is presented as pragmatic, it risks destabilising the region in favour of maximising US and Israeli military and economic advantage. President Donald Trump considers himself an "expert dealmaker", believing that calculated military strikes create leverage for diplomatic gains - particularly by pressuring Iran back to the negotiating table. His strategy emphasises overwhelming but short-term military force to achieve defined goals, avoiding prolonged entanglements or "forever wars". It also marks a rejection of nation-building, shifting the burden of regional stability onto local partners. Though the strategic value of Middle Eastern energy resources has declined for the US, the region remains crucial - perhaps even more so under the current administration. As Med This Week reports, three primary factors shape recent US actions. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The first is the ideological alliance between far-right governments in the US and Israel, which transcends the traditional "special relationship" and reflects a deeper political and strategic alignment. The administration also views Israeli hegemony as a vehicle for regional stability, envisioning a dominant "Greater Israel", backed by overwhelming US support, capable of unilaterally enforcing peace and marginalising Iran. At its core, the Trump doctrine envisions a Greater Israel, backed by US power, enforcing peace and sidelining Iran Finally, personal financial interests - particularly those of Trump and his family - were prominently on display during his recent Gulf visit. The immediate objective of the 12-day war was to dismantle Iran's nuclear infrastructure and prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. Trump declared key sites "destroyed" or "shut down", hailing the campaign as a critical blow against a perceived existential threat. (A recent US intelligence report found that only one of the three targeted nuclear facilities was completely destroyed, with the others expected to be operational again within months.) These military operations have significantly reshaped regional power dynamics, pushing forward the Trump administration's regional strategy: normalising relations between Israel and Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia, and potentially extending to Oman, Indonesia, Qatar and even Syria. Yet this pursuit of realignment remains constrained by Israel's ongoing war on Gaza. A ceasefire and the release of Israeli hostages are seen as prerequisites for advancing and expanding normalisation. Israel: A hegemonic power? The US has demonstrated its willingness to act unilaterally with overwhelming force - particularly through the use of "bunker-buster" bombs on Iranian nuclear sites. This was portrayed as a show of unmatched American might, aimed not only at Iran but also as a deterrent to rivals like China and Russia. America's costly backing for Israel is enabling China's unstoppable rise Read More » Meanwhile, Israel has sought to project itself as a formidable military force with deep intelligence reach into Iran's nuclear and security infrastructure. Some Israeli officials have even claimed the country has joined the ranks of global powers, though the strikes, which killed large numbers of civilians, have drawn widespread criticism and raised questions about the legitimacy of such claims. Yet the question remains: can Israel truly become a hegemonic power in the region? Despite its recent operations and short-term tactical gains, Israel faces structural and political barriers to sustained dominance. It remains heavily reliant on US military, diplomatic and economic support. Deep-rooted regional conflicts persist, particularly the unresolved Palestinian issue, which continues to inflame public opinion and obstruct meaningful diplomatic engagement. Key regional powers such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt are unlikely to accept Israeli expansionism or hegemony. Meanwhile, Iran's political will to pursue its nuclear ambitions appears undiminished, with some analysts suggesting that the recent strikes may ultimately accelerate, rather than deter, its nuclear development. Iran's leadership, especially Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is unlikely to negotiate from a position of perceived weakness. The recent military escalation follows the US "maximum pressure" campaign and its hostile stance towards Iran after withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or Iran nuclear deal, in 2018. Together, these developments have reinforced Iranian mistrust and further narrowed the space for diplomacy. Furthermore, there is no credible assessment that the recent strikes have permanently crippled Iran's nuclear programme. Many analysts believe any setbacks will last only months, not years, and that Iran will simply shift operations deeper underground. Roadblocks to dominance The unresolved Palestinian question remains the greatest obstacle to expanding the Abraham Accords and achieving regional peace. Saudi Arabia has made its position clear: it demands an unambiguous commitment to establishing a Palestinian state. Yet the Netanyahu government - shaped by ultra-right forces - prioritises military dominance over meaningful negotiations, particularly in Gaza and the West Bank. Israel's military assault on Gaza has inflamed Arab public opinion, making normalisation politically costly for Gulf leaders. Without a clear post-war vision for Gaza and a comprehensive ceasefire, Israeli dominance is unsustainable. Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war Regional actors, especially in the Gulf, fear appearing complicit with a state widely viewed as violating Arab rights. Israel's prolonged war in Gaza and lack of a political roadmap have tarnished its global image, leading to growing international condemnation and even weakening support from traditional allies like the EU (though it declined to take any action). Israel's military assault on Gaza has inflamed Arab public opinion, making normalisation politically costly for Gulf leaders The erosion of diplomatic support for Israel - alongside the continued refusal to hold it accountable for its war crimes - has only furthered its isolation, undermining any bid for genuine regional leadership. Meanwhile, Israeli national security doctrine under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu relies on military superiority as the only guarantee of peace. But even claimed military "victories" come at staggering human and economic costs - both for Palestinians and for Israelis. Even if external military actions temporarily consolidate internal support - as seen in Iran - they often fail to trigger regime change or long-term stability. Decades of foreign interventions have shown that externally imposed political transitions are more likely to produce chaos than lasting peace. Regional and internal pressures have compounded the challenges facing Israel's hegemonic ambitions. Gulf states, wary of Iranian collapse, fear the resulting chaos, humanitarian crisis, refugee flows and nuclear proliferation. Domestically, Netanyahu faces mounting pressure amid public frustration over his failure to secure a full ceasefire in Gaza or release all hostages - exposing internal fractures that challenge any coherent long-term strategy. Crucially, Israel has not established a legitimate Palestinian governing authority to assume control of Gaza, nor has it succeeded in imposing external or co-opted leadership. The result is chaos and the emergence of new resistance movements - mirroring US failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Regional defiance Saudi Arabia has remained unwilling to embrace Israeli ambitions, insisting that any normalisation must be preceded by a concrete commitment to establishing a Palestinian state. However, Israel's aggression has made further agreements politically untenable. Gulf states must act to avoid Israel's war on Iran spiralling into chaos Hadi Kahalzadeh Read More » Some Gulf countries are reassessing their approach to Israel, questioning whether its actions foster stability or provoke further conflict. Many now prefer a long-term weakening of both Iran and Israel, rather than a decisive victory for either, to reduce threats to their own regimes. Saudi and Emirati strategies of hedging - including outreach to Iran - suggest a desire to avoid taking sides in regional conflicts, reducing their willingness to join an anti-Iran alliance led by Israel. Turkey, too, is unlikely to accept Israeli regional dominance. What was once a "golden age" of cooperation in the 1990s has devolved into mutual suspicion. Turkish leaders have grown increasingly vocal in their condemnation of Israel's actions, particularly in Gaza, and Ankara views Israel's deepening alliances with Greece and Cyprus as a threat. Turkey continues to build its own military and missile capabilities and asserts regional influence in Syria. It also positions itself as a potential mediator in Israeli-Iranian tensions - an indication of its desire to act independently. A fragile vision Trump's military campaign may have weakened Iran's nuclear ambitions and its regional allies, but long-term regional stability remains elusive. The current "peace" is more accurately described as a fragile truce than a durable shift. At its core, Israeli military superiority has failed to deliver political solutions. Without addressing the Palestinian question, stabilising Gaza, and navigating complex regional rivalries, lasting peace is impossible. Even if armed groups are temporarily subdued, the region's capacity to generate new forms of resistance endures Even if armed resistance groups such as Hezbollah or Hamas are temporarily subdued, the region's capacity to generate new forms of resistance endures. Israel may maintain its military edge, but it will continue to struggle for legitimacy and leadership in the Middle East. As violations of international law by the US and Israel mount, the message appears clear: "Only the weak follow the rules." Such a precedent erodes collective security and undermines any meaningful regional consensus. Real, enduring peace will not come through dominance alone - it demands diplomacy, justice, and the courage to confront the root causes of conflict. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
