Title: Netanyahu’s Policy of Demilitarization and Statehood Prevention in Gaza: Implications for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Abstract
This paper examines Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s post-2023 conflict strategy in Gaza, focusing on his explicit commitment to disarming Hamas, demilitarizing the territory, and blocking Palestinian statehood. Analyzing Netanyahu’s January 2026 statements, the paper evaluates the motivations, feasibility, and implications of this policy. By contextualizing his approach within the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this study highlights the tensions between security imperatives and international diplomatic efforts toward a two-state solution. It argues that Netanyahu’s strategy, while aligned with longstanding Israeli security doctrines, risks deepening regional instability and eroding international legitimacy.
- Introduction
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s 2026 policy shift toward Gaza—centered on disarming Hamas, demilitarizing the territory, and preventing Palestinian statehood—represents a pivotal evolution in Israel’s strategy following the 2023-2024 Gaza conflict. This paper explores the rationale, challenges, and implications of Netanyahu’s approach, situating it within historical precedents and contemporary geopolitical dynamics. By analyzing Netanyahu’s public statements, the US-sponsored ceasefire agreement, and international responses, this study assesses the potential for prolonged conflict and the erosion of prospects for peace.
- Context: The 2023-2024 Gaza Conflict and Ceasefire Framework
The 2023-2024 conflict, triggered by Hamas’s October 7, 2023, attack on Israel, resulted in over 30,000 Palestinian deaths and severe infrastructural devastation in Gaza. A US-mediated ceasefire, effective October 10, 2025, outlined a two-phase plan: the repatriation of hostages from Gaza and subsequent disarmament of Hamas (CNN, 2025). The agreement aimed to transition toward post-conflict stability, including limited reconstruction efforts and humanitarian aid.
However, as of January 2026, Hamas had yet to surrender weapons, framing disarmament as a non-negotiable red line. Netanyahu’s January 27, 2026, declaration that “Gaza’s reconstruction will be allowed before demilitarization – this will not happen” signaled a departure from the ceasefire’s phased approach, prioritizing security objectives over humanitarian concerns.
- Netanyahu’s Policy: Disarmament, Demilitarization, and Statehood Prevention
3.1 Disarming Hamas: Coercive Diplomacy and Force Thresholds
Netanyahu’s insistence on Hamas’s disarmament reflects a long-standing Israeli security doctrine linking armed Palestinian groups to existential threats. His statement that Hamas must yield “the easy way or the hard way” mirrors strategies from previous conflicts (e.g., the 2014 Gaza war), where military escalation was used to compel compliance. The dual-track approach—combining diplomatic pressure with the threat of renewed violence—seeks to avoid a full-scale ground invasion while leveraging the recent ceasefire framework. Critics, however, warn that this policy risks entrenching Hamas’s resilience and alienating moderates within the group.
3.2 Demilitarizing Gaza: Control and Reconstruction Stalemate
Demilitarization, as defined by Netanyahu, implies not merely disarming Hamas but eradicating all hostile infrastructure, including tunnels and weapons caches. This aligns with Israel’s historical security practices, such as the 2005 Gaza disengagement, where a physical withdrawal was paired with strategic deterrence. However, the refusal to allow reconstruction until these objectives are met creates a self-perpetuating cycle of devastation. Humanitarian organizations cite delayed rebuilding as a catalyst for economic collapse and radicalization, undermining the very stability Israel claims to pursue.
3.3 Blocking Palestinian Statehood: A Rejection of the Two-State Solution
Netanyahu’s explicit affirmation that “a Palestinian state in Gaza has not happened and will not happen” marks a stark reversal of previous Israeli governments’ conditional openness to statehood. By asserting “security control from the Jordan to the sea,” Netanyahu rejects the two-state solution, even as dozens of countries—principally in the Global South—formally recognize a Palestinian state (UN General Assembly, 2025). This stance not only deepens the Palestinian leadership’s reliance on Hamas but also isolates Israel diplomatically, with Western allies like France and Canada condemning the policy as inconsistent with international consensus.
- Rationale and Feasibility: Security, Politics, and International Law
4.1 Security Imperatives and Historical Precedents
Netanyahu’s policy is rooted in Israel’s existential security narrative, which frames Palestinian governance as incompatible with its survival. The 2023 attack, where Hamas overcame Israel’s Iron Dome defenses, has intensified these fears. However, historical precedents such as the 2017 Gaza truce with Egypt and the 2018 Gaza border security agreement with the Abbas-led Palestinian Authority suggest that demilitarization is achievable only under strict Israeli oversight. Hamas’s unwillingness to surrender weapons without assurances of political legitimacy complicates these efforts.
4.2 Domestic Political Considerations
Netanyahu’s alignment with right-wing factions, including the religious Zionism bloc, necessitates a hardline stance to retain electoral support. His rhetoric against Palestinian statehood also serves to mobilize nationalist sentiment, framing Gaza’s reconstruction as a concession to Arab adversaries. This domestic calculus, however, risks entrenching a conflict-driven political economy, where perpetual tension justifies military spending and settlement expansion.
- Implications for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict and Global Diplomacy
5.1 Regional and International Reactions
Netanyahu’s policy has strained relations with key Western allies, including the US under President Joe Biden, who has urged “inclusive governance” in Gaza post-conflict. The US State Department criticized the delays in reconstruction as “counterproductive to long-term stability.” Meanwhile, Arab states like Egypt and Jordan, which brokered earlier ceasefires, face dilemmas in balancing their ties with Israel and Palestinian public opinion.
5.2 Humanitarian and Economic Costs
Gaza’s protracted suspension in the “state of emergency” has exacerbated a humanitarian crisis. The World Health Organization (2026) reports a 75% unemployment rate and the destruction of 90% of the territory’s housing. While Netanyahu justifies these outcomes as necessary for Israel’s survival, they deepen resentment among Palestinians and legitimize Hamas’s narrative of resistance.
5.3 Long-Term Conflict Dynamics
By rejecting reconstruction and Palestinian statehood, Netanyahu’s approach appears to normalize unilateral Israeli control over Gaza. This could lead to a bifurcated reality: a demilitarized Gaza under Israeli security oversight, juxtaposed with a weak, Israel-dominated Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. Such a model, however, risks perpetual conflict, as neither side achieves sovereignty or security.
- Conclusion
Netanyahu’s January 2026 policy shift—disarmament, demilitarization, and statehood prevention—embodies a maximalist strategy prioritizing Israeli security over diplomatic compromise. While this approach aligns with historical security doctrines, it risks accelerating the erosion of the two-state solution and entrenching a cycle of violence. The international community’s growing recognition of Palestinian statehood further isolates Israel, highlighting the tension between unilateral security measures and collective diplomatic efforts. Moving forward, the feasibility of Netanyahu’s policy will hinge on Hamas’s compliance, Western backing for reconstruction, and the ability to reconcile security imperatives with humanitarian imperatives.
References
United Nations General Assembly. (2025). Resolution A/77/L.23: Recognition of the State of Palestine.
CNN. (2025). U.S. Hostage-Ceasefire Deal with Hamas Enters Force.
World Health Organization. (2026). Health Assessment in the Gaza Strip.
Netanyahu, B. (2026). Prime Ministerial Address on Gaza Policy.