Israel’s move to occupy large swaths of Gaza has sparked backlash from Democrats on Capitol Hill, where lawmakers are warning that the escalation is an impediment — not a pathway — to the end of the Hamas war.
The Democrats are quick to endorse Israel’s right to self-defense in a hostile region, especially in the wake of the deadly attack by Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023. Overwhelmingly, the party has voted to support billions of dollars in military aid to Tel Aviv.
But the hard-line strategy being advanced by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — not only the occupation of Gaza, but also a months-long blockade on humanitarian aid — is acting only to destabilize the region at the expense of a lasting peace deal, the lawmakers say.
“It’s the wrong approach,” Rep. Adam Smith (Wash.), senior Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said bluntly. “They need to get humanitarian assistance into Gaza. And they’ve been saying for at least 15 months now that, ‘We’re going to come in, we’ll control the distribution of that aid.’
“And they’ve never done it.”
Smith said he’s been in conversations with Arab leaders in the region, including a recent discussion with Jordan’s King Abdullah II, who think they have good-faith Palestinian partners who could replace Hamas and eventually lead a Palestinian state alongside Israel. He’s worried that Netanyahu, who opposes the two-state design, is impairing those prospects with a military campaign that’s killed more than 50,000 people in Gaza, including thousands of children.
“They think they’ve got people they can work with who are an alternative to Hamas. And Israel’s undermining that,” Smith said. “If you’re going to get to a future without Hamas, you have to have something other than Hamas. So I’m very worried about the plans, and what he’s doing and what the impact is going to be.
“It’s going to lead to greater instability in the region.”
Some of Israel’s closest congressional allies are sending a similar message.
Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.), who heads the House Abraham Accords Caucus, emphasized that eliminating Hamas is “critical” to any peace deal. But he also warned that Netanyahu’s military strategy is putting the hostages still held by Hamas “at great risk.” And he rejected any plan to annex the Palestinian territories — Gaza and the West Bank — or force the permanent removal of the Palestinians living there.
“In the same way there can’t be peace with Hamas controlling Gaza, there’s not going to be peace without the Palestinians having a prospect in the future for self-determination and control of their own destiny,” Schneider said. “Gaza is a Palestinian territory. I’ve been clear on that.”
“If you want to get to a long-lasting peace, it’s got to be done with the Palestinians eventually having a place that they govern themselves — no Hamas — along with the other countries in the region,” echoed Rep. Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), senior Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
Earlier this month, the Israeli government approved a plan to occupy parts of the Gaza Strip as part of their ongoing fight against the Hamas operatives who carried out the Oct. 7 attack, which left roughly 1,200 people dead and saw hundreds more taken hostage. The move marked a reversal for Netanyahu and the Israeli government, which had vowed for the previous 18 months not to take that step.
The turnaround came after the ascension of a new military leader, Eyal Zamir, a former tank commander now overseeing the operations in Gaza, who is taking a more aggressive approach that features the deployment of thousands of Israeli reservists who will remain in Gaza after Hamas militants are rooted out.
Palestinian residents would be relocated, as part of the strategy, and Israel would play a much greater role in the delivery of humanitarian aid.
On Monday, Netanyahu announced the occupation policy would apply to the entire Gaza Strip.
“This is part of defeating Hamas, in parallel with the tremendous military pressure, our massive entry, to essentially take over all of Gaza and strip Hamas of all ability to plunder humanitarian aid,” Netanyahu said, according to Reuters.
“This is the war and victory plan.”
The occupation has been welcomed by a small minority of Democrats, who say it represents the best chance of not only defeating, but also dismantling, Hamas.
“He’s had the wrong strategy for a counterinsurgency for a long time. And this is actually part of a successful counter-insurgency strategy,” said one House Democrat, who spoke anonymously to discuss a sensitive topic. “You can’t clear land and leave. You have to actually hold and build.
“It’s a lesson we learned time and again in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
A much larger number of Democrats, however, are up in arms over Netanyahu’s handling of the conflict in Gaza, in general, and the recent escalation, in particular.
Some fear it’s part of a larger strategy to seize the entirety of Gaza, remove the Palestinians living there and develop it for Western consumption — a plan President Trump has promoted on several occasions since returning to power this year.
“Though there has been some daylight between Trump and Netanyahu on general policy issues, I think they’re united on their plan to evict Palestinians — all Palestinians — from Gaza and redevelop it into a luxury development with settlements,” Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) said.
“They have no desire for a Palestinian state,” he continued. “The two-state solution is dead in the eyes of Netanyahu and MAGA.”
The escalation has rekindled the focus on the long-standing allegations of corruption facing Netanyahu — charges that are winding their way through Israel’s courts. Some Democrats contend the prime minister’s instincts for political survival are driving his forceful approach in Gaza even in the face of mounting civilian casualties.
“What [Hamas] did on Oct. 7 was horrendous and not defensible, and I understand that. He’s trying to retaliate for that. But there needs to be a point where he stops,” Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) said. “But I don’t think he can stop, politically, because his trial is still hanging over him and he can still be removed from office.
“Politically, I think he’s [acting on] self-preservation.”