Israel withdrew in 1994 from most areas of the Gaza Strip for a reason. Governing the lives of a million hostile Arabs was an unbearable burden. As a soldier who was sent for a few days to stand guard in the strip, I remember well how unpleasant it was to cross streets while hateful eyes stared at me.
This was the atmosphere before the Oslo Accords, which brought with it the withdrawal plan known as "Gaza and Jericho First." Israel fled from those areas to the cheers of both the Jewish and Arab masses. Yishai Levi conquered the hit charts with his honey-voiced song "Goodbye, goodbye Gaza. We're parting ways. I'll sit on the porch. I'll forget about the uniforms... I don't care for you, and I'm not in love with you. Keep your knife in their backs for your lovers."
Follow Israel Hayom on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram
But with the entry of Palestine Liberation Organization Chairman Yasser Arafat into the strip, the monster of terror began to form and that exploded upon us 29 years later. Before that, there were the suicide bombers in the mid-90s, the first rockets at the end of the decade, and the first terror tunnels at the beginning of the millennium. Yes, the first tunnel exploded on our soldiers as early as 2004. And the end is known.
Now the IDF is cleaning up the filth of terror that has accumulated in the strip for three decades. Assuming that victory is achieved, we will essentially return to square one. How does one control two million Arabs who have been taught from birth to kill "subhuman Jews," especially in a small, crowded, destroyed area lacking natural resources, whose population has no tradition of self-rule and aspiration for progress, but rather a culture of jihad and murder?
The term denazification was coined in the American Pentagon two years before Hitler's defeat. The founding idea was to destroy Nazism, not only militarily but also ideologically, politically, culturally, economically, educationally, and in short – in all spheres of life.
Even before its implementation, the Allies had a condition. They demanded Hitler's unconditional and complete surrender. Here there is already a difference between the German case and ours. Israel has not spoken so far about Hamas surrendering. On the contrary, in the midst of the war, we are making deals with it and its Qatari benefactors.
The victory of the Allies over Germany at the end of World War II was different from that of World War I. In 1945, every German citizen felt the defeat in the most personal and difficult way. Death, hunger, destruction, prostitution, looting, rape, the black market and foreign soldiers were everywhere. Nazi Germany was wiped off the face of the earth. Until this happened, no rehabilitation efforts began.
After the victory, the Allies established four occupation zones: Russian, American, French and British. For the purposes of this discussion, we will focus on the American example, which was the central player in establishing West Germany.
The Americans imposed full military rule over Germany for four years. This is the period in which the denazification process took place, the implementation of which changed from time to time.
At first, the Americans took a very hard line. Every German citizen over the age of 18 was required to fill out a questionnaire detailing his ties to the Nazi Party. It turned out that 10% of the population were party members. Due to a shortage of translators, the Americans even struggled to process all 45 million documents they received.
And yet, at the end of the war, 400,000 Germans were arrested, and 90,000 of them were held in detention until 1947. Some 3.5 million people who held significant roles in the Nazi party were allowed to work only as manual laborers.
Meanwhile, the Nuremberg trials began. They were deliberately held on German soil and guided by the American occupation and were extensively covered in the German media. The surviving senior officials of the Nazi regime were brought to justice. Some were executed, and others were sentenced to life imprisonment or shorter terms. There were also quite a few who were acquitted. The trials too were meant to convey the message of wiping Nazi ideology from the face of the earth.
The media was another key means of control. Censorship was imposed on the content of newspapers and radio stations operated by the authorities. Consistent democratic content was presented in them. It was forbidden to criticize the Americans, and of course to support the Nazis. Millions of Nazi publications, including books, poetry, and newspapers, were confiscated and destroyed. Anyone caught holding them was brought to trial. Libraries and librarians were also replaced to oversee what Germans read.
The rationale, as defined by General Dwight Eisenhower, was "only a long-term and inflexible occupying authority will be able to lead the Germans to a fundamental change in their latest political philosophy." He estimated it would take 50 years, but his patience and that of the American people was much shorter.
At the start of this process, Eisenhower ordered the destruction of Germany's means of production. The first was the arms industry, some of whose leaders were taken to the United States to assist there in the continued campaign against Japan. Later, the Americans realized that the German economy would not be able to recover, and therefore eased the severe restrictions.
Germany was of course forbidden to establish an army or any other armed force. Only in 2022, with the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, did the Germans begin investing in an army commensurate with the size of their state, which shows how long the restrictions on Germany lasted, even though in recent decades it was by their own free will.
Avoiding Stalin
It should be noted that Germany's denazification process was not easy. Frederick Taylor, author of the book "Exorcising Hitler (2011), explains that the ruling council of the Allies soon realized that without integrating former Nazi regime officials into the state apparatus, the state would not function.
Just as Hamas ingrained its rule at all levels of life in Gaza, so too did the Nazis imbue life with Nazism on every level: in business, law, trade unions, among lawyers, and of course bureaucrats. And so, albeit quietly and while being required to conceal their past, many of them were integrated into the new regime.
In 1949, a civilian federal government was established in West Germany, still under the strict supervision of the powers. This government was led by opponents of the Nazi regime, chief among them Konrad Adenauer, and not by people who agreed with them subliminally. However, Adenauer opposed the idea of denazification and advocated integrating former Nazi regime officials into the "new Germany," according to democratic norms. Despite turning a blind eye and whitewashing the past,
Ultimately, it worked. According to various scholars, denazification first and foremost succeeded because every German citizen learned personally and painfully where Nazism led them. More importantly, there was no one left after the defeat to rekindle nationalist sentiments again, unlike the situation at the end of World War I.
Another reason for German acceptance of the West was the alternative from the East: communism. That is, West German citizens understood that they had to obey America, otherwise they would be crushed by Joseph Stalin. This view is held, among others, by Michael Dobbs, author of the internationally bestselling book "Six Months in 1945," which describes the collapse of Germany. He believes that Israel's challenge in Gaza is even more complex than that faced by the Allies in Germany.
It's not just about Gaza
"I think it is intriguing and certainly an attractive/best-case scenario, but ultimately very improbable, unfortunately. It's attractive because it offers a model of how two defeated enemies can be turned into prosperous, democratic allies. Furthermore, it offers two slightly different models: Nazi Germany where all the political structures were dismantled (albeit some former Nazis were recruited to cooperate with the occupiers) and Japan where the emperor was permitted to stay in office as a symbol of continuity and respect for the traditions of the Japanese people," Dobbs explains. He then adds: "So why does the analogy break down? First, even assuming that Gaza is totally defeated and occupied at the end of this war, Gaza is only a small part of the Arab world. Jihad, Jihadists/Islamism, Islamists will continue to exist and thrive elsewhere in both the Arab world and the larger Middle East. Indeed their cause may be strengthened and reinvigorated by the memory of events in Gaza. This will not be (and can never be) a total defeat, comparable to the defeat of Nazism or Japanese militarism. Second, particularly in Germany, occupation by the US/western allies was seen as vastly preferable to the alternative: occupation by the Soviet Union. Even in defeat, the vast majority of Germans were relieved and grateful to find themselves under western rather than Soviet occupation. In fact, millions of Germans voted with their feet in favor of the Allies, moving westward in advance of the Red Army. While I am sure that there are many Gazans who are fed up with Hamas, I don't think there is the same basis of support (even passive) for a prolonged Israeli occupation of Gaza."
He offers the following conclusion: "Bottom line: I wish Israel well and hope for an outcome that will relieve suffering on both sides, but the problems of occupation/setting up democratic structures of government in a defeated land are even more intimidating and challenging than the western allies faced after World War II."
There is reason to assume Dobbs is right. In addition to all the differences between Gaza in 2024 and Germany in 1945, the world has become much smaller thanks to technology. Today, weapons can be manufactured in every home, and every mobile phone can be used to learn how to make bombs. Also, the US was free to do as it pleased in Germany. The whole world watches Israel's every move with 700 eyes.
Having said all this, and with all the differences noted, Israel has something to learn from the German story. First, Hamas must be brought to absolute defeat, not just a "decisive blow." The German experience teaches that Gazans need to understand that the Hamas idea brought terrible suffering upon them and that it has been ridden from this world.
And there is another lesson: As long as Hamas does not surrender, there is nothing to talk about regarding the rehabilitation of the strip. This is contrary to Israel's intention, as expressed this week by Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, who is under American pressure, to return Gazans to their homes in the northern strip. If rehabilitation begins before Hamas disappears, the Gazans' state of mind will have not been seared with their responsibility for the horrors. From a military point of view, there is also the question of why rebuild a neighborhood if two minutes later Hamas will take control of it again.
After surrendering and clearing the area from terrorists, there must be a thorough de-Hamasization process. Whether we rule over the strip or some kind of international entity, it is vital to implement reforms that uproot both Hamas ideology and other antisemitic and anti-Israeli content. These must be basic preconditions.
From the German example, it can be learned that there are ways to eradicate malignant ideology. Even if success is not complete, the effort will have not been in vain. The threat emanating from Gaza has lasted for 75 years. After what happened, we are permitted, and obligated, to do everything possible so that it is permanently removed.
Therefore, for example, trials against Hamas people should be held in Gaza, not Jerusalem. Every home in the strip must see them, as well as every classroom, even if it means closing down the internet and controlling the media. If Gazans want to enjoy the pleasures of democracy, they have to prove they are worthy of it. They can't have it both ways.
It is clear that any future government in the Strip must be extremely anti-Hamas. In addition, it must not engage in the Palestinian armed conflict. That itself would be fuel to reignite the fire. Whoever rules Gaza, their role will be to manage civilian life, clean of any kind of incitement against Israel or Jews. No compromises, no blinking, no "ifs" or "buts".
UNRWA cannot continue operating in Gaza, period. Here, by the way, the comparison to Germany works very well. After World War II, the UN founded a refugee agency, which has resettled tens of millions of refugees on the continent and around the world since then. UNRWA, on the other hand, has not solved the problem of a single Palestinian refugee and instead educates future generations to kill Jews, and in some cases even physically assists them in doing so.
Israel of course cannot allow the Palestinian Authority to be the body controlling Gaza. An "upgraded PA," which Americans and Yair Lapid are talking about, is also not exciting. The reforms required in the West Bank are no less than those required in Gaza. The Holocaust-denier Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has not condemned Hamas' Nazi-like crimes to this moment.
As in Germany, in addition to means of warfare, our soldiers need to destroy all Hamas propaganda tools. Physical and digital content must evaporate from phones and schools, mosques, and the media. In their place, Gazans should be educated about tolerance, inclusiveness, and acceptance of the Jew as a normative neighbor. This sounds fanciful, and there is no doubt that the murderous demons will not disappear overnight or even in a decade. But if we want life, there is no other way.
In an ideal world, it would be better if a foreign rule of any kind, Arab or Western, would clean up the Gazan cesspool. The chances of this happening are slim. Anyone entering the Strip, especially if Hamas is not annihilated, will encounter violent resistance and flee for their lives. As long as it's not about their own regimes' survival, Arab rulers are not known for great courage, and even more so when they might be seen as helping Israel against the Palestinians.
There are therefore all the reasons to think that the full burden, both civilian and not just security, will ultimately fall on our shoulders. It's worth internalizing that. Statements by Israel that "the day after, the Palestinians will rule themselves" are premature. Before Israel commits to Palestinian self-rule, it must first make clear in intricate detail how the de-Hamasization process will be carried out. This is a vital condition for survival.
It would be best if another solution was found, but the chances are that we will have to update the 1990s hit. "Goodbye, goodbye Gaza, we're coming back again. I don't care for you, and I'm not in love with you. But I won't let you stab me in the back again."
Subscribe to Israel Hayom's daily newsletter and never miss our top stories
