This Should Be Front Page News - It Isn't Because It's Israel

Right, so Israel has never lacked for euphemisms, but with its latest plan for Rafah, it may have outdone even itself. In what Defence Minister Israel Katz is calling a “humanitarian city,” Israel intends to corral the last surviving Palestinians into a sealed enclosure atop the rubble of their former homes, with no freedom of movement, no future, and no way out — unless, of course, they agree to leave Gaza forever. In another context, this might be called mass internment. In Israel’s PR machine, it’s “relief.” The cruelty here isn’t just the policy — it’s the branding. What is being presented as a sanctuary is, in function and form, a concentration camp. Israel’s plan for Rafah is not a humanitarian response but the culmination of a campaign of ethnic cleansing — and arguably I would suggest this is a blueprint, perhaps, for how genocide will be carried out in the 21st Century, when the likes of concentration camps should have been consigned to the horrors of the past, because who ever stands in Israel’s way and blocks them from escalating their atrocities even further?
Right, so Israel has a new plan for Gaza. Not a ceasefire. Not reconstruction. Not even basic humanitarian relief as the deaths of over 600 people across the last month or so have amply demonstrated at the GHF so-called aid hubs, but which the head of UNRWA has more accurately termed as human abattoirs. Instead, Israel’s deranged Defence Minister Israel Katz has unveiled what he calls a “humanitarian city” — a sealed and militarised enclosure built on the rubble of Rafah where the surviving Palestinian population will be concentrated, controlled, and, ultimately, encouraged to leave Gaza entirely. So safe to assume their existence will be made so intolerable that they will leave. Far from a refuge, critics are calling it what it is: a concentration camp.
Far from a humanitarian gesture, the plan is the institutionalisation of demographic erasure under the guise of relief — and if implemented, it may mark the final death blow to Palestinian sovereignty in Gaza.
According to Israel Katz, the Israeli government is planning to construct a “humanitarian city” on the ruins of Rafah — one capable of housing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians forcibly displaced from across Gaza. The facility will include tent structures, military oversight, controlled entry and exit points, and will be completely fenced off. As Quds News reports, the stated goal is not merely containment, but to “push them to emigrate.”
This marks a significant shift in Israeli policy towards Gaza, the language is no longer guarded. This is not about humanitarian corridors, transit zones, or safe areas. Katz is open about the strategy: concentrate the population, manage them through a militarised “humanitarian” hub, and pressure them to leave Gaza — permanently. You can well imagine that that pressure will be to leave either breathing or no longer breathing.
The planned camp — set to imprison 600,000 Palestinians and I use that word imprison quite deliberately — has no meaningful freedom of movement or civilian oversight. It is part of a broader agenda to fragment Gaza into controllable, isolated chunks, breaking not only the geographical but the social cohesion of Palestinian life, ending it in principle before removing the people one way or another.
In international law, there is a critical difference between a refugee camp as this is in essence being framed as and a concentration camp which is what this amounts to in reality. The former, governed by the 1951 Refugee Convention, must be based on voluntary presence, freedom of movement, and civilian protection. Refugees may seek safety there, but they are not coerced or confined without cause.
A concentration camp, by contrast, is defined by coercion, confinement, and collective punishment. The Geneva Conventions prohibit the internment of civilians without trial or military necessity, especially under occupation. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court considers such actions — particularly when tied to identity-based targeting — to be crimes against humanity.
Israel’s proposed Rafah enclave does not meet the criteria of a refugee camp. It is a sealed zone. Civilians will be concentrated based on ethnicity. Exit will require military approval. There is no right of return, no long-term resettlement plan, and no access to judicial review. By every functional and legal standard, it is a concentration camp.
Ethnic cleansing, while not codified as a standalone crime, is recognised in international jurisprudence as a crime against humanity when it involves forced displacement, destruction of homes, and terror-inducing violence and we’ve all learned this from the South Africa case against Israel at the ICJ and other instances besides.
Israel’s campaign in Gaza over the past nine months alone has again displaced over 1.9 million people — more than 85% of the Strip’s population. The destruction of residential areas, hospitals, water systems, and schools, combined with the use of starvation as a weapon and denial of aid, has created conditions calculated to make life impossible.
The Rafah plan completes this trajectory. It is not just a response to crisis; it is the institutionalisation of displacement without return. As Katz himself confirmed, the plan’s endgame is not protection, but pressure: concentration and expulsion.
Under the 1948 Genocide Convention and Article 6 of the Rome Statute, genocide includes more than just acts of mass killing. It encompasses a range of actions that collectively aim to destroy a group, in whole or in part, based on their national, ethnic, racial, or religious identity. One such act is the infliction of conditions of life calculated to bring about the group’s physical destruction. This proposal is, in and of itself, aside from anything else Israel have done, an act of genocide. Another is the deliberate imposition of serious bodily or mental harm. It also includes measures intended to prevent births within the group or forcibly transferring children to another group.
The International Court of Justice has already ruled that Israel’s conduct in Gaza presents a plausible risk of genocide. ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan has issued arrest warrants for Israeli leaders for using starvation as a weapon — itself a war crime and potential act of genocide.
The Rafah plan does not merely follow those actions — it may consolidate them, throwing international law back in the courts faces and reliant as they are on the likes of UN signatory nations to enforce said laws and too many signatories have just been blatantly not doing that, international law itself gets ground into the dirt along with the hopes of Palestinian people who just want the right to live in their own land. By trapping an entire ethnic population in a militarised enclosure with no future, no freedom, and no return, Israel crosses from collective punishment into the territory of intentional group destruction. They just keep ramping things up.
Katz’s plan raises an immediate humanitarian question though: where are the displaced supposed to go?
They cannot go north — their homes are rubble and Israel want all Palestinians moved out of those areas anyway. They cannot flee to Egypt — the border is sealed and militarised, Sisi has made sure of that. There are no safe zones, no internationally accepted relocation programmes, and no functional infrastructure left in Gaza.
The camp can quite easily be seen as not a waypoint therefore — but as a final destination possibly. Not a transit zone — but a prison – or worse. This is not humanitarianism. This is warehousing humans until they are too broken to resist or until foreign powers, pressured by geopolitical fatigue, agree to offshore the problem through forced emigration.
Israel's use of humanitarian language to describe a sealed-off internment zone represents a cynical manipulation of global discourse. The term "humanitarian city" is designed to obscure the reality of what is being created: a prison camp for displaced civilians. This sleight of hand with the language used is not merely disingenuous; it is dangerous. It allows policymakers and the media to speak of mass internment in the language of relief, confusing the public and shielding perpetrators from scrutiny.
This is not the first time states have cloaked violent demographic engineering in the language of aid. The use of terms like "transit centre," "safe zone," or "protected area" has often accompanied genocidal policies, from Srebrenica to Myanmar. Language matters. When Israel uses the word "humanitarian" to describe a plan that involves military control, restricted movement, and no return, it becomes an instrument of propaganda, not policy. It is a deliberate strategy to disarm criticism and frame the victimisation of an entire population as benevolence.
The international community's muted response to this plan is as dangerous as the plan itself. While people such as UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese has called for sanctions and an end to arms sales, most Western governments have maintained full diplomatic and economic ties with Israel, utterly complicit as that makes them.
Worse still, private actors like the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation are reportedly involved in planning and facilitating these so-called "transit areas". Makes a change from just shooting people turning up for aid I suppose. Their complicity threatens to make humanitarianism, as it is still being claimed they are enacting, a cover for internment and forced transfer, rather than a shield against it. If implemented, this plan would mark a catastrophic collapse of international law. The institutions designed to protect human rights are being bypassed or corrupted, and international humanitarian law is being rewritten in real time to accommodate the crimes of powerful states. Israel once aqain being made exceptions for.
The logic behind Israel's Rafah plan echoes dark chapters of modern history. The concentration camps of Bosnia, the ghettos of Nazi-occupied Europe, and the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II all involved the mass confinement of civilians based on ethnicity or national origin, under military control, and often with the goal of expulsion or cultural destruction.
What distinguishes Gaza is the scale and visibility of the crime. We are witnessing it unfold in real time, with full knowledge and documentation, yet with little tangible intervention. History is repeating itself not as tragedy, but as meticulously documented horror. And just as with those past atrocities, future generations will ask why more was not done to stop it.
If this plan is implemented, justice for the people of Gaza will require more than humanitarian aid. It will demand the dismantling of the Rafah enclosure and an end to policies of forced displacement. It will require the restoration of the right of return for all displaced Palestinians, not as a symbolic gesture but as a binding legal obligation.
Accountability must follow. Those responsible for designing, ordering, and implementing this plan should face prosecution under international criminal law themselves.
Reparations must be paid for destroyed homes, lives, and communities. The complicity of international and private actors must also be investigated.
Justice also requires a global reckoning with how humanitarian language gets used to enable atrocity. The ease with which war crimes are reframed as acts of mercy reveals the vulnerability of human rights discourse to manipulation and many media outlets should warrant scrutiny in that regard too. Until that changes, the language of international law will remain just talk, and the promise of "never again" will keep on ringing false.
Israel’s plan for a "humanitarian city" built on the ruins of the buildings and the lives of the people of Rafah is not a humanitarian initiative at all. It is a calculated move to finish what months of bombing, starvation, and siege began: the physical and political erasure of Gaza’s Palestinian population. By framing a concentration camp as a benevolent refuge, Israel weaponises the language of aid to disguise further atrocity.
This is not just a crime against Palestinians. It is a challenge to international law, human dignity, and the basic principle that civilians — even in war — have rights that cannot be ignored.
If the world allows this plan to go forward, it will not just be complicit in ethnic cleansing — it will have normalised it, branded it with humanitarian logos, and handed it a press release.
So let’s not indulge in euphemisms over this. Call it what it is.
A concentration camp. A war crime. And a blueprint for genocide.
Speaking of Gaza’s ruins though and coming back to those Gaza Humanitarian Foundation aid sites, it turns out that alongside that supposed aid, which has seen lives ended rather than fed in too many cases, is Project Aurora, a plan for ethnic cleansing of the Gaza Strip, also with the involvement of previous GHF backers, the consultancy firm Boston Consulting Group, who had also been consulting on this allegedly with the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, news that has had people speculating over whether what Blair did in Iraq 20 years ago is the plan for Gaza now. Get all the details of that story in this video recommendation here as your suggested next watch.
Please do also hit like, share and subscribe if you haven’t done so already so as to ensure you don’t miss out on all new daily content as well as spreading the word and helping to support the channel at the same time which is very much appreciated, holding power to account for ordinary working class people and I will hopefully catch you on the next vid. Cheers folks.