The recent statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding the potential displacement of Palestinians have been met with strong criticism from Egypt and Qatar. Both nations have publicly condemned Netanyahu’s comments, particularly those concerning the Rafah crossing into Egypt.
Qatar has been particularly vocal, denouncing the remarks as another example of Israel’s disregard for Palestinian rights and international legal standards. In a statement released on Friday, Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) stated that Netanyahu’s comments were an extension of Israel’s approach of violating Palestinian rights, its contempt for international laws, and its efforts to undermine peace efforts, particularly those related to the two-state solution.
Netanyahu, in an interview with the Israeli Telegram channel Abu Ali Express, discussed future plans for Gaza’s reconstruction. He also claimed that a significant portion of Gazans desire to leave, though he denied this constituted a mass expulsion. He stated that while he could open the Rafah crossing, Egypt would likely close it immediately.
Qatar’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs warned that Netanyahu’s remarks suggested Israel’s intentions to seize Palestinian land, which could destabilize the region. The statement also condemned Israel’s use of collective punishment against Palestinians, especially its military actions in Gaza, as a continuation of its crimes.
The statement further emphasized that Israel’s policies, including the ongoing war in Gaza, actions in the West Bank, violations of religious sites, settlement expansion plans, and restrictions on humanitarian aid, would not succeed in forcing Palestinians from their land or in taking their legitimate rights.
Egypt also firmly rejected Netanyahu’s statements, reiterating its categorical opposition to any forced displacement of Palestinians. The Egyptian ministry asserted that such actions would constitute violations of international humanitarian law and could be considered war crimes. Egypt declared that it would not participate in any such actions and regarded the matter as a ‘red line’.