Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has warned that the Israel army will “definitely enter and occupy Gaza” if Hamas refuses to disarm under the terms of the current ceasefire framework. In an interview with Israel’s public broadcaster Kan, he said Hamas may soon be given an ultimatum to surrender its weapons and accept full demilitarisation of the Gaza Strip. Smotrich added that, failing this, the military would act with what he described as international legitimacy and American backing. His remarks raise further questions about the future of Gaza, the durability of the ceasefire and the broader political strategy of Israel’s far-right ministers.
General context: Smotrich Gaza occupation threat
According to The New Arab, Bezalel Smotrich made his comments during an interview broadcast on Monday, 22 February 2026, in which he directly linked the threat of a Smotrich Gaza occupation to Hamas’s stance on disarmament. The outlet reports that Smotrich said Israeli authorities “estimate that in the coming days, Hamas will be given an ultimatum to disarm and completely demilitarise Gaza.” He framed this ultimatum as part of ongoing discussions over how to implement the second phase of the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
The New Arab notes that the second ceasefire phase, which officially began last month, calls for a gradual withdrawal of Israeli forces from parts of Gaza and the disarmament of Hamas, a provision the Palestinian group has strongly rejected. Under this framework, Hamas is expected to hand over weapons and allow for a verified demilitarisation process, while Israel is meant to scale back its military presence. Smotrich’s comments indicate that, from his perspective, a refusal by Hamas to comply could justify deeper Israeli military intervention.
In the Kan interview cited by The New Arab and corroborated by other regional outlets, Smotrich said that if Hamas does not accept the ultimatum, the Israel army “will have international legitimacy and American backing to do it itself.” He claimed that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are already preparing plans for a possible Smotrich Gaza occupation scenario. Smotrich, a far-right politician and a member of Israel’s security cabinet, is directly involved in approving large-scale military operations, giving his remarks additional weight in terms of policy direction.
What did Smotrich say and how have others reacted?
Smotrich’s central statement, as reported by The New Arab, was that “the [Israeli military] will definitely enter and occupy Gaza if Hamas does not disarm.” In the same interview, he said there were “two or three alternatives” under examination for how the military might execute such an operation, though he did not publicly detail those options. Regional and international media, including TRT World and Asharq Al-Awsat, carried similar quotes in their coverage of the Smotrich Gaza occupation warning.
TRT World reported that Smotrich suggested Israel could move towards a full reoccupation of Gaza if Hamas refuses to hand over its weapons, describing his remarks as a signal of rising tensions over the next stage of the ceasefire. Asharq Al-Awsat and Arab News also quoted Smotrich’s statement that the army would “definitely enter and occupy all Gaza” if disarmament does not occur. These outlets highlighted his assertion that military planning for such a contingency is already under way.
The New Arab’s article positions the Smotrich Gaza occupation threat within a broader pattern of statements from the minister. It recalls previous remarks in which he advocated for annexing parts of Gaza in stages if Hamas did not surrender, disarm and release Israeli captives. In August 2025, multiple media outlets reported that Smotrich proposed annexing portions of Gaza week by week, accompanied by a siege and forced relocation of Palestinians within the territory. Hamas and other Palestinian factions condemned those earlier proposals as calls for further displacement and control over Gaza.
So far, The New Arab’s report and other coverage do not cite formal public responses from Hamas specifically addressing the latest Smotrich Gaza occupation warning. However, the group has repeatedly rejected demands for unilateral disarmament, arguing that its weapons are a response to Israeli occupation and military action. The article notes that Hamas has vehemently opposed the disarmament clause in the ceasefire’s second phase, seeing it as a strategic surrender.Supporting details: ceasefire framework, US role and force deployments
The New Arab explains that Smotrich’s remarks come in the context of a multi-stage ceasefire process, backed by the United States and other international actors, that aims to reduce hostilities in Gaza while addressing security concerns and humanitarian needs. The second phase, now formally in effect, centers on two key pillars: a phased withdrawal of Israeli troops from parts of the territory and a process to demilitarise Hamas and other armed groups. The Smotrich Gaza occupation warning is thus tied directly to the perceived success or failure of this phase.
Complementing The New Arab’s coverage, Daily Sabah and Arab News detail elements of the broader security plan associated with US President Donald Trump’s peace proposal. According to their reporting, the plan envisions the deployment of an International Stabilization Force (ISF) of around 20,000 troops from various countries to help maintain security in Gaza during and after the ceasefire implementation. These troops are meant to support demilitarisation and prevent renewed large-scale hostilities, at least in the initial period.
In this context, Smotrich was asked in his Kan interview how the Israel army would operate against Hamas in the event that foreign forces are already deployed on the ground as part of the ISF. Daily Sabah and Arab News report that he responded by saying that the foreign troops would “pull out very quickly and allow the [Israeli military] to enter,” adding that this was “coordinated with the Americans.” This statement links the Smotrich Gaza occupation scenario not only to Israeli planning but also to ongoing consultations with Washington.
The New Arab and other outlets describe Smotrich as one of the most hardline figures in Israel’s government, known for advocating expanded Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank and for questioning Palestinian statehood. His role in the security cabinet means his views on Gaza strategy are part of internal decision-making, even though they may not reflect the full range of positions within the Israeli government. The article underscores that his interview comments offer a window into one influential strand of thinking about the future of Gaza.
How does this affect Gaza’s future and the current ceasefire?
The Smotrich Gaza occupation threat has implications for both the stability of the current ceasefire and broader debates over Gaza’s long-term status. The New Arab notes that the ceasefire’s second phase is already fragile, with Hamas rejecting disarmament and Israel maintaining significant military capabilities around and inside parts of Gaza. If Hamas continues to refuse the ultimatum described by Smotrich, the risk of renewed large-scale operations could increase, despite formal commitments to de-escalation.
Regional outlets such as TRT World and Asharq Al-Awsat report that Smotrich’s comments have fueled concerns among Palestinians and some international observers that Israel may be preparing the ground for a more permanent presence in Gaza. A full Smotrich Gaza occupation would reverse the 2005 disengagement, when Israel withdrew its settlements and ground forces from the Strip, and could reshape political and humanitarian conditions on the ground. Critics of reoccupation, cited in past coverage, have warned that such a move would deepen instability and international isolation.
At the same time, the United States and other mediators are attempting to keep the ceasefire process on track. By tying his threat to what he describes as “international legitimacy and American backing,” Smotrich suggests he believes a renewed offensive could be justified if Hamas rejects disarmament. However, The New Arab’s report does not cite any explicit US endorsement of a Smotrich Gaza occupation; rather, it presents his statement as his own interpretation of the diplomatic environment. This distinction is likely to be central in future discussions about whether any such operation would proceed.
Looking ahead, The New Arab indicates that the key variables will include Hamas’s response to any formal ultimatum, internal Israeli cabinet deliberations and the stance of Washington and other international actors. If Hamas signals even partial willingness to negotiate demilitarisation terms, it could create space to adjust the ceasefire’s second phase without implementing the Smotrich Gaza occupation scenario. If it does not, the risk remains that Israel’s leadership, under pressure from far-right figures like Smotrich, could opt for more extensive military action.
Smotrich’s warning that the Israel army will “definitely enter and occupy Gaza” if Hamas does not disarm adds a new layer of uncertainty to an already fragile ceasefire process. The New Arab and other outlets report that his remarks are tied to an anticipated ultimatum demanding full demilitarisation of the Gaza Strip, with the threat of reoccupation if those terms are rejected. As discussions continue over how to implement the ceasefire’s second phase, the Smotrich Gaza occupation threat underscores deep divisions over Gaza’s future and the unresolved question of how, and by whom, security in the territory will be guaranteed.
