The document, which was published in full by the Hebrew independent website Mekomit, considers the transfer to Egypt as the most convenient option among three possible alternatives for the future of Gaza's Palestinians at the end of the war.

The document proposes that, during the conflict, Israel should take steps to "relocate the Gaza population to Sinai."

This would involve establishing temporary tent cities and new settlements in northern Sinai to house the displaced population.

Simultaneously, a buffer zone extending several kilometers into Egyptian territory would be established, preventing the return of the population to the vicinity of the Israeli border.

Global efforts primarily focusing on the United States, says the document, should be engaged to execute the plan.

The document, which is dated 13 October, five days after Hamas' initial raids into Israel, “does not necessarily indicate that its recommendations are being considered by the government,” noted the writer of the Mekomit report, since the Ministry of Intelligence is an autonomous entity responsible for producing independent studies and policy papers.

These documents are distributed for government and security agencies' review; however, they do not carry binding authority over them.

Ahram Online needed help to verify the authenticity of the 10-page document independently. However, given recent leaks of analogous policy papers from Israeli think tanks and the reputable nature of the news website – as confirmed by our advisors in Palestine – we have chosen to highlight its content.

In the past week, the "Meshgav Institute", a conservative research organization led by Meir Ben Shabat, a close ally of Netanyahu and former head of the National Assembly, released a paper advocating the coerced relocation of Gaza's population to Sinai. The institute later removed the publication from Twitter due to significant international backlash.

A few days earlier, Calcalist also reported about the document that Mekomit published in full.

The transfer plan is divided into several phases: in the first phase, the population in Gaza must be "vacated to the south," while Israeli Air Force strikes focus on the northern part of the Strip. 

In the second phase, Israeli ground forces will enter Gaza, leading to the occupation of the entire strip, from north to south, and the "cleansing of the underground bunkers from Hamas fighters."

Simultaneous with the occupation of the Gaza Strip, the citizens of Gaza will move to Egyptian territory, leave the Strip, and will be permanently prohibited from returning.

"It is important to leave the traffic lanes towards the south usable, to allow the evacuation of the civilian population towards Rafah," the document states.

In the document, it is proposed to promote a dedicated campaign for citizens in Gaza that will "motivate them to agree to the plan" and make them give up the lands that they lost because of Hamas' leadership.

Additionally, it is written that the government must launch a public relations campaign promoting the transfer program in the Western world as a humanitarian necessity ostensibly leading to "fewer casualties in the civilian population".

Since the beginning of the Israeli war on Gaza, more than 8,000 people have been killed, and hundreds of thousands displaced from their homes seeking refuge in schools and hospitals.

The document also states that the US should be made to support the move so that it will pressure Egypt to take in the Gazans and to harness other Western countries, particularly Greece, Spain, and Canada, to resettle some of the refugees in their own territories.

The document states that Egypt will have an "obligation under international law to allow the passage of a population" and that the US can contribute by exerting "pressure on Egypt, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the Emirates to contribute to the initiative either with resources or in accepting displaced persons."

In the document, it is proposed to run a dedicated public relations campaign addressed to the Arab world, focused on "the message of aiding their Palestinian brothers through resettlement, even if it is necessary to take a tone that scolds or offends Israel."

The document presents two other alternatives regarding the citizens of Gaza the day after the war. The first is to import the rule of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza, and the second is to cultivate another local Arab government as an alternative to Hamas. 

Both alternatives, it is claimed, are undesirable from a strategic and security point of view for Israel and will not provide a sufficiently deterrent message, especially to Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The drafters of the study claimed that the introduction of the Palestinian Authority into Gaza is the "most dangerous alternative" of the three because it could "lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state."

The division between the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza is one of the main obstacles today to the establishment of a Palestinian state, and "the result of this attack cannot be an unprecedented victory for the Palestinian national movement or pave the way for the establishment of a Palestinian state," the document reads.

The document claims that a model of Israeli military rule and PA civilian rule, as it exists in the West Bank, is expected to fail in Gaza. 

"There is no way to maintain an effective military occupation in Gaza based on a military presence alone and without settlement. In a short time, there will be an internal Israeli and international demand for withdrawal."

The drafters of the document added that in such a situation, the State of Israel "will be considered a colonialist power with an occupying army... similar to the situation of the West Bank today, only worse".

The last alternative, the formation of a local Palestinian leadership to replace Hamas, is not desirable according to what is written in the document because there are no local opposition movements to Hamas, and the new leadership may be more radical. 

"The likely scenario is not a change in ideological orientation, but the establishment of new, perhaps even more extreme, Islamist movements," the document says about this alternative.

Lastly, it is asserted that retaining the Gaza population within the Strip would result in "numerous Arab casualties" during the anticipated occupation of Gaza, tarnishing Israel's global reputation more than a general expulsion to Sinai.

Therefore, the Ministry of Intelligence recommends advancing the permanent relocation of all Gaza residents to Sinai once and for all.

Egypt categorically rejects the idea of relocating Gazans to Sinai and emphasizes that it will not hesitate to take any measures to halt this encroachment on its national security.

On Wednesday, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah El-Sisi said in a joint press briefing with French President Emmanuel Macron, following extensive talks in Cairo, that all efforts should focus on containing the escalation in the Gaza Strip.

El Sisi stressed again the country’s refusal to allow Palestinians to be resettled en masse in Egypt.

“Not only [because] we in Egypt will not allow it, but it is perilous to the [Palestinian] cause,” he said, noting that it would complicate the prospects of the two-state solution.

El-Sisi said that “the exit of the Palestinians is not a solution,” adding, “if the two-state solution has not materialized while the Palestinians exist on their land, it is impossible for it to succeed when they do not.”

Egypt is not alone in adopting this stance; Hamas itself has declared its opposition to relocation, as has the Palestinian Authority led by Mahmoud Abbas, along with other Palestinian factions in the West Bank and Gaza.

Egypt's rejection of the relocation idea enjoys substantial Arab support, as it is seen as an attempt to settle the Palestinian issue on Israeli terms and eliminate any hope of establishing a Palestinian state.

King Abdullah II of Jordan also argued that if the people of Gaza were to be relocated to Sinai, the next step would likely involve relocating the people of the West Bank to Jordan, a move his country would not accept.