Gaza (Gush Katif) 20 Years Since the Disengagement – 20 Years of Warnings That Were Not Heeded

“Stopping the Disaster of the Disengagement”

The three posters attached tell the story of an entire era—an era in which hundreds of thousands of citizens felt they were fighting for the future of the country and for the future of Jewish settlement in a region that had become their home. One poster reads: “A massive rally along the highways.” Another: “The Disengagement March – a huge march to Gush Katif.” And a third: “Heading to Gush Katif and Samaria to support our heroic brothers.” These were not just advertisements. They were calls from an entire public that believed the State of Israel was about to make a historic mistake. People left work, traveled for hours, attended rallies, marched on foot, tied orange ribbons to cars and homes, and felt they were fighting for something far greater than the settlements themselves.

To understand the intensity of the crisis, one must go back to the years before the disengagement. For decades, the State of Israel encouraged settlement in Gush Katif. Governments from both the right and the left invested enormous resources in the area. Communities were built, schools and synagogues were established, advanced agricultural greenhouses were developed, and thriving communities took shape. Thousands of families built their lives there with the belief that they were fulfilling a national mission.

At that time, Ariel Sharon was seen by many as one of the great leaders of the Israeli right—a fighter, a military commander, a major general in the IDF, Defense Minister, and later Prime Minister. For years he was perceived as a strong supporter of settlement in Judea, Samaria, and the Gaza Strip. Then came the change. After being elected Prime Minister on a platform that did not include unilateral evacuation of Gush Katif, Sharon began promoting the disengagement plan. For many of his former supporters, this was a dramatic reversal, and they felt the leader who had promised to strengthen settlement was now leading its dismantling. The rift within Israeli society deepened.

Entire streets were painted orange, bridges were covered with signs, and hundreds of thousands participated in protests. Families joined marches, and both young and old, religious and secular, tried to stop the process. One of the most memorable images was the “human chain”—hundreds of thousands standing along many kilometers in an attempt to stop the plan. Later came mass marches toward Gush Katif, like those shown in the posters. Many believed that if enough public pressure was created, the evacuation could be prevented. But the government was determined to proceed.

In the summer of 2005, the evacuation began. Thousands of soldiers and police officers entered the settlements to remove residents from their homes. For days, Israeli television broadcast scenes that were difficult to believe were taking place in Israel: children crying, parents embracing soldiers, synagogues filled with worshippers saying farewell, farmers leaving behind greenhouses they built with their own hands, and families carrying out their final belongings. The slogan “A Jew does not expel a Jew” echoed everywhere, reflecting the deep emotional rupture. After the evacuation, the settlements were demolished, synagogues emptied, and communities dismantled, forcing thousands to rebuild their lives elsewhere.

At the time, it was promised that the disengagement would improve security, strengthen Israel’s international standing, and reduce friction with the Palestinians. However, the years that followed developed differently: Hamas grew stronger, took control of Gaza in 2007, rocket fire increased, a vast tunnel network was built, and Israel found itself in repeated rounds of conflict.

Then came October 7, 2023. On that morning, Israel’s sense of security collapsed as Hamas militants infiltrated communities, military bases, and cities, killing, kidnapping, and causing destruction on a scale not seen since the founding of the state. For many, that day brought back memories of 2005—the posters, the marches, the protests, and the warnings that the evacuated territory would become a terrorist base.

The events of October 7, 2023 were seen by many as a breaking point that sharply highlighted the magnitude of the mistake. The area from which Israel withdrew in the hope of improving its security situation became the source of the most severe threat the country has faced since its establishment. Those who opposed the disengagement had argued at the time that the evacuated territory would become a base for terrorism, and today many believe that reality demonstrated the validity of those warnings.

Twenty years after the disengagement, the public debate continues, but one thing is clear: it remains a defining and divisive chapter in Israeli history and discourse.