I'm a Former Israeli Officer. AMA

I totally disagree with this suggestion. Forcing the resettlement of Palestinians out of their homeland to Egypt with no regard for Egyptian sovereignty raises the question of how to prioritize the sovereignty of one country over the other. Second, it violates all ethical and international norms by taking indigenous inhabitants out of their homeland. Third, this is not a solution, this is basically moving a problem to another country that has nothing to do with its start, and here I want to support David Manheim’s perspectives on the current events (check his comments on your thread). And even from a utilitarian point of view (Although it’s not the most suitable argument for the current situation), resettlement outside the Israeli/Palestinian territories will only cause more causalities,  because, by involving the host country (Egypt), you’re basically risking the lives of 100 million Egyptians to save less than 10 million Israelis, and it won’t save Palestinian either especially if the current apartheid Netanyahu government remained. Although resettlement is not the best solution in my opinion (and here again I assert to check  David’s proposition), theoretically, if Palestinians have to move, the most realistic option would be the Negev desert, given it’s within the Israeli territory so they can assure and control its security status, and around 25% of its population are Arab Bedouin so Palestinians could be easily integrated there until Israel finishes up with Hamas in Gaza 

Strongly disagree.

Most people are the silent majority, who just want peace and don't have leverage to make it happen. That applies to the Palestinians and Israelis, most of whom don't know what to do, but want things to be peaceful and allow them to live happy lives. Unfortunately, political leaders on both sides have incentives to ensure that the easiest path to their near-term goals of staying in power involve continuing the cycle of violence. 

The critical path in my mind is prosperity - if Palestinians had a median income of Jordanians and Iraqis, double the current level, or of Egyptians, which triple the current level, it wouldn't matter that median Israelis had four or five times as much. But Iran has probably successfully maneuvered Israeli into undermining the Saudi deal, and I think that Israel's narrow short term needs will continue the cycle.

I agree those are heavy short-term and medium-term obstacles. But I was asking about the long-term. How do you persuade the population of Gaza to want peace? 

Right now, Gazans are being born packed like sardines into a poverty-stricken strip that they can't leave, and their primary exposure to Israelis is via blockades and bombs. Those conditions clearly contribute to a ripe recruitment ground for hatred and terrorism. 

If instead Gaza was a relatively prosperous land, with freedom of movement and control over it's own future, and the violence with Israel was a distant memory, then it seems unlikely the average citizen would jeopardize that prosperity by supporting terrorism. 

The problem is how to get from point A to point B, given that it take time for hatred to fade, and that helping Gaza be prosperous might also help terrorists get more deadly. 

Paying every immigrant actually has been a suggestion, mainly from the far right. It's considered close enough to forced population transfer that it's not mainstream, and I'm not sure how many takers you'll have.

Seems like there's an important distinction regarding whether the transaction is voluntary or not. If someone gave me the option of a stipend and free airfare to relocate to a different country, I probably wouldn't take their offer, but I wouldn't consider myself a victim of a crime against humanity either.

I wasn't proposing an all-or-nothing approach. It seems to me that there is value on the margin in giving individual Palestinians more options. If Israel is about to invade Gaza, I'll bet there are at least a few women, children, and elderly who would appreciate the option of a permanent residency elsewhere. And this is also likely to benefit Israel from a PR perspective.

In terms of countries wanting immigrants -- $10K per immigrant means $10M for a country that takes in 1000 immigrants. I imagine some countries could use the cash -- ideally countries where Arabic is the primary language.

Anyway, thanks for your response!

Another wild idea I've been dreaming about is financialization of immigration.

Assume for the sake of argument that Gazans tend to fall into two groups: Hamas-supporting radical terrorists, and peaceful people who just want safety.

If there was a magical method to identify which group an immigrant falls into, then countries could accept everyone from Group 2, and leave the Group 1 people in Gaza to fight for their epic historical/religious purpose.

There is no magical method, but there are some heuristics. Is the person a woman, child, or elderly? Are they willing to post a video to social media condemning Hamas? Are they willing to sign a statement recognizing Israel's right to exist and defend itself in some form? Etc. However, we can't predict with confidence which heuristics will work, and working heuristics are liable to degrade over time as terrorists figure out how to game them.

Therefore, instead of trusting the government to tell the difference, imagine if any citizen could post an "immigration bond" for an immigrant Gazan -- analogous to a bail bond. Perhaps the bond would be $100K or something like that. If the immigrant Gazan commits a serious crime or terrorist attack, the person who posted the bond loses the entire amount. If the immigrant Gazan becomes a productive member of society, perhaps the person who posted the bond would be entitled a fraction of the income tax revenue they generate for the government, if that tax revenue exceeds the amount of money the immigrant receives through government programs.

I'm imagining this bond program working via two channels:

• Personal relationships. If my cousin is in Gaza and I believe she just wants peace, I post a bond so she can come to my country and live peacefully. If she ever gets tempted to commit a terrorist attack, I remind her that I stand to lose $100K if she does so, and it wouldn't be right to betray a family member like that.

• Financial speculators. Imagine a hedge fund doing a bunch of research and data analysis, conducting interviews, trying to figure out the best predictors of terrorism in order to invest in immigration bonds and receive income tax revenues. Same with financial markets, over time the best speculators make more money and increase their influence on the market, as they're able to figure out how to separate Group 1 from Group 2 effectively.

Thanks, I'm interested that you think occupation is a real possibility, with another leadership to take over control - that would mean a battle and complete takeover I suppose, its hard to imagine Hamas surrendering easily...