The war on the Supreme Court is blinding the government - and weakening the war on UNRWA | Lilach Sigan

Due to the abundance of spin regarding the "dismantling of Hamas," even the current agreement fails to address the concept that educates new generations of Palestinians in the spirit of refugee status and an imaginary "right of return." Nothing was conditioned on an agreement to stop funding the Palestinian fantasy of destroying Israel.

We were so busy with the firing of the Central Command chief on live television, and the subsequent denials, that we missed an important event. The day before yesterday, the Supreme Court rejected the petition by the Adalah organization against the cessation of UNRWA's activities in Israel, determining that there is no evidence of human rights violations, despite the petitioners' claims.

The vocal Knesset members who arrived at the hearing were content to grumble about the Supreme Court for even agreeing to hear the petition—even though the law to stop UNRWA's activities in Israel was approved by the Knesset with a majority of 92. It is a pity that they surrendered, as usual, to a narrative that serves the campaign against the judicial system, and did not pause for a moment on the rejection of the petition, which serves the campaign of the State of Israel.

With all due respect to stopping work with UNRWA within the country's borders, what is important is to stop UNRWA's activities in Gaza and in general. This corrupt organization has long since become a tool of the Hamas concept, according to which all fourth-generation Palestinians in the Strip have a right of return to Israel, while Jews have the right to be slaughtered or drowned in the sea.

This distorted concept, like the perpetuation of refugee status and its inheritance, is funded by countries around the world under the auspices of the UN. Israel managed to stop the funding at the beginning of the war, when it was discovered that teachers who were UNRWA employees physically participated in the October 7 massacre. But at some point, the funding freeze was thawed, and since then, the one suffering from a decline in image is Israel—not Hamas.

Now a new round of pressure is being exerted on Israel, intended to soften the demand for the demilitarization of Hamas before any reconstruction of Gaza. At the moment, they are suddenly discussing "storage" instead of demilitarization, and steps involving partial IDF withdrawals, but for some reason, no one is talking about including UNRWA in the equation.

Disarming Hamas is not just a question of guns, but also of ideological weapons. In the government, they excuse the stalled situation by saying that "eliminating Hamas is a process," but a significant part of that process is the concept itself. Why does Israel not demand to include in the agreement a waiver of refugee status, at least from those who are supposed to take over the management of Gaza?

Israel must act to end the Palestinian status that preserves an imaginary right of return, even if it is a process. At the end of the process, all Palestinians should be erased from UNRWA records as "Palestine refugees," but there are many intermediate actions that can accumulate before such an end. Former Knesset member Einat Wilf suggested, for example, that the 5,000 police officers currently undergoing an approval process to receive weapons should be required, in exchange for their position and salary, to be erased from UNRWA records as refugees. One must start somewhere, and this is a very legitimate demand.

The problem is that we are not operating with smart plans, but with campaigns designed for appearances. For how many years have they promised here to "dismantle Hamas" while doing nothing? When it comes to systematic work, we miss opportunities. If that is not enough, the "campaign" against the judicial system is currently considered more important than using the rejection of the petition as legal material. With its help, one could convince the world that even the Supreme Court recognizes that non-cooperation with UNRWA does not constitute a violation of human rights.

The Supreme Court gave the government a legal gift to continue fighting UNRWA. It wrote that "UNRWA serves as a platform for incitement; in the schools it operates, antisemitic content is taught, glorifying terrorists who murdered children and women, and its institutions in Gaza were used by terrorist organizations for storing and launching missiles." So what is more important: promoting the delegitimization of UNRWA through such court rulings, or promoting the delegitimization of the judicial system? When the leadership thinks so crookedly, it is hard not to wonder how exactly we will win this way.