IDF may reduce Hebron presence after 2,000 evacuated

Approximately 2,000 Palestinians were forced from their homes in a western Hebron neighborhood, a figure that could rise to 4,969 according to municipal data cited in a new legal petition. The Israeli Defense Forces occupied the area following a deadly Hamas-linked attack last Friday morning.

The military operation began on the night of October 23, when troops ordered families in the Ein Deir Baha and al-Jalda neighborhoods to leave their homes. Loudspeakers announced the orders between 12:30 and 1 a.m., leaving residents little time to prepare. Many families spent the night outside, and some were unable to retrieve their vehicles. The military stated that the attackers were connected to a specific Hamas clan in the area, though it did not provide concrete evidence linking the majority of the evacuees to specific crimes.

By Sunday and Monday, the IDF Chief of Staff, Lt.-Gen. Eyal Zamir, recommended allowing the displaced residents to return. The military had inspected the relevant areas and determined there was no clear military reason to remain. However, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu initially rejected this recommendation. He has since signaled potential flexibility, feeling in a stronger political position after the recent election.

The situation distinguishes itself from previous operations in the West Bank. In early 2025, Israel cleared areas in Jenin, Tulkarm, and Nur al-Shams, displacing nearly 40,000 people. Those areas had documented histories of mass terror incidents dating back to 2022. In contrast, Hebron has generally not been a leading problem spot in recent years. The current operation appears motivated by public statements from Netanyahu and Defense Minister Israel Katz regarding the destruction of the neighborhood where the attackers originated. Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich described the demolitions as a form of deterrence and a price to be paid for the attack.

Adalah filed a petition with the High Court of Justice on Thursday on behalf of the Hebron municipality and seven residents. The legal filing seeks to halt forced evacuations and demolitions. It alleges that troops turned some homes into military positions and demolished civilian buildings. The petition argues that the scale and open-ended nature of the measures violate international humanitarian law. Specifically, it cites Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which permits temporary evacuation only for civilian safety or imperative military reasons and requires return once hostilities end.

Municipal figures cited in the petition indicate that blocked access routes have prevented rubbish collection. Approximately 1,200 tons of waste had accumulated across the city by Wednesday. The petition also highlights that restrictions hinder access to medical treatment and the movement of ambulances. Adalah approached the authorities on Sunday and sent a reminder the following day but received no substantive response before filing. The case names the defense minister, the head of IDF Central Command, the military advocate-general, and the attorney-general as respondents.

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel made a similar demand on Sunday. It requested that displaced residents be allowed to return and that movement restrictions be lifted. Noa Sattath, the organization’s executive director, stated that no attack gives the military license to punish an entire city. The association also requested the orders authorizing the measures already taken.

Justice Gila Canfy Steinitz issued an initial decision last Friday. She directed the state to respond and expected it to refrain from changing the existing situation or demolishing additional buildings pending a further decision. The IDF may exit or reduce its presence over the coming weekend, a move that would signal a shift in the military’s posture in the region.

The petitioners seek an immediate order barring further evacuations and demolitions. They also request safe passage for medical teams, emergency vehicles, and municipal workers. The legal team argues that barring residents’ return indefinitely while damaging their homes risks making the displacement lasting. The High Court is expected to consider these arguments in an upcoming hearing.