With the outbreak of the regional war launched by Israel and the United States against Iran, and with Israelis seeking refuge in shelters and fortified rooms to protect their lives, Palestinians, wherever they are on both sides of the Green Line, remain exposed to danger without any effective civilian protection system or shelters. From Gaza to the West Bank and within the Green Line, Palestinian civilians are left directly exposed to bombardment, displacement, and settler violence, in blatant violation of international humanitarian law and fundamental human rights. This ongoing war has exposed a structural gap in civilian protection, in violation of Israel’s legal obligations as an occupying power, notably with the absence of shelters, the repeated targeting of civilians and their facilities, and the systematic discriminatory policies that turn legally guaranteed protection into an unattainable exception.
Where do Palestinians seek refuge, and who protects them?
West Bank
With the ongoing war, dangerous rocket debris is falling all across the occupied West Bank on a daily basis, without any meaningful protection for Palestinians. Particularly in Area C under full Israeli civilian and military control, the discriminatory planning and building regime imposed by the Israeli Civil Administration effectively prohibits Palestinian construction and growth. Any attempt to build shelters or fortified rooms encounters complex legal obstacles, as obtaining the necessary permits is nearly impossible, especially in areas classified as “C” or around refugee camps, where the land is under full Israeli control. In addition, strict restrictions are imposed on the building materials required for these shelters, coupled with complex bureaucratic procedures and exorbitant costs, making it virtually impossible to provide any civilian protection for Palestinians. The practical outcome is that Palestinian civilians remain in a constant state of exposure to risks, without any safe shelters or protective system, in clear violation of the obligations imposed by international humanitarian law on the occupying power.
Jerusalem
In contrast to West Jerusalem, where the Jewish-majority population has access to over 550 public shelters, residents of East Jerusalem can rely on only 51 shelters, despite the high population density in many of its neighborhoods. This stark disparity cannot be understood outside the framework of the systematic discriminatory policies pursued by the Israeli authorities.
East Jerusalem residents face a persistent sense of abandonment during every security escalation. With virtually no protective infrastructure, neither public shelters nor reinforced rooms in private homes, families are left with no real safe space. When sirens sound, people are forced to seek refuge in stairwells or against walls, with no shelter capable of withstanding explosions, constantly fearing for the safety of their children.
The problem extends beyond the mere shortage of public shelters. Thousands of families in East Jerusalem are barred from constructing reinforced rooms in their homes because regulations require engineering and construction permits. These conditions are nearly impossible to meet in these neighborhoods.
The root of this issue does not lie in residents’ negligence but in the complex and costly regulatory system imposed by the municipal authorities, which makes obtaining building permits for Palestinians extremely difficult, if not impossible. This legal and administrative framework effectively denies East Jerusalemites access to the basic protective measures that are otherwise available to the city’s Jewish population.
Gaza Strip
Palestinians in Gaza have been subjected to a genocide lasting over two consecutive years, in the complete absence of any civilian protection system or shelters across the entire territory. This unfolded amid sustained and intensive aerial bombardment carried out directly over civilian populations, with no safe areas to which people could flee. Even the facilities of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), which are used as collective shelters, have been repeatedly targeted by bombardment. At least 853 displaced persons have been recorded as killed inside UNRWA buildings themselves, and more than 2,500 others have been injured, all resulting in catastrophic human losses. The number of Palestinians killed has exceeded 76,000 individuals whose bodies were recovered and identified, a figure that does not include thousands of bodies and human remains still trapped beneath the rubble, or those who could not be identified due to the severe mutilation caused by the intensity of the bombardment. This reality reflects not merely a failure to provide protection, but the deliberate use of the absence of shelters and safe spaces as part of a broader pattern of mass targeting of the civilian population.
This reality is further entrenched by the structural policies imposed on the Gaza Strip, where Israel has prohibited the entry of construction materials for the private sector since 2007, allowing only very limited shipments since 2013 under highly restrictive mechanisms. This has rendered the establishment of any form of civilian protective infrastructure, including shelters, virtually impossible from the outset.
Inside the Green Line
Inside the Green line, a comprehensive legal and regulatory framework ostensibly exists to provide civilian protection from military threats, particularly rocket fire. Central to this framework are the Merkhav Mugan (reinforced security rooms within homes) and mandatory requirements for shelters or protected spaces in modern residential buildings, as regulated by the Home Front Command and by building and planning laws adopted since the 1990s, particularly following the 1991 Gulf War.
In practice, however, human rights reports and official assessments reveal a deep structural gap in access to shelters, most notably between Jewish citizens on the one hand and Palestinian citizens of Israel inside the Green Line on the other. Many Arab towns and localities inside the Green Line suffer from a severe shortage of public shelters, and a large proportion of homes lack reinforced rooms, in stark contrast to Jewish localities, which enjoy significantly higher levels of protection coverage. This disparity is particularly acute in unrecognized villages, especially in the Naqab (Negev), where civilian protection infrastructure is virtually non-existent. In Arab towns, there are only about 37 public shelters out of a total of 11,775 shelters in Israel, representing 0.3% of all shelters; eight of these are deemed unfit for use.
These figures confirm the findings of a previous report by the Israeli State Comptroller, retired judge Yosef Shapira, which showed that 46% of Arab citizens lack access to shelters or protected rooms, compared with 26% of the general population.
This gap is further entrenched by planning and recognition policies. Homes built without official permits, an extremely common condition in Arab communities due to restrictive and discriminatory planning regimes, are legally barred from constructing reinforced rooms or compliant shelters. As a result, many residents are forced to resort to unsafe, improvised solutions, such as sheltering in interior rooms or structurally inadequate buildings, exposing them to serious and foreseeable risks.
This reality cannot be reduced to a mere “service gap” or developmental shortcoming. Rather, it reflects a systematic pattern of discrimination in the allocation of protection resources within the state. Protection from harm, inseparable from the right to life, is effectively guaranteed for Jewish citizens and settlers. At the same time, Palestinians inside Israel, particularly Bedouin communities in unrecognized villages, are partially or wholly excluded from the civilian protection regime. In this context, shelters cease to function as a neutral civil-defense measure and instead become a revealing indicator of the ethno-political hierarchy embedded in Israel’s concept of “security.”
Analytical Legal Framework
The absence of shelters for Palestinians, whether in Gaza, the West Bank, or inside the Green Line, must be understood within the broader context of international law and humanitarian obligations. Under Article 27 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which governs situations of occupation, an occupying power is legally obliged to ensure the protection of civilians, prevent unnecessary suffering, and, where feasible, provide safe zones or shelters for populations at risk. Furthermore, Articles 55 and 56 obligate the occupying power to ensure the provision of food and medical care and to maintain public health and hygiene, which includes protective infrastructure in emergencies. Israel’s systematic failure to designate safe areas, issue warnings, or establish any meaningful shelter system represents a clear breach of these obligations, exposing civilians to foreseeable and avoidable harm.
Beyond these obligations in occupied territory, international human rights law, including Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), confers a fundamental right to life and emphasizes the duty of states to protect civilians from predictable threats. The stark disparity in access to shelters between Israeli and Palestinian citizens within the Green Line exemplifies a violation of the principle of non-discrimination under Article 2(1) of the ICCPR, as Palestinian communities, particularly in unrecognized villages and Bedouin areas, are systematically denied access to legally mandated reinforced rooms or protective infrastructure. This structural inequity transforms what should be a neutral civil-defense measure into an instrument that reflects and perpetuates an ethno-political hierarchy.
Moreover, the repeated targeting of UNRWA facilities in Gaza, combined with Israel’s long-standing blockade on construction materials, illustrates that the absence of civilian protection is not a temporary logistical failure but part of a deliberate policy that exacerbates civilian vulnerability. From a humanitarian and ethical standpoint, this reality underscores the profound gap between legally guaranteed protections and their practical implementation: shelters and safe zones, when they exist, remain largely inaccessible to those most at risk. Consequently, any analysis of Palestinian civilian protection must account for both the legal obligations of Israel as an occupying power and the structural barriers that prevent the realization of these protections, highlighting the transformation of a legally guaranteed right into an unattainable exception.
From the perspective of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), these policies constitute serious violations of international law. In its 2024 advisory opinion on Legal Consequences arising from the Policies and Practices of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, the ICJ have affirmed that deliberate or systematic denial of protection measures to civilians, including safe shelters, can constitute a serious breach of obligations under international humanitarian law, and, depending on the circumstances, may amount to crimes against humanity.
From a legal, ethical, and humanitarian perspective, any meaningful analysis of Palestinian civilian protection must account not only for Israel’s formal obligations as an occupying power but also for the deliberate structural and policy barriers that systematically deny Palestinians access to safety. The result is a reality where civilians live under constant threat, with protection and shelters existing in theory but remaining practically inaccessible to those most at risk.