Ramallah, occupied West Bank – Every day, Fuad Abu Salam sips his morning coffee outside his rented home in the Thinnabeh suburb, gazing at every detail of the sprawling Tulkarem refugee camp in front of him. This West Bank camp he can see in the distance once housed a two-storey building comprising four apartments, each measuring 300 square metres (3,229sq feet), in which he and his extended family lived.

After he was displaced from the camp, he, his wife, his four children, and his mother were confined to a small, rented apartment no bigger than 100sq metres (1,076sq feet) in Thinnabeh. His home in Tulkarem was partially destroyed when he left the camp.

Everything changed for Fuad and his family on January 21, 2025, when Israel launched a military assault in the occupied West Bank dubbed “Iron Wall”, initially targeting the Jenin refugee camp. A week later, the operation expanded to include the Tulkarem and Nur Shams camps in the city of Tulkarem.

Israeli forces forcibly displaced the entire populations of the three camps during January and February 2025 and continue to prevent their return, the United Nations has said.

Mass displacement

Data from UNRWA cited in a report titled, Destruction of Palestinian Refugee Camps in the Northern West Bank, stated that 33,362 Palestinians remain forcibly displaced from the three camps. By October 2025, 52 percent of structures in the Jenin camp, 48 percent in the Nur Shams camp, and 36 percent in the Tulkarem camp had been destroyed or damaged.

The Israeli operation has affected hundreds of homes, roads, and infrastructure, including water and electricity networks, while humanitarian aid to the camps has been cut off.

Israeli forces killed 102 Palestinians, including 21 children, during the period covered, according to the report. This represents 46 percent of the total number of Palestinians killed by Israeli forces in the West Bank during this period.

On Sunday, the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the government to provide a timeline for the return of displaced people to the three camps, setting November 23 as a deadline for a response.

Israel’s far-right Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich rejected the ruling, warning that the return of residents could allow for the reconstruction of what he termed “terror infrastructure”. He called on the government not to implement the decision.

Meanwhile, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz opposed the court’s intervention, asserting that the army’s continued presence in the camps was a security decision and stating his intention to maintain a military presence there.

Fuad, 42, a greenhouse installer, found himself forced to flee with all the camp’s other residents and more than 40 family members. But he and his neighbours carried with them the hope of returning home.

They moved between the homes of relatives, enduring harsh living conditions, until he finally settled in the Thinnabeh suburb of Tulkarem.

The neighbourhood, which overlooks the camp, has “restored his spirit” because he can see his home even if it’s from afar. Although he is unable to reach the building, he can gaze at it and imagine a time when he can return.

“If a decision were issued right now allowing us to return, I would go back immediately without a moment’s hesitation,” he said.

But his home is no longer what it used to be. It was partially demolished and set on fire by Israeli soldiers, rendering more than 80 percent of the apartment block uninhabitable. Fuad plans to use the rubble to rebuild his home.

“I will never waver in my resolve to return, even if it means pitching a tent over the ruins and living there,” he declared.

Mohamad Ararawi, 18, from the Jenin refugee camp, also saw his home razed to the ground with a wide road replacing it.

He told Al Jazeera that his family of 40, who had lived in a five-story building in the al-Damaj neighbourhood, all fled the camp when the Israeli military operation began, seeking shelter in homes belonging to other relatives.

“My mother, father, five sisters, and I took refuge in my brother’s unfinished apartment. We endured harsh conditions, suffering through biting cold and scorching heat, before gradually completing the construction until it became somewhat habitable,” he added.

Returning is all that matters to them, and they refuse to live anywhere but the camp, even if it lacks basic amenities.

A near-impossible return

Returning the displaced back to their homes is not merely an issue of clearing roads for residents. Returning would mean living in a camp in which infrastructure has been damaged and hundreds of homes destroyed, all amid a lack of necessities.

Nihad Shawish, a member of the Nur Shams Camp Popular Services Committee, told Al Jazeera that the scale of destruction makes the residents’ return fraught with immense difficulties, despite their will to go back to their homes.

Approximately 400 homes, most of them three to four stories high, were destroyed, he said, while about 100 homes were burned down during the Israeli army’s presence in the camp.

Even the ones that survived are not necessarily habitable; they sustained severe damage affecting doors, windows, and interior facilities. The collapse of some buildings has also damaged neighbouring homes.

Approximately 10,900 camp residents remain displaced, including families staying in private homes and others at a school in the Thinnabeh suburb.

Faisal Salameh, an official with the Tulkarem Camp Popular Committee, told Al Jazeera that more than 2,000 housing units were completely destroyed, while approximately 90 per cent of the camp’s homes sustained partial damage, rendering them uninhabitable.

“Israel has turned the camp into an environment that drives residents away, given the widespread destruction and the ban on reconstruction in certain areas that have been converted into roads,” he noted.

Despite these conditions, Salameh said that displaced residents are eager to return to the camp as soon as a decision by the Israeli government permits them to.

The camp was home to approximately 15,000 people. The majority of the displaced currently live in rented homes or with relatives, while others have sought shelter in schools, mosques, or makeshift tin shacks.

Israeli rejection

While the Israeli Supreme Court’s ruling opens the door to discussing the return of displaced persons to camps in the northern West Bank, its rejection by Israeli government ministers raises questions about whether it will be implemented. Until then, the lives of the displaced families remain in limbo.

Mohamad Halaseh, an expert on Israeli affairs, told Al Jazeera that the Israeli right-wing isn’t just trying to alter the structure of the judicial system, but also seeking to undermine its legitimacy and exert pressure on judges.

He explained that the effect of political stances is evident in the disregard for Supreme Court rulings. He cites the issue of Palestinian prisoner visitations, a case in which the state failed to comply with the court’s decisions, as one example of this.

“The continued disregard for court rulings undermines the judiciary’s ability to compel the government to act when judicial decisions conflict with the stance of the political leadership,” he said.

Several precedents make the implementation of court rulings on the camps unlikely, he said. This is particularly distressing for residents who also face strong Israeli political opposition to the return of Palestinians to the three camps.

“Declared political stances set a limit on the extent to which executive institutions comply with judicial rulings,” he said.