More than seven months into Israel‘s war against Hamas in Gaza, the lack of a viable plan for the future governance of the enclave has now shifted into sharper focus.
Since the war began, prompted by Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack in which 1,163 people were killed and around 250 kidnapped by Hamas militants, Israel has categorically ruled out any governing role for Hamas after the conflict ends.
In turn, Hamas has also frequently rejected any form of Israeli administration in Gaza.
On Wednesday, Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh repeated in a televised speech that Hamas was in Gaza “to stay.”
Hamas, a militant Islamist group, is categorized as a terror organization by Israel, the US, the EU and many others.
What are the Arab neighbors saying?
The deadlock has been made even more complicated by regional Arab neighbors insisting that their involvement, either in the future governance of or the financing of reconstruction in the war-battered Gaza Strip, depends on the presence of a workable path towards a two-state solution.
Yet, the two-state solution, which would see a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, has been ruled out by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has vowed Hamas’ October 7 attack will not be rewarded by granting the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
“There is no common ground,” Yohanan Tzoreff, senior researcher at the Tel Aviv Institute for National Security Studies and an expert on Israeli-Palestinian relations, told DW.
“All attempts to find compromises have failed so far,” Tzoreff said. “The current Israeli government will not accept the idea of a two-state solution. Only elections could change this.”
Israel’s emergency coalition under threat
Now, a rift among Israel’s political leadership over the future of Gaza is even raising questions about the Jewish state’s political stability.
Earlier this week, former Chief of General Staff Benny Gantz, who, alongside Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant, is part of Israel’s three-person War Cabinet, set June 8 as a deadline for the Cabinet’s adoption of his post-war plan of action for Gaza.
The six-point plan includes, among other things, the return of hostages still held by Hamas, the end of Hamas rule in Gaza, the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip, and the implementation of Israeli security control over Gaza.
Gantz is also calling for the creation of an international civilian governance mechanism for Gaza. This would include American, European, Arab and Palestinian factions alongside Israeli security forces while specifically excluding Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.
Should the plan be rejected, Gantz has said he will resign his post in the War Cabinet.
If Gantz were to step down, Netanyahu could still rely on other political allies to remain in power. However, those far-right partners favor even more extreme visions for the future of Gaza, such as resettling Israelis in the strip, which Israel left to Palestinians in 2005.
To date, Netanyahu has rejected any further discussions about “the day after” in Gaza as “meaningless until Hamas is defeated and the hostages returned.”
“The biggest obstacle to finding a solution for the future administration of Gaza comes from Israel on the one hand,” Neil Quilliam, associate fellow of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the London-based think tank Chatham House, told DW.
“Israel will not allow Gaza to be administered without it maintaining a presence in the territory and a very forward-leaning security posture, meaning retaining military assets inside Gaza,” he said
“And that’s obviously something that would be an anathema to any Palestinian group governing and any Palestinian living in Gaza, on the other hand,” Quilliam added.
This week, Netanyahu also said that he was “not prepared to switch from Hamastan to Fatahstan,” in reference to Hamas in Gaza; and Fatah, the major political party of the Palestinian Authority under the rule of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank.
Hopes resting on the Arab Quint
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has also vociferously reiterated the US conviction that Israel needs to present a clear and concrete plan “for the future of Gaza to avoid a power vacuum that could become filled by chaos.”
In turn, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has intensified talks with the so-called Arab Quint — which consists of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar — about the group’s potential participation in a multinational Arab peacekeeping mission operating under a UN Security Council resolution.
Although the proposal originated with the Quint, as senior Middle East policy fellow Hugh Lovatt of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) points out, its members have been careful to emphasize that their participation would be contingent upon the establishment of an effective cease-fire and real progress toward a two-state solution.
On Saturday, UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan said that his country would not participate in a new civil administration in Gaza.
However, Bahrain, which normalized ties with Israel in 2020 as part of the US-brokered Abraham Accords, has signaled a willingness to join such a multinational force.
Meanwhile, Bahrain’s influential neighbor Saudi Arabia, which had been in the process of normalizing ties with Israel until the October 7 Hamas attack, has agreed to a semi-finalized version of a draft on wide-ranging security agreements between the kingdom and the United States. The draft also includes an “upgrade” of Israeli-Saudi relations.
Moreover, a statement released Sunday, after the meeting between Sullivan and Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, once again highlighted the need for a “credible path on the Palestinian issue.”
“It is difficult to imagine Saudi Arabia normalizing relations with Israel at this juncture unless there is some form of resolution” to the question of Palestine, Neil Quilliam told DW.
ECFR Middle East expert Lovatt echoes that view, telling DW, “The Israeli government has refused to offer anywhere near the minimum that would be required by Saudi Arabia for a deal.”
In turn, Lovatt sees the Arab Quint’s proposal for a multinational force under UN supervision as the most realistic vision by far for stabilizing Gaza after a cease-fire “as long as it is coupled with a new diplomatic pathway in support of Palestinian self-determination.”
“In a way, that also leads to Israel’s full regional integration,” Lovatt told DW, adding, “Even if there remain considerable obstacles to come, it is an important starting point for future discussions.”
Since the war began, prompted by Hamas’ October 7, 2023, attack in which 1,163 people were killed and around 250 kidnapped by Hamas militants, Israel has categorically ruled out any governing role for Hamas after the conflict ends.
In turn, Hamas has also frequently rejected any form of Israeli administration in Gaza.
On Wednesday, Hamas chief Ismail Haniyeh repeated in a televised speech that Hamas was in Gaza “to stay.”
Hamas, a militant Islamist group, is categorized as a terror organization by Israel, the US, the EU and many others.
What are the Arab neighbors saying?
The deadlock has been made even more complicated by regional Arab neighbors insisting that their involvement, either in the future governance of or the financing of reconstruction in the war-battered Gaza Strip, depends on the presence of a workable path towards a two-state solution.
Yet, the two-state solution, which would see a Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, has been ruled out by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has vowed Hamas’ October 7 attack will not be rewarded by granting the creation of an independent Palestinian state.
“There is no common ground,” Yohanan Tzoreff, senior researcher at the Tel Aviv Institute for National Security Studies and an expert on Israeli-Palestinian relations, told DW.
“All attempts to find compromises have failed so far,” Tzoreff said. “The current Israeli government will not accept the idea of a two-state solution. Only elections could change this.”
Israel’s emergency coalition under threat
Now, a rift among Israel’s political leadership over the future of Gaza is even raising questions about the Jewish state’s political stability.
Earlier this week, former Chief of General Staff Benny Gantz, who, alongside Netanyahu and Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant, is part of Israel’s three-person War Cabinet, set June 8 as a deadline for the Cabinet’s adoption of his post-war plan of action for Gaza.
The six-point plan includes, among other things, the return of hostages still held by Hamas, the end of Hamas rule in Gaza, the demilitarization of the Gaza Strip, and the implementation of Israeli security control over Gaza.
Gantz is also calling for the creation of an international civilian governance mechanism for Gaza. This would include American, European, Arab and Palestinian factions alongside Israeli security forces while specifically excluding Hamas and the Palestinian Authority.
Should the plan be rejected, Gantz has said he will resign his post in the War Cabinet.
If Gantz were to step down, Netanyahu could still rely on other political allies to remain in power. However, those far-right partners favor even more extreme visions for the future of Gaza, such as resettling Israelis in the strip, which Israel left to Palestinians in 2005.
To date, Netanyahu has rejected any further discussions about “the day after” in Gaza as “meaningless until Hamas is defeated and the hostages returned.”
“The biggest obstacle to finding a solution for the future administration of Gaza comes from Israel on the one hand,” Neil Quilliam, associate fellow of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at the London-based think tank Chatham House, told DW.
“Israel will not allow Gaza to be administered without it maintaining a presence in the territory and a very forward-leaning security posture, meaning retaining military assets inside Gaza,” he said
“And that’s obviously something that would be an anathema to any Palestinian group governing and any Palestinian living in Gaza, on the other hand,” Quilliam added.
This week, Netanyahu also said that he was “not prepared to switch from Hamastan to Fatahstan,” in reference to Hamas in Gaza; and Fatah, the major political party of the Palestinian Authority under the rule of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank.
Hopes resting on the Arab Quint
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has also vociferously reiterated the US conviction that Israel needs to present a clear and concrete plan “for the future of Gaza to avoid a power vacuum that could become filled by chaos.”
In turn, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has intensified talks with the so-called Arab Quint — which consists of Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar — about the group’s potential participation in a multinational Arab peacekeeping mission operating under a UN Security Council resolution.
Although the proposal originated with the Quint, as senior Middle East policy fellow Hugh Lovatt of the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR) points out, its members have been careful to emphasize that their participation would be contingent upon the establishment of an effective cease-fire and real progress toward a two-state solution.
On Saturday, UAE Foreign Minister Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan said that his country would not participate in a new civil administration in Gaza.
However, Bahrain, which normalized ties with Israel in 2020 as part of the US-brokered Abraham Accords, has signaled a willingness to join such a multinational force.
Meanwhile, Bahrain’s influential neighbor Saudi Arabia, which had been in the process of normalizing ties with Israel until the October 7 Hamas attack, has agreed to a semi-finalized version of a draft on wide-ranging security agreements between the kingdom and the United States. The draft also includes an “upgrade” of Israeli-Saudi relations.
Moreover, a statement released Sunday, after the meeting between Sullivan and Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, once again highlighted the need for a “credible path on the Palestinian issue.”
“It is difficult to imagine Saudi Arabia normalizing relations with Israel at this juncture unless there is some form of resolution” to the question of Palestine, Neil Quilliam told DW.
ECFR Middle East expert Lovatt echoes that view, telling DW, “The Israeli government has refused to offer anywhere near the minimum that would be required by Saudi Arabia for a deal.”
In turn, Lovatt sees the Arab Quint’s proposal for a multinational force under UN supervision as the most realistic vision by far for stabilizing Gaza after a cease-fire “as long as it is coupled with a new diplomatic pathway in support of Palestinian self-determination.”
“In a way, that also leads to Israel’s full regional integration,” Lovatt told DW, adding, “Even if there remain considerable obstacles to come, it is an important starting point for future discussions.”
