GAZA, (PIC)
At a time when the Israeli war of genocide on Gaza continues, ongoing political movements behind the scenes reveal a wide gap between American visions for ending the war and reconstructing the Strip, and the field realities imposed by the Israeli government led by Benjamin Netanyahu.
This contradiction appeared clear in the first press conference held by the High Representative of the “Peace Council” Nickolay Mladenov since assuming his post, days after two consecutive meetings with Netanyahu, where he presented the outlines of the plan proposed to Hamas regarding its disarmament, and directly linked the implementation of the plan to the reconstruction of Gaza.
However, the conference, whose details were reported by Haaretz newspaper, also reflected the scale of the dilemma facing the “Peace Council”, given the absence of real pressure tools on Israel, which continues attacks in the Strip and restrict the entry of aid despite political endeavors.
Reconstruction versus disarmament
Since the launch of the “Peace Council” during the World Economic Forum, the administration of US President Donald Trump has tried to market a plan based on a clear equation: reconstructing Gaza in exchange for ending the rule of Hamas and its disarmament.
Washington pledged to provide huge funding for reconstruction, including direct American contributions reaching 10 billion dollars over ten years, in addition to Gulf promises of other funding.
However, the plan clashed from its beginning with two basic obstacles: Hamas’s refusal to hand over its weapons under Israeli conditions, and the insistence of the Israeli government to use aid and reconstruction as a political and security tool of pressure.
During his talk with journalists, Mladenov appeared aware of the scale of this complexity, as he spoke about the suffering of the Palestinians in Gaza as a direct result of the continuation of political stalling, stressing that the residents of the Strip “cannot wait indefinitely,” in reference to the stumbling implementation of humanitarian understandings.
But Mladenov avoided answering the most sensitive question: what will happen if Hamas refuses to disarm, which reflects the absence of any practical vision for the “Peace Council” to deal with the failure of the plan, especially since the actual tools of pressure remain in the hands of Israel and the United States.
Data contained in the report reveal that the Trump administration, despite its direct involvement in negotiations, has not been able to impose a fundamental change in Israeli behavior inside Gaza.
While Washington asked Tel Aviv during rounds of negotiations in Cairo to ease military operations, Israel escalated its attacks, most notably the assassination of the commander-in-chief of the armed wing of al-Qassam, Izz al-Din al-Haddad.
Haaretz indicates that American influence on the Netanyahu government remains limited, despite Israel’s increasing reliance on American support in light of its widening international isolation.
This contradiction between the political track and military escalation puts the American plan to a difficult test, especially since Israel continues to impose new realities on the ground inside the Strip, including expanding areas of military control and reducing the spaces available to the Palestinian population.
A gate under restrictions
Away from political plans, the humanitarian reality in Gaza remains governed by strict Israeli restrictions, especially regarding humanitarian aid and the movement of the sick and wounded through the Rafah land crossing as the only outlet for the residents of the Strip to the outside world.
Despite the entry into force of the ceasefire agreement, the volume of aid reaching the Strip remained much less than the actual needs, after the number of trucks agreed to enter according to the ceasefire agreement fell from about 600 trucks daily to approximately 250.
Israeli also imposes strict restrictions on the entry of fuel, medical equipment, construction materials, tents, and prefabricated houses “caravans”, despite being stipulated within the first phase of the ceasefire agreement, under the pretext of “dual-use”, while Israel claims that the entry of prefabricated houses represents the beginning of the reconstruction process before implementing the condition of disarming Hamas.
As for the Rafah crossing, which remained closed for long months, it currently operates at a very limited pace, amid overlapping Egyptian and Israeli restrictions that prevent most residents of Gaza from leaving, with the exception of limited numbers of the sick and wounded.
An Israeli security source says that the World Health Organization teams working on transporting the wounded “are collapsing under work pressure”, in light of the limited operational capacity of the crossing.
In parallel with the political stagnation, Israel continues to expand the scope of its control inside the Strip.
According to estimates by Doctors Without Borders, the percentage of land controlled by the occupation army rose from 53% in October to about 58% currently, while the area subject to military restrictions exceeds 60% of the Strip.
During recent weeks, new areas subject to military restriction were also monitored in the Zaytun neighborhood in Gaza City, within a gradual policy to expand the “buffer zone”.
Despite the “Peace Council” denying the existence of its approval for this expansion, the continuation of military operations reveals the limited nature of its actual influence on Israeli decisions.
Reciprocity proposal
In an attempt to bypass the disarmament knot, the “Peace Council” presented a modified version of its proposal to Hamas, which includes the principle of “reciprocity”.
According to leaks, the Movement will not be required to disarm except in conjunction with the dismantling of armed groups supported by Israel inside the Strip, within a mutual monitoring mechanism.
The plan also proposes retaining part of the existing police structure in Gaza, while subjecting its personnel to security checks under Israeli supervision. However, this proposal also clashes with the Israeli position that rejects any arrangements that do not begin first with the complete disarmament of Hamas.
In light of this blockage, the “Peace Council” is studying the option of starting reconstruction in areas outside the control of the Movement, through deploying an “international stabilization force” to replace the Israeli occupation army.
But this scenario, according to Haaretz newspaper, seems far-fetched, in light of Netanyahu’s refusal to withdraw from any areas inside Gaza unless direct and decisive American pressure is imposed on him.
Thus, the Gaza reconstruction plan appears stuck between Israel’s security conditions, the adherence of the resistance to its weapon, and the helplessness of international mediators to impose a balanced settlement, while the residents of the Strip pay the greatest price with the continuation of genocide and humanitarian collapse.
