PA rule in Gaza is the most realistic way forward

After 7 October, the European Union added him to their terrorist list.  This has heightened fears among the group's political leadership that they could be labelled next.

As further isolation looms for the group, Israel is returning to a strategy used in 1978 to prepare for the times that follow this latest war.

Back then, it aimed to distance Palestinians from the PLO through the Villages Leagues, engaging directly with local leaders who did not have political affiliations with Palestinian groups.

But now, many such influential families in Gaza are associated with organised crime, raising concerns that empowering them could further complicate the situation rather than stabilise it.

With broader powers, these families would manage aid distribution and refugee control, yet the effectiveness of this strategy is unlikely.

Unpopular strategy

Hamas has already warned such families against cooperating with Israel, threatening retaliation. On its part, the Palestinian Authority also opposes the plan, viewing it as undermining its own governance.

This strategy also conflicts with US commitments to resolve the Palestinian issue, and it would impose health and economic responsibilities on Israel as an occupying force, creating an unsustainable situation with long-term problems.

An alternative would be for the political wing of Hamas to sever connections with the military wing and move closer to the broader Muslim Brotherhood network, potentially joining the PLO.

This scenario also appears highly unlikely, not least because Hamas's military wing continues to operate in Gaza. The organisation's popularity comes from its military wing, not its political wing, which is increasingly viewed as inadequate in the eyes of many Palestinians. 

A split between its political and military branches would likely, in effect, signal the end of Hamas. Furthermore, the organisation's ideological steadfastness has historically limited its politics, making such a major shift even more unlikely.

Pragmatic option

Another option is that Israel would boost its collaboration with the Palestinian Authority, which is already running the West Bank. This seems to be the most pragmatic solution to the question of who governs Gaza after the war. It is also the most viable option in the long term.

Read more: From World Bank to West Bank: Mohammad Mustafa, the new Palestinian PM

While Netanyahu's objections seem influenced by anger and a desire for revenge, there is a need for a way out of war and involving the PA in Gaza's government is the most realistic way to do this.

The PA—with its PLO and Fatah components—has the capability and backing in Gaza to effectively administer the region, unlike Hamas.

The consequences of war have arguably bolstered Fatah's appeal, given its emphasis on political engagement over military confrontation with Israel.

This aligns with international support for a two-state solution, making a PA administration in Gaza all the more feasible.

Putting a PA government in charge in Gaza will not be easy. Israel is likely to resist fully relinquishing control over Gaza, possibly seeking to retain control over strategic areas, such as northern Gaza, to facilitate future military operations.

Moreover, Gaza will remain susceptible to ongoing incursions, mirroring the situation in the Occupied West Bank. But while these problems remain, integrating the PA into Gaza when the guns are silent is the best available option.