Competing visions for a post-war Gaza

The cyclical nature of the conflict and Israel’s occupation continue to shape regional and international outlooks

AFP

Palestinians gather for a communal iftar, or fast-breaking meal, on the first day of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, amid building rubble in Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on March 1, 2025.

Competing visions for a post-war Gaza

Ahmed Maher

last update on 03 Mar 2025

In previous Gaza wars, reconstruction often became synonymous with temporary solutions rather than sustainable development. The most basic needs and aspirations of the population after more than 16 months of a genocidal war launched by Israel following Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel, are dependent on how regional and international stakeholders want Gaza to look like after the war stops.

Several plans have been floated for a post-war Gaza. Among them are an Egyptian plan, a rare Fatah-Hamas plan, Trump’s widely-condemned plan to turn the Strip into the “Riviera in the Middle East”, and an Israeli plan that apparently aims to disrupt a joint Arab effort to counter Trump’s unrealistic proposal.

The challenge to rebuild Gaza after the war is compounded by the fact that it remains under draconian Israeli blockade and occupation—one that extends beyond military presence; encompassing control over borders, airspace, and essential resources, creating an environment of profound instability and dependency. The Israeli blockade, imposed since 2007, has severely restricted the flow of goods, including construction materials, medical supplies, and food—all necessary things for rebuilding and sustaining life.

With each war, there is less donor appetite to rebuild, given the cyclical nature of Israeli bombardment and the grinding realities of a political stalemate. With each passing war, aid pledges have gradually diminished, which indicates a stark decline in confidence and willingness from international donors to fund reconstruction projects. Many donors hesitate to commit large sums for reconstruction efforts, fearing their investments will later be destroyed again. This has led to a growing Arab consensus that Hamas shouldn’t run Gaza after the war.

Bashar TALEB / AFP — Israeli hostage Omer Shem Tov, flanked by Palestinian Hamas fighters, smiles after being released along with two others as part of the seventh hostage-prisoner exchange, in Nuseirat in the central Gaza Strip, on February 22, 2025.

Egyptian plan

The Egyptian plan, which state-run media outlets have leaked details of, is being presented as the Arab consensus strategy moving forward. It is centred on the establishment of a technocrat Palestinian administration with no affiliation to Hamas or the Palestinian Authority which would govern the Strip and oversee reconstruction efforts.

Under this plan, a Palestinian police force comprising mainly of former PA policemen, who remained in Gaza after Hamas took control of the strip in 2007, would oversee security with reinforcements trained by Egypt and the West. Reconstruction would come in three phases and take five years to complete in this plan.

Under the plan, three “safe zones” would be carved out inside Gaza to resettle Palestinians during the initial six-month “early recovery period.” The zones would be equipped with mobile homes and shelters, with humanitarian aid flowing in. More than 20 Egyptian and international companies will be involved in clearing the rubble and rebuilding the Strip’s infrastructure, which would help the Egyptian economy.

While on the surface, the idea of creating safe zones is surely welcomed as it would provide much-needed shelter and security for civilians displaced and traumatised by Israel’s war on Gaza, this would largely depend on cooperation between Israel and Hamas, which still maintains a significant military and political presence.

Without a comprehensive approach that reconciles Israel's security concerns with humanitarian imperatives, the prospect for meaningful reconstruction in Gaza remains bleak

But perhaps the most important aspect of the plan is that it would allow Palestinians to stay in Gaza and not be displaced. Trump's plan has largely been seen as an attempt to ethnically cleanse Palestinians from the land they are culturally and historically tied to.

For their part, Egypt and Jordan have already rejected Trump's idea to displace the Palestinians. The US president also walked back his comments after doubling down on them on several occasions, telling Fox News Radio last week that the plan was just an idea and wouldn't be forced on anyone.

Perhaps he began to understand it would lead to widespread unrest in Gaza, Israel and the broader region if implemented. But he later posted a deranged AI-generated video on his Truth Social platform showing what 'Trump Gaza' could look like—making it more difficult for observers to understand his true intentions.

Fatah-Hamas plan

In December, there was a very rare Fatah-Hamas declaration in Cairo-sponsored talks. Both rivals agreed to form a committee to manage the Gaza Strip at the end of the war in coordination with the Palestinian government. Under this plan, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas would "issue a presidential decree to appoint this committee after he approves the draft agreement." This committee would comprise 10 to 15 national figures with relevant competencies, recognised for their integrity, experience and transparency."

But the feasibility of this plan seems far-fetched, given the bitter rivalry between the two groups since Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007. This resulted in a fragmented Palestinian political landscape, with each faction governing different territories (Fatah in what's left from the Israeli-occupied West Bank and Hamas in what's left from the Israeli-occupied Gaza). Their longstanding tensions have made it impossible to come up with a coordinated political strategy for the Palestinian people and their quest for self-determination.

Omar AL-QATTAA / AFP — A man raises the Palestinian flag as he watches the return of displaced people to northern Gaza via the Netzarim Corridor.

That said, increased international scrutiny and the need for a unified Palestinian front might compel them to reconcile. The urgent need for post-conflict reconstruction and humanitarian assistance in Gaza could necessitate cooperation between the two factions. Both parties seem to recognise that a disunited front could hinder recovery efforts and diminish access to international aid.

Israel's plan

Despite all these plans, Israel seems to be sending the message that nothing can be decided for Gaza without its approval. The Guardian reported that the Israeli military has presented the UN and aid organisations with a post-war plan to run the Gaza Strip through "tighter control." The plan reportedly does not mention the withdrawal of its forces from Gaza, as stipulated by the ceasefire agreement reached between both parties.

Sources from aid organisations who spoke to British newspaper said that representatives from the Israeli army would distribute supplies through "tightly managed logistics hubs" to vetted recipients in the Gaza Strip. These so-called humanitarian hubs would be gradually expanded and could be secured by private security contractors in areas under full Israeli army control. According to the planned framework, all non-governmental organisations allowed to operate in Gaza would have to be registered in Israel and have their staff vetted.

In conclusion, reconstruction and aid distribution in the Strip will be closely linked to the political considerations of each stakeholder. But what seems apparent is that the endless cycle of violence and Israel's occupation remain key obstacles to reconstruction. Without a comprehensive approach that reconciles Israel's security concerns with humanitarian imperatives, the prospect for meaningful reconstruction in Gaza remains bleak, perpetuating the cycle of conflict and suffering.

+ / -