In the wake of the Gaza conflict, various governance proposals have emerged from President Trump, opposition leader Yair Lapid, and Egypt. While Trump’s controversial plan involves Palestinian displacement, Lapid’s proposes an Egyptian-led management, and Egypt’s plan emphasizes reconstruction without removing current residents. Each plan faces significant hurdles, with ongoing tensions threatening to derail any progress towards a stable governance structure.
The ongoing conflict in Gaza has raised critical questions regarding its future governance after the war. Several proposals have emerged, predominantly from U.S. President Donald Trump, Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid, and Egypt, each advocating different strategies for a stable and peaceful outcome in the region. Establishing a solid governance framework is essential for achieving a lasting cease-fire, making these proposals a focal point of current discussions.
Trump’s Proposal: President Trump’s controversial plan suggests the expulsion of Palestinians from Gaza, with intentions to resettle them in Jordan and Egypt. He envisions the U.S. overseeing Gaza’s reconstruction to transform it into a luxurious region akin to the “Riviera of the Middle East.” Although some Israeli officials support it, Palestinian leaders and many Arab countries have vehemently rejected it, criticizing it as a form of ethnic cleansing and a violation of international laws.
Lapid’s Plan: The Israeli opposition leader offers the so-called “Egyptian solution,” which proposes that Egypt manage Gaza’s civilian and security affairs for up to 15 years. This plan seeks to demilitarize Gaza while allowing the international community to aid in rebuilding efforts, including addressing Egypt’s substantial foreign debt, thus incentivizing their involvement. While it remains open to Palestinian governance, Egypt has already deemed this proposal as unacceptable due to lack of prior consultation.
Egypt’s Plan: Egypt has presented a robust $53 billion plan approved by Arab countries, aimed at rebuilding Gaza in three phases over five years. The plan includes the clean-up of debris, housing construction, infrastructure development, and the establishment of a Palestinian police force trained by Egypt and Jordan. However, it has faced resistance from both the U.S. and Israel for not mandating disarmament of Hamas, a significant player in Gaza’s governance.
Challenges Across All Proposals: All proposals currently face significant hurdles, particularly as the cease-fire’s fate hangs precariously. The absence of an agreement to extend this cease-fire raises concerns regarding further hostilities. Moreover, the pervasive control of Hamas complicates any reconstruction plan, given the United States and Israel’s opposition to their continued authority. Domestically and regionally, tensions, including escalations in the West Bank, further encumber resolution efforts.
The future governance of Gaza remains uncertain, hinging on various proposals predominantly from Trump, Lapid, and Egypt, each outlining different frameworks for postwar management. However, the rapidly changing political landscape, coupled with divergent responses from key stakeholders such as Hamas, may threaten the viability of these proposals. The ultimate determination of Gaza’s governance will require considerable diplomatic engagement and a commitment from all parties to achieve lasting peace.
Original Source: foreignpolicy.com
