Is Washington betting on Qatar, Egypt and Turkey to make its plan in Gaza a success? | policy

Recently, after moving forward with the first phase of implementing the ceasefire in Gaza, many questions have emerged about the nature of the international forces proposed for the Gaza Strip and their actual role in disarming the resistance, managing the crossings and rebuilding, in light of growing fears of the Strip turning into two separate regions under the pretext of gradually dealing with the crisis.

In this context, the “Track of Events” program reviewed the complexities surrounding the American plan to deploy multinational forces in Gaza, as many parties question the obligations of the participating countries and the extent of their ability to impose the implementation of the agreement in light of Israeli reservations and Palestinian fears.

Professor of International Relations at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, Dr. Ibrahim Freihat, believes that the Arab and Islamic sides agreed to the plan with the aim of reaching a ceasefire and stopping the killing in Gaza, pointing out that the multinational force is responsible for dealing with the most difficult point in the second and third stages, which is dealing with the weapons of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas).

But Fraihat warned of a “dangerous scenario” of subjecting the process to blackmail by stopping the reconstruction process in areas controlled by Hamas and starting it in areas controlled by Israel, which could lead to a de facto division between eastern and western Gaza.

This means that there will be reconstruction operations in the eastern region under Israeli control, while there will be no reconstruction in the western region controlled by Hamas if disarmament is not done.

Among the challenges facing the proposed international force is its need for legitimate cover from the UN Security Council. According to Fraihat, obtaining this cover requires Russia’s approval and not using its veto, which may require making concessions to Moscow in other regional files.

He stresses that the success of the mission depends mainly on the Arab role in direct negotiations with Hamas to resolve the arms dilemma.

Freihat went on to say that one of the most important goals that called on US President Donald Trump to stop in Qatar is to convey a message to the Arab parties that this is the major mission they must undertake.

Based on these data, Freihat defines the composition of the expected forces as being mainly Arab-Islamic, including Turkey, Egypt, Qatar, and perhaps the UAE, and that the decisive factor is the Egyptian role, given that Egypt hosts meetings of the Palestinian factions, and the Egyptian government can play a role in dealing with this file.

The same speaker believed that the Arabs have an opportunity to put pressure on the American administration to achieve a reconstruction process commensurate with the scale of the tragedy that Gaza experienced.

Israeli complications

On the other hand, the writer specializing in Israeli affairs, Ihab Jabareen, believes that Israel has lost much of its sovereign capabilities in its perceptions of the next day, indicating that there is political guardianship over the following day entirely while it aspired to form a model of governance more acceptable to it.

Jabareen warned that Israel would attempt political blackmail through the issue of aid and crossings as it is the only sovereign point left for it to maneuver, suggesting that Israel would deal with this within the context of the bodies of prisoners, then handing over weapons, then tunnels, all the way to blackmailing the committee and the bureaucratic government.

The analyst specializing in Israeli affairs points out that the primary goal of Israel’s leaders is to move from talking about a Palestinian administration that has a large margin for maneuver to talking about international complexities that do not only deal directly with the Palestinians, but must also be dealt with by the American side.

Within these complications, he points out that the Israeli objection to the entry of some countries such as Turkey comes because it does not want to submit to blackmail, as the Turkish file is located inside Syria and not in the Gaza Strip.

Palestinian vision

As for the Palestinians, they prefer an Arab Islamic force, especially from friendly, mediating and understanding countries such as Egypt, Qatar, Turkey and Indonesia, which understand the Palestinian reality and situation, according to the writer and political analyst Dr. Iyad Al-Qara.

The role of these forces is to oblige Israel to implement the agreement and follow up on the implementation details, and not to be linked to the Israeli occupation or be a substitute for it.

In this context, Al-Qara warns against the term partition, which is very dangerous for the Palestinians, pointing out that the presence of forces or mediators in the eastern regions and the city of Rafah to present a new model will be viewed with suspicion as a prelude to the beginning of the agreement.

Al-Farra also stressed the importance of the Palestinian identity being present in the management of the crossings, especially the Rafah crossing, which he said should be under Egyptian-Palestinian control without Israel interfering in the affairs of travelers or the entry of goods, and that it should not be allowed to place any restrictions on the entry of building materials and reconstruction materials.

Building trust

On the other hand, former US Presidential National Security Advisor Mark Pfeifel spoke about a prevailing way of thinking among Israelis and some Americans that the Gaza crossings are used by Hamas to obtain weapons and that some humanitarian goods are sold to finance the movement, indicating that this conviction exists and will be difficult to overcome.

He considered that the challenge facing President Trump is to use his diplomatic capabilities to build confidence through coordination with Arab and Muslim countries, allies, Israelis and Palestinians.

Fife said that many countries do not want to send soldiers to Gaza because of the difficulties in working in this potentially hostile environment, stressing the need for countries such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and Indonesia to work together at the level of defense and foreign ministers to find ways to make this multinational force a success.

He ruled out the possibility that this force would remain in Gaza for decades, like the UNIFIL forces in southern Lebanon. “Rather, it will be a smaller force and its footprint will be smaller in the long term.”