Plans for an international stabilisation force authorized by the United Nations to demilitarize the militant group in Gaza are facing increasing opposition after the United Arab Emirates announced it will not take part due to the absence of a clear legal structure.
Israeli authorities have previously excluded Turkish participation, and the Jordanian King Abdullah has declared that his country's forces will not join. Azerbaijan, previously mooted as a possible participant, was absent from a planning meeting in Turkey and indicated it would not contribute unless a full truce was in place.
Emirati officials lacks clarity on a defined structure for the stability force and under such circumstances will not participate, but backs all political efforts towards peace – and stay at the vanguard of relief efforts.
The UAE's announcement, made by senior envoy Dr Anwar Gargash at a forum in Abu Dhabi, highlights Arab doubts about the terms of a US-drafted document previously distributed to diplomats at the UN in New York. The proposal assigns responsibility on a American-led security mission to be the primary means of ensuring order in Gaza after Israel have withdrawn from the territory.
Regional governments would prefer expanded responsibilities to be assigned to a distinct Palestinian civilian police force. Global jurisprudence would also forbid foreign troops from deploying into contested Palestinian territories unless there was clear local approval; without it, the mission could be viewed as imposed under UN law, and potentially stabilising an illegal Israeli occupation.
A Palestinian American co-author of the ceasefire proposal commented: “It is critical that the force be deployed not to stabilise the unlawful Israeli occupation, but to enforce global standards and terminate it. The force will work as long as it operates in the entire disputed land, including the occupied territories, at the invitation of Palestine, and has a defined goal to end the presence within the context of a sovereign state of Palestine.”
The draft contains no mention to the occupied territories in the American proposal, or to a sovereign Palestine, or a peaceful resolution, a prospect that Israeli leadership rejects.
Detailed talks on the mission mandate, including its leadership structure, began officially on last week in New York, and appear to be lengthy – potentially creating the emergence of a power gap in Gaza that may empower militant factions.
The United States is suggesting that it command the mission although it will not have many personnel involved on the ground. It has already in effect assumed command of the delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza from a recently established civil military coordination centre based in Israel.
The proposed US resolution defines the aim of the security mission as “together with the recently prepared and vetted law enforcement to assist in protecting border areas, stabilise the security environment in the region by ensuring the process of demilitarising the Gaza Strip including the destruction and blocking of reconstructing the military terror and offensive infrastructure as well as the lasting removal of arms from non-state armed groups”.
The mission, reporting to a “peace council” chaired by Donald Trump, and not to the UN, would be required to use “any required actions” to fulfill its goals.
Arab states including Qatar are also worried that this authority is overly broad, and if Hamas is to lay down arms, the faction will only do so to fellow Palestinians, likely in the civilian police force, at a moment that, from the militant perspective, signifies the end of occupation.
They also fear the draft mandate spills into giving the stabilisation force a governance role in the territory, a responsibility that was to be set aside for a local expert panel working in cooperation with a reformed local government.
This “transitional governance administration” in the strip would stay until “the local government has satisfactorily finished its restructuring plan, the satisfaction of which shall be acceptable to the BoP”, the proposal says. It also “underscores the significance” of unhindered relief in Gaza, including through the United Nations, the ICRC, and the Red Crescent.
However, it opens the door the exclusion of “any organisation determined to have misused such assistance”. The wording permits the board of peace barring Unrwa, the organization that the global judicial body has ruled is the lawful provider of aid.
France and Saudi Arabia are currently advocating for a mention to a Palestinian state to be included in the resolution. The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, is due in the US presidential residence on 18 November, and Manal Radwan has said that a reference to a Palestinian state is a requirement.
The Palestinian Authority leader, Mahmoud Abbas, met the French president, Emmanuel Macron, in Paris on this week to review the PA role.
Neither the UN nor the 15-member UNSC are assigned a oversight role over the stabilisation force, supervising the implementation of the proposal, a point mostly overlooked by the proposed document. No details is specified about the funding of this stabilisation mission, which, as per the US officials, should be largely covered by regional nations, with the Kingdom taking the lead.
Israel is requesting formal assurances from the US that it be permitted to follow the pattern of the Lebanese situation and retain the right to return to Gaza if it believes demilitarization is not occurring at a scale or speed it requires.
The Israeli proposal was put to the former US advisor, Donald Trump’s relative, and the American diplomat, Steve Witkoff. The advisor was in the Israeli capital on this week to review progress on the truce and Witkoff was due to appear subsequently the that day.
Only the bodies of a small number of the original 251 captives are still not recovered.
Independently, Israel has been suggesting that the Gaza Strip could still be divided in two parts with reconstruction work beginning in the Israel occupied parts of the region. International officials insist that this is not part of the former US administration's proposal.
A seasoned casino analyst with over a decade of experience in gaming strategies and industry trends.
