Gaza: An Opportunity to Reorder the Palestinian House

The welcoming response of the Palestinians to the ceasefire agreement, and the step to form the National Committee for Managing Gaza, represents a moment that may seem necessary to halt the ongoing genocide. However, it remains an incomplete moment unless it transforms into a true entry point for reorganizing the Palestinian house, politically and socially, and launching a comprehensive national dialogue that rebuilds the political organization and redefines a lasting national project stemming from Palestinian will, not from imposed external arrangements.

In this context, the adoption of a non-speech and non-sloganeering tone appears to be a political and moral necessity, not as an acceptance of the status quo, but as a conscious choice aimed at seizing this moment to stop the humanitarian bleeding and restore the Palestinian society that has been exhausted by the genocide and its deep impacts, which continue in various forms despite any announced calm.

However, this calm should not obscure the fact that the Peace Council, and the organizational and administrative structures arising from it, are not Palestinian in their reference or structure but rather represent, in practice, a form of political guardianship and a gradual deprivation of national and political rights, even if wrapped in humanitarian discourse. Even the National Committee for Managing Gaza does not exceed the status of a local service body, deriving its powers from the Executive Peace Council, not from national mandate or popular legitimacy.

The formation of the Peace Council is the result of an American understanding that has received international, Arab, and Islamic blessing, and reflects a structure of a colonial settlement American-Israeli system that is based on the systematic denial of Palestinian political rights, and on the re-production of rights deprivation in a humanitarian form, within a deliberate policy of dismantling Palestinian society and administering it instead of empowering it. This reality compels Palestinians to deal with it with political caution, balancing between alleviating humanitarian suffering and preserving rights, without substituting them with a service administration stripped of sovereignty.

Even with the claim that the Peace Council's mission is temporary, confined to a transitional period not exceeding two years, this does not exempt Palestinians from the responsibility of formulating a clear national alternative based on a collective project that relies on national interests, organized resilience, recovery, rebuilding, and reconstruction, in parallel with serious internal efforts to rebuild societal trust, reunite factions, address division, and restore the significance of politics as a protective tool rather than an additional burden on a weary society.

Utilizing this opportunity requires a shift from the logic of disaster management to the logic of recovery and rebuilding, socially and politically, with an awareness that genocide, even if its media sound has lessened, continues in other forms: through siege, starvation, hindering reconstruction, and delaying Israeli withdrawal. Hence, restoring Palestinian society and building networks of internal and international solidarity within the framework of national legitimacy are fundamental entries to confront attempts to isolate Palestinians and break the declared and undeclared plans aimed at restructuring Palestinian society amid displacement, division, and the weakening of the political system along with the deterioration of its structures.