Gaza and the Reengineering of the Plan: When the Logic of Power Advances Over Law

It is hard to believe that the second phase of the American plan for the Gaza Strip will be implemented as announced. Political and security indicators suggest that this phase will undergo a restructuring that takes into account Israeli interests more than it responds to the requirements of sustainable calm or a political solution. In the absence of any real guarantees for lifting the siege or stopping aggression, the possibilities of forced displacement, changing the demographic structure, and expanding Israeli control remain ongoing risks that are gradually managed under different headings.

This path cannot be separated from a deeper transformation in the international system, where the practical weight of international law and United Nations institutions is declining in favor of approaches based on managing conflict instead of resolving it, and on balances of power instead of regulatory rules. The issue is no longer just about double standards, but a real shift towards an international system that is less committed to legal order and more prone to justifying the use of force when it serves the interests of influential powers.

The Palestinian cause is at the heart of this transformation, not on its margins. The international response to the Gaza war reflects a high degree of leniency towards widespread violations, in contrast to limited and conditional pressure, which often confines itself to the humanitarian dimension without approaching the political roots of the conflict. In this context, political plans become tools for reproducing the existing reality, rather than changing it.

At the broader international level, this coincides with the return of competition among major powers within the logic of 'vital areas'. China is seeking to enhance its military and economic presence to protect its strategic interests and supply chains, while keeping the Taiwan issue present in national security calculations. Conversely, Russia continues its war in Ukraine within a vision that goes beyond the current conflict, aimed at reinstating its influence in its geopolitical surroundings.

In light of this scenario, Gaza appears to be one of the most affected arenas by the collapse of the international regulatory system. The Palestinian exception is no longer an exception; it has become part of a broader pattern in conflict management, where imposing facts by force is permitted, with diplomatic rhetoric that lacks genuine enforcement tools.

Continued adherence to this approach threatens not only the Palestinians but also opens the door to a more fragile international system, where the idea of law recedes in favor of force, and crises are managed according to influence calculations rather than principles of justice. In this context, Gaza becomes a mirror reflecting deeper global transformations that transcend its geographical boundaries and pose fundamental questions about the future of the international system itself.