Analysis by Haaretz: The Peace Council Faces 3 Pathways for Reconstruction, and Israel Obstructs Them All

SadaNews - Israel again positions itself against any potential pathway for the reconstruction of the Gaza Strip, facing accusations from international and regional parties of obstructing proposed plans, whether by rejecting proposed security arrangements, delaying the entry of international forces, or insisting on conditions that make the implementation of any plan nearly impossible.

Journalist Lisa Rozovsky discusses the deadlock faced by the "Peace Council" today in an analysis published by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, confirming that it now has three options to initiate the reconstruction process, yet the Israeli government hampers all of them.

According to the analysis, the three pathways are as follows:

 Pathway One: Establishing refugee camps in Rafah as part of a pilot project without the approval of Hamas according to Article 17 of President Donald Trump's peace plan.

Pathway Two: Negotiating and waiting for Hamas to agree to a gradual disarmament plan.

Pathway Three: Allowing a "technocratic" committee to manage the sector based on partial agreements with Hamas, but without guarantees for disarmament.

Rozovsky warns that the failure of these pathways means that the residents of Gaza will enter a fourth winter in tents lacking the basic necessities of life, repeating the tragedies they have experienced in recent years.

Below is the author's detailed explanation of how Israel undermines all solutions - according to the analysis - alongside a summary of the assessment of the three pathways.

The Israeli Obstacle

With multiple pathways available, the obstacle remains the same: the Israeli government led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who finds himself stuck between satisfying Israeli demands locally and the potential loss of patience from Washington on an international level, according to the author.

On one hand, Netanyahu - with elections approaching - refuses to accept steps he previously described as capitulation to Hamas, especially after reports indicated the US administration's willingness to drop the disarmament requirement for the movement as a prerequisite for reconstruction.

On the other hand, the White House is pushing matters in a different direction. In this context, the author notes that the US administration’s advisor responsible for the Gaza file in the "Peace Council," Ariye Lightstone, sent a message to Netanyahu weeks ago containing practical demands to facilitate reconstruction.

The demand included - according to what Haaretz reported from its sources - expanding the scope of humanitarian aid, allowing the entry of prefab homes, fuel, solar panels, and medical equipment, in addition to agreeing to the entry of international stability forces and the National Committee to manage Gaza into Rafah to implement the pilot project; however, without Israeli approval so far.

First: The Exclusion Pathway for Hamas

The author expands on the analysis by reviewing the first pathway, indicating that it is based on Article 17 of the peace plan, which provides for the establishment of a humanitarian zone in Rafah managed away from Hamas's control if the movement continues to reject the plan.

In this context, she refers to the meetings held in Cyprus involving American officials, members of the Peace Council, and representatives of the technocratic committee, who discussed the details of implementing the pathway without reaching a final decision mainly due to the absence of Israeli approval.

However, the author points to another factor, which is the desire of some to give negotiations with Hamas an additional chance.

This analysis highlights a dispute that arose within the Peace Council itself between those pushing for the rapid implementation of the project and those fearing that bypassing Hamas would undermine the chances of reaching an agreement with it, especially after the movement indicated its willingness to discuss the principle of gradual disarmament.

Second: The Pathway of Working with Hamas

As for the second and third pathways, they lead to a negotiated settlement with Hamas while continuing Egyptian mediation, with the possibility of reaching a transitional administration via the technocratic committee.

The progress of this pathway - according to the analysis - hinges on the announcement of Hamas's government emergency committee's resignation in preparation for transferring its powers to the national committee managing Gaza.

Despite the symbolic nature of the decision - in the author's words - it reflects a degree of flexibility on the part of the movement and a readiness to engage in the arrangements for the upcoming phase, especially under the pressures exerted by mediators and messages suggesting that the plan could proceed even without its approval according to Article 17.

The analysis reports that the movement has already agreed to 13 out of 15 clauses in the proposed framework document, while two key points remain contentious: the first relates to disarmament, and the second concerns the future of Hamas-affiliated staff and security apparatus and the mechanism for their integration or compensation.

A Plan Stuck in the Middle

The author then shifts to dissecting the reasons behind the failure of the pilot project on the ground. The plan to create a humanitarian zone in Rafah requires a limited withdrawal of the Israeli army behind the yellow line and the entry of a stabilization force, alongside elements following the technocratic committee.

However, the author emphasizes that this plan still lacks clear mechanisms for organizing the movement of residents and managing the area, in addition to its complete dependence on Israeli approval, which has yet to sign an agreement allowing for the deployment of the necessary forces for the international force's presence, granting it actual capacity to disrupt or delay the project.

Conversely, the author believes that the negotiating pathway faces a political obstacle of equal complexity, as Hamas links its approval to disarmament with obtaining a political framework leading to the establishment of a Palestinian state, while the author anticipates Israeli rejection of this condition, even though Trump's own plan includes a reference to a political horizon for the Palestinians.

By tracing both the executive and negotiating pathways, the author concludes that all options stall at one point: the Israeli stance.

Source: Haaretz