🔗 Share this article

Proposals for an international stabilisation force authorized by the UN to demilitarize Hamas in the Gaza Strip are encountering growing opposition after the United Arab Emirates stated it will not join due to the absence of a clear legal framework.

Growing Global Reservations

Israel have already ruled out Turkish involvement, and the Jordanian King Abdullah has declared that his country's troops will not join. Azerbaijan, once mooted as a potential contributor, did not attend a preparatory meeting in Istanbul and indicated it would not contribute unless a full truce was in place.

The UAE lacks clarity on a defined structure for the stabilisation force and in this situation declines involvement, but backs all political initiatives towards peace – and stay at the vanguard of relief efforts.

Arab Doubts and Legal Issues

The Emirati announcement, made by senior envoy Dr Anwar Gargash at a forum in the UAE capital, highlights regional reservations about the terms of a American-proposed document already circulated to diplomats at the UN in NYC. The proposal places an onus on a American-led stabilisation force to be the primary means of ensuring security in Gaza after Israeli forces have withdrawn from the region.

Arab states would prefer expanded responsibilities to be given to a separate Palestinian civilian police force. International law would also prohibit foreign troops from deploying into contested Palestinian territories unless there was clear local approval; without it, the mission could be seen as imposed under UN law, and arguably stabilising an illegal presence.

Local Perspectives and Calls for Definition

Jamal Nusseibeh of the Palestinian armistice plan said: “It is essential 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 whole occupied territory, including the occupied territories, at the request of the Palestinian authorities, and has a clear objective to end the presence within the context of a sovereign state of Palestine.”

There is no reference to the occupied territories in the US draft resolution, or to a Palestinian state, or a two-state solution, a outcome that Israeli leadership rejects.

Ongoing Discussions and Possible Risks

In-depth negotiations on the mission authority, including its leadership structure, began formally on last week in New York, and appear to be lengthy – risking the emergence of a vacuum in Gaza that may strengthen militant factions.

The US is suggesting that it lead the mission although it will not have a large number of personnel deployed on the ground. It has already effectively assumed command of the distribution of relief supplies into the territory from a recently established logistical hub based in Israel.

Mission Mandate and Governance Function

The proposed US resolution defines the aim of the stabilisation force 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 procedure of disarming the territory including the elimination and blocking of rebuilding the militant and offensive infrastructure as well as the lasting decommissioning of arms from non-state armed groups”.

The mission, reporting to a “peace council” chaired by the former US president, and not to the United Nations, would be required to use “all necessary measures” to achieve its objectives.

Regional powers including Qatar are also worried that this authority is too expansive, and if the group is to lay down arms, the faction will solely do so to local counterparts, probably in the local law enforcement, at a moment that, from the Hamas viewpoint, signifies the end of occupation.

They also worry the proposed authority extends to 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 restructured local government.

Humanitarian Aspects and Financial Issues

This “interim authority” in Gaza would remain until “the local government has adequately finished its reform program, the satisfaction of which shall be acceptable to the board of peace”, the proposal says. It also “underscores the importance” of full relief in Gaza, including through the UN, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the Red Crescent.

Nonetheless, it opens the door the removal of “any organisation found to have misused such assistance”. The phrase permits the board of peace barring Unrwa, the organization that the global judicial body has said is the legal distributor of aid.

Global Diplomatic Efforts

France and Saudi representatives are already advocating for a reference to a Palestinian state to be added in the document. The Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman, is scheduled in the White House on 18 November, and a Saudi foreign ministry official has stated that a reference to a Palestinian state is a prerequisite.

The Palestinian Authority leader, Mahmoud Abbas, held talks with the French leader, Emmanuel Macron, in Paris on Monday to discuss the PA role.

Not the United Nations nor the 15 strong security council are assigned a oversight role over the stabilisation force, monitoring the execution of the resolution, a aspect largely ignored by the draft text. No details is specified about the funding of this stabilisation mission, which, as per the Americans, should be largely borne by regional nations, with the Kingdom assuming primary responsibility.

Israel's Demands and Regional Developments

Israel is requesting formal assurances from the US that it be permitted to emulate the model of Lebanon and retain the right to return to the territory if it considers disarmament is not taking place at a level or speed it requires.

The Israeli proposal was presented to Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s relative, and the US special envoy, Steve Witkoff. Kushner was in Jerusalem on Monday to review developments on the ceasefire and Witkoff was scheduled to appear subsequently the same day.

Only the remains of four of the original hundreds of captives remain unreturned.

Separately, Israeli officials has been suggesting that the territory could still be split in two parts with reconstruction work starting in the Israel occupied parts of the region. International officials maintain that this is not part of the Trump plan.