🔗 Share this article

Proposals for an multinational stabilisation force mandated by the United Nations to disarm Hamas in the Gaza Strip are encountering growing opposition after the United Arab Emirates announced it would not take part due to the absence of a clear legal framework.

Increasing Global Concerns

Israeli authorities have already excluded Turkey participation, and Jordan's King Abdullah has stated that his country's troops will not participate. The Azerbaijani government, once mooted as a potential contributor, did not attend a preparatory meeting in Turkey and said it would not contribute unless a full truce was established.

The UAE does not yet see a clear structure for the stabilisation force and in this situation declines involvement, but backs all political initiatives towards peace – and stay at the vanguard of humanitarian aid.

Arab Skepticism and Legal Concerns

The UAE's announcement, made by senior envoy Dr Anwar Gargash at a forum in the UAE capital, highlights Arab doubts about the provisions of a US-drafted document previously distributed to delegates at the UN in NYC. The draft assigns responsibility on a American-led stabilisation force to be the primary means of ensuring order in Gaza after Israeli forces have withdrawn from the region.

Arab states would like greater duties to be given to a separate local civilian police force. Global jurisprudence would also prohibit external forces from entering occupied Palestine unless there was clear local approval; otherwise, the mission could be seen as imposed under international statutes, and arguably stabilising an unlawful Israeli occupation.

Local Perspectives and Calls for Clarity

A Palestinian American co-author of the ceasefire proposal commented: “It is essential that the mission be deployed not to reinforce the unlawful Israeli occupation, but to enforce international law and terminate it. The mission will succeed as long as it enters the entire occupied territory, including the occupied territories, at the request of the Palestinian authorities, and has a defined goal to conclude the occupation within the framework of a sovereign state of Palestine.”

There is no mention to the West Bank in the US draft resolution, or to a Palestinian state, or a two-state solution, a prospect that Israeli leadership opposes.

Continuing Discussions and Potential Dangers

In-depth negotiations on the stabilisation force authority, including its command and control, started formally on last week in New York, and look likely to be lengthy – risking the development of a vacuum in the strip that may empower Hamas.

The US is proposing that it lead the mission although it will not have many personnel deployed on the ground. It has already effectively taken control of the delivery of humanitarian aid into the territory from a new civil military coordination centre based in Israel.

Force Mandate and Governance Role

The proposed US resolution defines the purpose of the stabilisation force as “along with the newly trained and screened police force to help secure border areas, secure the safety situation in Gaza by ensuring the process of disarming the territory including the elimination and blocking of rebuilding the militant and hostile facilities as well as the permanent removal of weapons from non-state armed groups”.

The force, reporting to a “board of peace” led by the former US president, and not to the United Nations, would be mandated to use “any required actions” to achieve its goals.

Regional powers including Qatari officials are also worried that this mandate is too expansive, and if Hamas is to disarm, the faction will only do so to fellow Palestinians, likely in the civilian police force, at a time that, from the militant perspective, signifies the end of occupation.

They also worry the proposed authority spills into granting the stabilisation force a administrative role in the territory, a task that was to be reserved for a Palestinian expert panel working in conjunction with a restructured local government.

Humanitarian Aspects and Funding Questions

This “interim authority” in Gaza would stay until “the local government has satisfactorily finished its reform program, the approval of which shall be acceptable to the BoP”, the draft states. It also “emphasizes the significance” of full humanitarian aid in Gaza, including through the UN, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the humanitarian organizations.

However, it allows for the exclusion of “any organisation determined to have improperly used such assistance”. The phrase leaves open the board of peace excluding the UN relief agency, the body that the global judicial body has said is the lawful provider of assistance.

Global Political Efforts

France and Saudi representatives are already advocating for a mention to a Palestinian state to be included in the resolution. The Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman, is scheduled in the White House on the specified date, and Manal Radwan has stated that a reference to a independent Palestine is a prerequisite.

The PA chair, Mahmoud Abbas, held talks with the French president, Emmanuel Macron, in Paris on this week to discuss the PA role.

Not the UN nor the 15-member UNSC are assigned a supervisory role over the stabilisation force, monitoring the execution of the resolution, a aspect largely overlooked by the draft text. No details is outlined about the funding of this stabilisation mission, which, according to the US officials, should be largely covered by Gulf states, with Saudi Arabia assuming primary responsibility.

Israel's Demands and Local Developments

Israeli authorities is seeking written guarantees from the United States that it be allowed to follow the model of the Lebanese situation and retain the authority to re-enter the territory if it considers demilitarization is not occurring at a level or pace it requires.

The request was put to Jared Kushner, Donald Trump’s son-in-law, and the US special envoy, Steve Witkoff. The advisor was in the Israeli capital on Monday to review progress on the ceasefire and the envoy was due to appear later the that day.

Only the remains of four of the initial 251 captives are still not recovered.

Independently, Israel has been suggesting that the territory could still be divided in two with reconstruction work starting in the Israeli-controlled areas of the region. International officials maintain that this is no part of the former US administration's proposal.