Published On 26/10/2025
|
Last update: 23:31 (Mecca time)
The formation of an international stabilization force in the Gaza Strip has become a subject of question and skepticism to many, amid a clear discrepancy in the definition of its tasks and powers between the parties concerned, in light of American assurances that its deployment will be imminent, restrictive Israeli conditions, and a Palestinian position that accepts it as a monitoring force only.
US President Donald Trump announced that the stabilization force in Gaza will be deployed soon and quickly, stressing that the leaders of this force are currently being selected, which he said will achieve a real peace that has never happened before in the Middle East.
In the same context, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio spoke about ongoing arrangements to delegate a multinational force, but he stipulated that it be convenient for the Israeli side, pointing to an actual objection to the participation of Turkish forces.
For his part, the head of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) in Gaza, Khalil al-Hayya, confirmed that the Palestinian factions accept the UN forces as separation forces, monitoring the borders, and following up on the ceasefire, stressing that the UN resolution will determine the quality of these forces, their duration, and their mechanisms of action.
This position contradicts the American and Israeli perception, which wants the international force to disarm Hamas and impose security in the Gaza Strip.
Indeed, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – wanted by the International Criminal Court – went on to emphasize that his country is the one who will decide which international forces will be acceptable or unacceptable to it in the Gaza Strip.
This contradiction in positions prompted Professor of International Conflicts at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, Dr. Ibrahim Freihat, to say that Trump and Hamas are talking about two completely different things despite their reference to the same entity, pointing to what he called a “deferred clash.”
Freihat explains during the “Beyond the News” program that Trump wants the forces to impose security and disarm Hamas, while Hamas talks about forces monitoring the borders and a ceasefire, while Netanyahu wants a force that serves the Israeli interest and is under his control.
Force composition
The military and strategic expert, Brigadier General Elias Hanna, agrees with Freihat’s point of view, stressing that there are many complications related to the composition of the military force and the source of the participating countries.
Hanna explained that the dispute revolves around whether the force’s mission is to maintain security or impose security, which is a fundamental military difference.
Regarding the possibility of disarming Hamas and the Palestinian factions by force without their consent, Freihat ruled out that any country would agree to participate in these forces if their mission was to disarm Hamas without the movement’s consent.
The expert in United Nations affairs, Dr. Abdel Hamid Siam, indicated that negotiations are currently taking place between a group of countries within the Security Council to agree on a draft resolution, but this draft is not yet ready.
Siam stressed that the most important thing the United Nations offers is legitimacy through Security Council resolution, and that countries usually accept United Nations missions because they do not represent a hegemonic or colonial force.
Freihat suggested that only a border monitoring force would be sent without a full job description, and that the Gaza Strip would end up being divided between a Hamas-controlled area that would be excluded from reconstruction, and an Israeli-controlled area that would be included in the reconstruction operations.