Informal negotiations are intensifying at the United Nations Security Council in New York over a US-sponsored draft resolution to deploy an international stabilization force in the Gaza Strip.
Egypt has confirmed that it has reservations about the proposal but remains hopeful that diplomatic efforts will produce a consensus-based text that protects core Palestinian principles while ensuring the plan’s viability on the ground.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty said in remarks published by Egypt’s official news agency on Tuesday that Cairo is “deeply engaged” in ongoing consultations regarding the proposed force.
The talks, he noted, are taking place daily with the United States, Russia, China, the European Union, and with the Arab group at the UN, led by Algeria as the current Arab member of the Security Council.
“We hope the final resolution will preserve the fundamentals of the Palestinian cause,” Abdelatty said, “and allow for the rapid deployment of the international force. But only through consensus, and with language that ensures the resolution can be implemented effectively on the ground.”
He added that several states have suggested amendments, stressing that the goal is to reach a balanced formula that reflects the concerns and priorities of all parties without undermining Palestinian national principles.
US President Donald Trump said last week that the stabilization force “will begin operating very soon,” following comments by an American official to Reuters on November 5 indicating that Washington would circulate the draft to the Council’s ten elected members.
According to details obtained by Axios, the draft outlines a two-year UN mandate for a transitional governing authority in Gaza, supported by an international stabilization mission.
The proposed text appears to accommodate several Israeli demands, describing the mission as an “executive force” rather than a traditional peacekeeping operation.
It would aim to stabilize the security environment by overseeing the disarmament of Gaza, including the destruction and prevention of rebuilding military and “terrorist” infrastructure, and ensuring the permanent dismantling of armed non-state groups.
In comments to Asharq Al-Awsat, Dr. Saeed Okasha, an expert on Israeli affairs at the Al-Ahram Center for Political and Strategic Studies, said Egypt’s diplomatic role is “crucial and indispensable,” but he warned that “Israel effectively holds a veto over UN action” and would not abide by decisions it opposes.
“It also rejects Turkish participation,” he added, “which further complicates the mission’s prospects.”
Palestinian political analyst Nizar Nazzal said that potential understandings among Egypt, Qatar, and the United States on the ground role and deployment mechanism could pave the way for a “soft consensus,” a force operating under UN auspices and with Palestinian approval.
But he cautioned that the Security Council faces a serious test. “Russia and China are wary of any resolution that could give Washington or Israel a mandate to operate on the ground without full international agreement,” he said.
The New York consultations are unfolding amid evident Arab caution. UAE presidential adviser Anwar Gargash said Monday at the Abu Dhabi Strategic Forum that the Emirates “does not yet see a clear framework for a stabilization force” and, under current conditions, is unlikely to participate.
His remarks came a day after Egypt and Qatar stressed “the need to clearly define the mandate and powers of any international stabilization force,” during a phone call between Abdelatty and Qatari Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani, according to an Egyptian Foreign Ministry statement.
For the resolution to pass, it must receive at least nine votes in favor and no veto from the Council’s five permanent members, namely the United States, Russia, China, Britain, or France.
Given the existing divisions, Okasha believes a Russian or Chinese veto remains likely. “In that case,” he said, “the United States may move to form a multinational coalition outside the UN framework, possibly without Arab participation but including African or Muslim-majority countries. Such a move would be risky,” he warned, “and could lead to confrontations with Hamas, which would accuse the force of protecting the occupation rather than peace.”
Nazzal, however, argues that if amendments are introduced to preserve Palestinian legitimacy and maintain balance in the force’s mission, Moscow and Beijing might avoid using their vetoes. He outlined several possible outcomes: a vague compromise resolution authorizing only a monitoring mission; the freezing of the project due to persistent disagreements; or a presidential statement from the Council that keeps the political track open for future negotiations.
