Has Washington Started Exploring Gaza’s Future?

As US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made his third visit to the region since the Gaza war began on October 7, it seemed that his goal went beyond talking about a short-term humanitarian ceasefire and involved shaping new political, military, and regional realities.

Observers closely following the situation believe that any initiative not taking the two-state solution into account is unlikely to be successful.

During a congressional hearing this week, Blinken, who started a visit in Israel on Friday, emphasized the importance of discussing Gaza’s future.

Western and US media reported on various plans to involve the UN in overseeing Gaza's administration and to establish an international alliance for its security.

Reports suggest that Blinken and his deputies are in discussions with their regional counterparts about plans for governing Gaza after Israel concludes its war against it.

Barbara Leaf, Blinken’s Middle East affairs assistant, has undertaken this task despite the absence of a concrete plan as of yet. One temporary option being considered is the formation of a multinational force from the region.

Dividing Gaza

As the “ceasefire resolution” remains elusive, the Israeli army has said it managed to divide Gaza into two parts, pushing most of the northern residents to the south.

Although Israel has declared its reluctance to occupy the northern part of Gaza, it is evident that the conditions for Palestinians returning there are under its control.

Moreover, a long and challenging process awaits Palestinians for reconstruction.

Paul Salem, the head of the Middle East Institute (MEI) in Washington, points out that the war’s outcome is still uncertain.

However, Salem said it is likely to lead to a division of Gaza into two parts, one controlled by Israel and the other by Hamas.

“I believe this is a realistic scenario, and the question becomes who will take over the part occupied by Israel?”

“I don't think, given the current situation, the Palestinian Authority or any Arab or international entity can bear the responsibility of replacing an administration practically under Israeli supervision with Israeli occupation,” said Salem.

Ghaith Al-Omari, a senior fellow and expert at The Washington Institute, noted that the international administration of the territory is still just an idea and not an official proposal, facing numerous challenges.

“For Arab countries, intervening in Palestinian affairs poses political risks. This doesn't mean the proposal is impossible, but it's a complex suggestion that requires significant diplomatic groundwork,” explained Al-Omari.

“The Palestinian Authority is currently extremely weak and has lost credibility to the point where it cannot play any role in Gaza,” he added.

“Therefore, the international administration will also have the task of rehabilitating the Palestinian Authority, which is why Secretary Blinken mentioned a reinvigorated Palestinian Authority,” explained Al-Omari.

Eyes on the West Bank

Israeli-Palestinian confrontations are not limited to Gaza. What is happening in the West Bank may have even more significant political implications, affecting not only its future, but also the Palestinian Authority and Jordan.

There are renewed calls for the displacement of Palestinians in the West Bank to Jordan and Palestinians in the Gaza Strip to Egypt, which both vehemently reject this displacement.

The actions taken by Israel in West Bank areas are no less than a parallel war to what is happening in Gaza, with their effects being equivalent to the erasure of the Palestinian Authority itself, which is supposed to be “reinvigorated.”

Nabil Amr, a leader in the Fatah movement, asserted that the conflict between Palestinians and Israel will only end with the disappearance of the occupation.

“Before this war, Israel withdrew from Gaza, and the issue now revolves around Jerusalem and the West Bank,” Amr told Asharq Al-Awsat.

He added that Israel is clinging to the occupation, while Palestinians are determined to end it.

“We hope that these recurrent wars will be put to an end until the world moves towards a two-state solution, not just as a slogan, but as an implementation on the ground,” said Amr.

Lebanese fears became reality early Tuesday when the Israeli military announced a “limited ground operation” in southern Lebanon against Hezbollah.

This move comes after 15 days of escalating violence, which began with the explosion of Hezbollah’s pagers and communication devices and the assassination of key leaders, culminating in the killing of Hezbollah’s Secretary-General, Hassan Nasrallah.

Israeli officials stated their intent to “do everything necessary to return northern residents” to their homes and to use “all means” to push Hezbollah “beyond the Litani River.”

These remarks are viewed as serious threats.

The issue of the Litani River gained attention again on August 11, 2006, when the UN Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1701.

This resolution called for a complete ceasefire between Lebanon and Israel, ending the July war pitting Hezbollah against the Israeli army.

Resolution 1701 established a zone between the Blue Line, the border between Lebanon and Israel, and the Litani River in southern Lebanon, banning all armed groups and military equipment except for the Lebanese Armed Forces and UN peacekeepers (UNIFIL).

Hezbollah initially accepted the resolution but later violated it by fully redeploying in southern Lebanon.

Israel has also repeatedly breached the resolution, failing to withdraw from the occupied Lebanese territories of Shebaa Farms and Kfar Shouba Hills.

It has conducted numerous air violations and recently bombarded southern villages, displacing over a million Lebanese residents.

Retired military analyst Brig. Gen. Saeed Kozah told Asharq Al-Awsat that

Israel aims to push Hezbollah fighters beyond the Litani River, believing this would reduce the threat by about 40 kilometers from its settlements.

Meanwhile, as Israel ramped up its military actions against Lebanon, air raid sirens continued to sound in Israeli settlements near the border.

This followed Hezbollah’s launch of dozens of rockets at military sites and settlements, including the city of Haifa.

The area of southern Lebanon around the Litani River covers about 850 square kilometers and is home to around 200,000 residents, 75% of whom are Shiite.

Observers believe this is a key reason why Hezbollah is unwilling to withdraw from the region.

Kozah noted that Hezbollah’s refusal to retreat is tied to its desire to “declare victory,” similar to its stance after the 2006 July war, as it does not want to admit defeat.

Kozah stated that while a Hezbollah withdrawal would reduce direct ground and rocket attacks, it would not eliminate the risk of missiles launched from the Bekaa Valley and other parts of Lebanon.

He emphasized that Hezbollah’s ballistic missiles could be fired from various locations, including Syria.

Has Washington Started Exploring Gaza’s Future?