🔗 Share this article

Plans for an multinational stabilisation force authorized by the UN to demilitarize Hamas in the Gaza Strip are encountering growing resistance after the UAE announced it will not join due to the absence of a well-defined legal structure.

Increasing International Reservations

Israeli authorities have already ruled out Turkey participation, and the Jordanian King Abdullah has declared that Jordanian troops will not participate. Azerbaijan, previously considered as a potential participant, was absent from a preparatory meeting in Turkey and said it would not take part unless a complete truce was in place.

The UAE lacks clarity on a defined framework for the stability mission and under such circumstances will not participate, but backs all political efforts towards peace – and remain at the forefront of humanitarian aid.

Regional Skepticism and Legal Issues

The Emirati decision, delivered by diplomatic representative Dr Anwar Gargash at a conference in the UAE capital, highlights regional reservations about the provisions of a US-drafted document already circulated to delegates at the UN in NYC. The proposal places an onus on a US-directed security mission to be the primary means of ensuring security in the territory after Israeli forces have withdrawn from the territory.

Arab states would prefer expanded responsibilities to be given to a distinct Palestinian law enforcement agency. International law would also prohibit external forces from deploying into contested Palestine unless there was clear Palestinian consent; otherwise, the mission could be viewed as coercive under international statutes, and arguably reinforcing an illegal presence.

Local Viewpoints and Appeals for Clarity

Jamal Nusseibeh of the ceasefire proposal commented: “It is essential that the force be sent not to stabilise the unlawful Israeli occupation, but to uphold international law and end it. The mission will succeed as long as it operates in the whole occupied territory, including the West Bank, at the invitation of the Palestinian authorities, and has a defined goal to conclude the occupation within the framework of a independent state of Palestine.”

There is no mention to the occupied territories in the American proposal, or to a sovereign Palestine, or a peaceful resolution, a prospect that Israeli leadership opposes.

Continuing Discussions and Possible Risks

Detailed talks on the mission mandate, including its command and control, started formally on last week in the UN headquarters, and appear to be protracted – risking the emergence of a vacuum in Gaza that may strengthen militant factions.

The United States is proposing that it lead the force although it will not have many personnel deployed on the ground. It has already effectively assumed command of the distribution of relief supplies into Gaza from a new civil military coordination centre based in the neighboring country.

Mission Mandate and Administrative Function

The proposed US resolution defines the purpose of the stabilisation force as “along with the newly trained and vetted police force to help secure border areas, secure the safety situation in Gaza by guaranteeing the procedure of disarming the territory including the elimination and blocking of rebuilding the militant and offensive infrastructure as well as the lasting removal of weapons from non-state armed groups”.

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

Arab states including Qatar are also worried that this mandate is too expansive, and if the group is to lay down arms, the faction will only do so to local counterparts, likely in the local law enforcement, at a moment that, from the Hamas perspective, signifies the end of occupation.

They also fear the proposed authority spills into giving the mission a governance function in Gaza, a task that was to be reserved for a Palestinian expert panel working in cooperation with a reformed local government.

Aid Aspects and Funding Questions

This “interim authority” in Gaza would remain until “the local government has satisfactorily finished its reform program, the satisfaction of which shall be acceptable to the board of peace”, the proposal says. It also “underscores the significance” of full relief in Gaza, including through the UN, the ICRC, and the humanitarian organizations.

However, it allows for the removal of “any group found to have improperly used such aid”. The phrase leaves open the council excluding Unrwa, the body that the global judicial body has said is the lawful provider of aid.

Global Political Efforts

French officials and Saudi Arabia are currently advocating for a mention to a sovereign Palestine to be added in the document. The Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman, is due in the White House on 18 November, and a Saudi foreign ministry official has said that a mention to a Palestinian state is a requirement.

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

Neither the UN nor the 15 strong security council are assigned a supervisory function over the mission, monitoring the implementation of the resolution, a aspect largely overlooked by the draft text. Nothing is outlined about the funding of this security operation, which, according to the US officials, should be largely covered by regional nations, with the Kingdom taking the lead.

Israeli Requests and Local Developments

Israel is seeking formal assurances from the US that it be permitted to follow the pattern of the Lebanese situation and reserve the authority to re-enter Gaza if it believes disarmament is not occurring at a scale or speed it demands.

The request was presented to the former US advisor, Donald Trump’s relative, and the American diplomat, Steve Witkoff. The advisor was in the Israeli capital on this week to review developments on the ceasefire and Witkoff was due to appear subsequently the that day.

Just the remains of four of the original 251 captives are still not recovered.

Independently, Israel has been proposing that the territory could still be split in two parts with rebuilding efforts beginning in the Israeli-controlled parts of the region. International officials insist that this is not part of the Trump plan.