How to rebuild a governing body in Gaza (without Hamas)? | DW News

Key Concepts: Donald Trump's Gaza Peace Plan, Hamas's Resilience, Disarmament Challenges, Palestinian Authority (PA), Mahmud Abbas, Power Vacuum, Viable Palestinian Leadership, Regional Diplomatic Influence, Ceasefire Conditions, Wider Political Settlement, Palestinian Statehood.

Donald Trump's Gaza Peace Plan and Hamas's Current Status

Donald Trump's proposed peace plan for Gaza mandates that Hamas disarm completely and relinquish any role in governing the territory. It offers amnesty to Hamas members who surrender weapons and renounce violence. The plan envisions governance by a Palestinian committee, overseen by a "Board of Peace" chaired by Trump himself, which would then transfer governmental and security responsibilities to the Palestinian Authority (PA), currently administering much of the West Bank. Key provisions include the destruction of Hamas's military infrastructure, such as its extensive tunnel network, and a guarantee that Israel will neither occupy nor annex Gaza.

Despite two years of conflict, Hamas remains a significant force in Gaza. While weakened, with senior leaders killed both abroad and within Gaza, and its backer Iran and regional ally Hezbollah reportedly diminished, Hamas has demonstrated remarkable resilience. It has successfully recruited almost as many fighters as it has lost, maintains its weapons arsenal, and continues to operate through its tunnel network. Crucially, Hamas is deeply embedded in Gaza's social fabric, controlling healthcare and education, making it an integral part of the administration. In areas where the Israeli military has withdrawn, Hamas is actively reasserting its authority, hunting suspected collaborators, and clashing with other armed groups.

Challenges and Gaps in the Peace Plan

The plan faces significant hurdles due to its lack of specific details and Hamas's reluctance to comply. Hamas is unwilling to surrender all its weapons, and the plan does not specify who would be responsible for destroying its military infrastructure.

Another major challenge is the Palestinian Authority (PA) and its 89-year-old leader, Mahmud Abbas. While an "international favorite," the PA is widely perceived as corrupt and weak, enjoying very little support among Gazans. Abbas has not faced an election in 20 years, further undermining his legitimacy.

The proposed multinational force, led by the US, intended to monitor the ceasefire, also lacks a clear duration, adding to the uncertainty.

Expert Perspectives on Hamas's Persistence and Disarmament

Mirie Eisen, an expert on Middle Eastern geopolitics and former Israeli army colonel, highlighted that Hamas was "never destroyed" or "decimated," making its current efforts to regain control unsurprising. She emphasized that the core issue is not Hamas's disappearance but the disarmament of its "terror capability," specifically referencing the October 7th attacks.

Eisen argued that Middle Eastern forces, including Egypt, Qatar, and other Arabic-speaking nations, are threatened by Hamas's capabilities and have largely supported Trump's disarmament plan. She noted that only Qatar might be inclined to keep Hamas in power, while even Turkey has called for Hamas to be disarmed.

Regarding who could convince Hamas to disarm, Eisen unequivocally stated, "Only Qatar." She credited Qatar with bringing Hamas to the table for the release of 20 live hostages and expects it to facilitate the return of the remaining 24 bodies. She suggested that Qatar, and possibly Turkey (where many Hamas leaders reside), are the key actors who can "put Hamas in its place."

Addressing the Power Vacuum and Identifying Viable Leadership

Eisen acknowledged the risk of a power vacuum if Hamas disarms but questioned the alternatives, stressing that Israel does not want to control Gaza. She advocated for a "viable leadership" defined by Palestinians or the international/Middle Eastern community, not by Israel. This leadership should focus on the "reconstruction of Gaza" and offering a "better future," rather than "killing Israelis or destroying Israel." She expressed hope that an "extreme" Israeli government would not obstruct such a development and that regional powers like Egypt, Jordan, Qatar, UAE, and Turkey would influence Hamas to accept alternative leadership.

When pressed to identify specific leaders, Eisen clarified that the focus should be on those "willing to recognize my existence," rather than necessarily "committed to peace." She mentioned "voices" within the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and two figures in Israeli jails (including Barghouti), arrested 20-25 years ago for terror attacks, who were not released in recent prisoner exchanges. She reiterated that the leadership should be "their own voices," not imposed by Israel or the United States. She explicitly stated that Mahmud Abbas is not seen as a leader in Gaza or by the younger generation in the West Bank due to his perceived corruption and lack of electoral mandate.

Eisen stressed the urgency of the situation, particularly the need for Hamas to return the 24 additional Israeli hostages (dead or alive from October 7th) as a "compulsory stage" for Israel to realign and redeploy its forces outside Gaza. She emphasized that reconstruction should be led by Arab and Muslim states, not Israel, as Palestinians do not want Israeli involvement.

The Broader Context of Disarmament and Regional Cooperation

Roger Chelik, a Middle East analyst at the Royal United Services Institute, echoed the sentiment that while the ceasefire is a "momentous day," it presents "more questions than answers." She explained that the deliberate absence of detail in such agreements often allows key stakeholders to negotiate specifics behind the scenes, especially in protracted conflicts. Disarming Hamas, she noted, is a "momentous, very challenging task."

Chelik identified other armed groups, such as Palestinian Islamic Jihad, attempting to expand their influence in Gaza. She also mentioned groups allegedly backed by Israel to diversify security provision and isolate Hamas, though their long-term sustainability is uncertain. The primary concern is that a security vacuum without Hamas could be filled by other armed actors, jeopardizing the safety of Palestinians and potentially diverting crucial humanitarian aid.

Chelik emphasized that disarmament processes must be part of a "wider political settlement." She argued that attempting to disarm Hamas without a broader framework of incentives, sanctions, and a clear pathway towards Palestinian statehood in the longer term would be "very difficult."

She acknowledged President Trump's pioneering role in the ceasefire but highlighted the "incredible level of cooperation and intra-regional coordination" by regional players. Egypt, Qatar, other Gulf states, and Turkey engaged in significant "diplomatic back channeling" and were instrumental in "incentivizing Hamas efficiently" to release the Israeli hostages. Chelik concluded that continued pressure from these regional actors, alongside the United States, is crucial for both Hamas and Israel to comply with the ceasefire terms, noting that Israeli withdrawal from Gaza is "very much dependent on Hamas's disarming."

Conclusion

The proposed peace plan for Gaza faces immense challenges, primarily due to Hamas's entrenched position and resilience, the perceived weakness and corruption of the Palestinian Authority, and the plan's own lack of specific implementation details. Experts agree that Hamas's disarmament is a critical but complex task that cannot occur in isolation. It requires a broader political settlement, the emergence of a viable Palestinian leadership (willing to recognize Israel's existence), and sustained diplomatic pressure from key regional actors like Qatar, Egypt, and Turkey, alongside the United States. The immediate priority remains the return of all Israeli hostages, which is seen as a prerequisite for further Israeli redeployment and the subsequent reconstruction of Gaza by Arab and Muslim states. The path forward is fraught with uncertainties, demanding a day-by-day approach to navigate the intricate geopolitical landscape and address the humanitarian crisis.