Putting The Cart Before The Horse

With the approach of the Cairo Summit to discuss the Palestinian issue and the reconstruction of Gaza, Arab leaders find themselves facing three main scenarios to make decisive decisions that determine the future of Gaza and the fate of the Palestinians the day after the cessation of the war. The dilemma is no longer limited to reconstruction only but also includes the political and administrative arrangements that ensure the stability of the sector and prevent the recurrence of the devastating conflict.

From the American side, it seems that the Trump administration is adopting a more stringent approach, as it recently stated the necessity of displacing Palestinians from Gaza as a “solution” to ensure regional security, which reflects its traditional position biased towards Israel and complicates any Arab efforts to find an independent solution for the sector.

 This American position raises great concerns in Arab and international circles, given the disastrous consequences it carries for the Palestinians and the entire region, especially in light of the widespread international rejection of forced displacement policies.

The first scenario involves adopting a comprehensive regional solution led by Arabs, aiming to place Gaza under temporary Arab administration, which may include Egypt and perhaps some Gulf states, in coordination with the Palestinian Authority. In this scenario, a transitional body would be established to administer the Strip, which would undertake reconstruction operations, organize basic services, and reorganize the security situation in a way that prevents the recurrence of the conflict. 

This body could also work to pave the way for comprehensive Palestinian elections to be held later, so that Gaza would be part of a unified Palestinian entity. 

This temporary administration would work to restructure institutions within the Strip, ensure the regular provision of health and education services, and rehabilitate infrastructure damaged by the war. It would also undertake the tasks of securing the crossings and ensuring the flow of humanitarian aid, while imposing strict control to prevent the infiltration of any elements that might contribute to destabilization. 

It is expected that the contributing Arab states would have different roles, as Egypt could handle security aspects, while the Gulf states would contribute to financing and reconstruction. This option requires Arab and international consensus, as well as internal Palestinian acceptance, which may be difficult in light of the differences between the factions. 

Israel may not view this scenario favorably, as it strengthens the Arab role in Gaza and limits its influence there. In addition, the success of this scenario depends on the Arabs’ ability to impose a unified vision and work to reduce external interventions that may hinder this solution. Ultimately, this scenario remains a realistic option, but it is fraught with challenges that require active diplomacy and strong political will.

As for the second scenario, it is to support the restructuring of the Palestinian Authority and grant it full control over Gaza after reaching internal understandings with the various factions, including Hamas. In this framework, the security services are integrated into a unified framework under the supervision of the Authority, and the administrative institutions are unified, with an Arab and international commitment to provide financial and logistical support to ensure the success of this transition.

One of the main pillars of this scenario is rebuilding trust between the various Palestinian factions, which requires intensive efforts from regional and international mediators, especially Egypt and the United Nations. This proposal also requires providing guarantees that the faction leaders will not be targeted or excluded from the political scene, which necessitates establishing a joint governance mechanism for a transitional period.

This scenario depends primarily on the ability of the Palestinian Authority to impose its effective control over the Strip, which is doubtful, especially in light of the deep differences between the West Bank and Gaza, and the lack of trust between the Palestinian parties. 

In addition, Hamas’s acceptance of this proposal may be conditional on effective participation in governance, which may not be acceptable to Israel or some regional powers. Moreover, this solution faces obstacles related to the extent of the international community’s ability to commit to funding reconstruction, and to ensuring that Israel does not obstruct any efforts aimed at strengthening the Palestinian Authority’s control over the Strip.

The third scenario, which may be the most complex, is to impose an international solution under the auspices of the United Nations, whereby international peacekeeping forces are deployed to oversee the administration of Gaza for a transitional period, during which the Strip is rebuilt, and the political conditions are prepared to find a comprehensive Palestinian settlement. 

In this scenario, the infrastructure is rehabilitated, security guarantees are provided to prevent the outbreak of new confrontations, while the way is opened for an internal Palestinian dialogue under international auspices to reach an agreement on the future of governance in Gaza. 

This scenario also includes international supervision of the rehabilitation of civilian institutions in Gaza, ensuring the distribution of aid, and preventing the use of resources in any military activities that may lead to a renewal of the conflict. 

It could also contribute to reactivating the peace process between the Palestinians and the Israelis through an international mechanism that ensures the implementation of any understandings reached. 

However, this option faces several obstacles, most notably the rejection by some Palestinian forces of any direct international intervention in Palestinian affairs, and Israel may refuse to deploy international forces near its borders, preferring to keep Gaza under siege or in a state of instability that keeps it weak and unable to pose a security threat. 

Moreover, any international intervention will require consensus among the major powers, which may be difficult to achieve in light of global political tensions. Each of these scenarios carries its own challenges, and the optimal choice remains linked to the extent of the Arabs’ ability to unify their positions and make bold decisions that go beyond narrow political calculations. 

The main challenge lies in reaching a solution that spares Gaza further destruction, establishes a new phase of stability and development, and ensures that the Palestinian issue is not exploited in regional conflicts. The question remains: Will the Cairo Summit be able to overcome Arab differences and present a unified vision to save Gaza and its future?

Hasan Dajah is professor of Strategic Studies at Al-Hussein Bin Talal University

CrossFireArabia

CrossFireArabia

Dr. Marwan Asmar holds a PhD from Leeds University and is a freelance writer specializing on the Middle East. He has worked as a journalist since the early 1990s in Jordan and the Gulf countries, and been widely published, including at Albawaba, Gulf News, Al Ghad, World Press Review and others.

Related Posts

Netanyahu, Mount Hermon and Arab Silense
  • HebaHeba
  • September 13, 2026

By Awni al-Rajoub

What is happening? What remains of the dignity of an Arab nation that stands before such a grave scene and then moves on as if nothing has happened?

For Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to enter Syrian territory and reach the Mount Hermon area, forcibly and under the protection of occupation forces, without hesitation or shame, is not merely a passing provocation, nor a fleeting political maneuver that can be dismissed as media posturing.

It is a scene that encapsulates the extent of Israeli arrogance and disregard for all international rules, norms, and conventions.

What audacity! What kind of arrogance allows the head of the occupation government to enter the territory of a sovereign Arab state as if it were unclaimed land?

Who gave him the right? Who said that power grants its possessor the right to violate the borders of states? Who said that the occupation can impose its own law on the region, while others are required to abide by international law?

What is happening can no longer be glossed over or addressed with cold diplomatic language. There is an occupation that acts according to the logic of force, and there is an Arab silence that grows heavier and more painful.

Netanyahu did not enter Mount Hermon because he doesn’t know it’s Syrian territory. Nor did he cross the border because he misread the map.

He knows perfectly well where he stands, he knows perfectly well what this move means, and he knows that the message is not just for Syria.

The message is for the entire region.

A message that says Israel is ready to advance whenever it finds the way open, to impose a new reality by force, and to test the limits of Arab and international reaction each time.

And therein lies the tragedy. The problem is not only with the one advancing, but with the one who allows him to advance without paying a real political price. We have reached a point where the question has become more painful than the event itself:

Is there still an Arab nation?

A nation that sees the land of an Arab state violated, the borders of an Arab state transgressed, and the sovereignty of an Arab state trampled upon, and then finds nothing in the face of this scene but silence, statements, and positions that change nothing on the ground?

We don’t want random wars, military adventures, or empty slogans. But we do want at least one thing:

For the Arabs to take a stance commensurate with the magnitude of the danger.

A genuine political stance. A genuine diplomatic stance. A stance that makes the occupation understand that every transgression has a price, that the region is not without will, and that the Arabs are not so powerless.

What is happening today in Syria should not be viewed as an internal Syrian matter or an isolated incident.

It is a matter of Arab sovereignty.

If violating the borders of an Arab state becomes something that can be overlooked with silence, what prevents it from happening again elsewhere?

Today it’s Mount Hermon.

And tomorrow, what?

Where will this project end?

The most dangerous thing facing the nation is not only the strength of the enemy, but the nation’s habituation to retreating before it. For occupation to become commonplace. For raids to become routine. For incursions to become routine. That violations of sovereignty become mere news items that pass through the news bulletins and are then forgotten.

This is the true catastrophe. Nations are not only defeated when they lose their battles, but also when they lose sight of the gravity of what is happening to them.

Netanyahu’s incursion into Syrian territory in this manner should awaken a profound question within us:

What do we want for the future? Do we accept that the map of the region be drawn by force?

Do we accept that Arab borders become subject to change whenever one party possesses military power?

Do we accept that sovereignty becomes a mere word in statements, while facts on the ground are imposed by force?

And will we continue to stand idly by as this saga of Israeli arrogance unfolds before our very eyes?

For how long? It is time to state it clearly:

Israel does not act with such arrogance in a vacuum. It does so because it senses that the cost of defiance is low, that reactions are limited, that the Arab world is mired in its crises and disputes, and that every country is preoccupied with its internal affairs.

And here we must pause. Arab disputes must not be allowed to become an open opportunity for others. Nor must Arab divisions be a bridge for occupation to cross into more Arab lands. We are facing a moment that demands we ask ourselves honestly:

Where is the Arab decision? Where is the Arab will? Where is the ability to transform anger into action? Where is the capacity to utilize politics, diplomacy, law, economics, and all available means of pressure?

No one is asking the impossible. No one is asking the Arabs to go to war. But what is required is that the nation not remain a mere spectator. For prolonged silence in the face of arrogance ultimately becomes a green light.

And here I fear that a day will come when the question will no longer be:

Why did Netanyahu enter Mount Hermon?

But rather:

Why did we let him go even further?

The Arab nation’s brow is not only stained when its land is occupied, but also when it witnesses repeated aggression and lacks the will to stop it.

And the shame lies not in the nation’s weakness at any point in its history; Weakness can afflict nations.

But the true shame is for a nation to become accustomed to its weakness, and to treat humiliation as an unchangeable fate.

It is high time the Arab nation regained its self-confidence. To understand that the respect others have for it begins with its respect for its sovereignty. And to realize that Arab national security is not a slogan to be raised on special occasions, but a historical responsibility.

As for Netanyahu, he must understand that the region does not belong to him, that history will not grant him a deed to possess land that does not belong to him, and that military power, however great, cannot grant occupation perpetual legitimacy.

Mount Hermon is not just a mountain.

It is a symbol of land, sovereignty, borders, and dignity.

Therefore, what happened should not be treated as just another news item.

It must remain an open question for every Arab:

What is happening?

And what remains of our nation?

This opinion, written by Awni al-Rajoub, was published by the Arabic website Jo24 and reprinted in English in crossfirearabia.com

Continue reading
Trumpaplooza! View from Amman

By Saleem Ayoub Quna

Once again President Trump managed to highjack the spotlight as he delivered his keynote speech at the unconventional midterm Republican National Convention in Dallas last week, or at what some media outlets, appropriately, dubbed as the Trumpaplooza!

These media organizations named some candidates who said they preferred Trump to stay out of their own local campaigns, because they thought his interference would not be to their advantage! Other candidates deleted Trump’s name and/or picture from their previous campaign posts for the same reason! And some republican personalities abstained from going to the convention altogether!

Nevertheless, in his nearly two-hour long monologue, Trump came up with more than few original ideas and suggestions for his supporters which he thought would help the GOP candidates, to be elected or reelected, to the Senate and the House next November.

In a rare unheard of tactic to convince his supporters to vote for their candidates, he begged them to imagine that his name was on the ballot they would cast! What this actually meant that their names and identities are less important than that of his own! In other words, President Trump was really saying those candidates would be worth nothing were they not running on behalf of the Republican Party, which he controls and are one of his own many intellectual properties! It must feel awkward for some candidates who fall under this category!

Then comes the big bombshell which no one was expecting, namely the $5000  bonus to be paid for each adult (a registered voter) when and if the elections guaranteed a republican majority in both the Senate and the House!

But let’s dig a little bit further in the significance of the timing of this generous dividend! The difference between the payment (after or before) the elections can be viewed from more than one angel. And this must be very revealing for many Americans and those watching the American experience from other parts of the world!

From purely a Trumpean point of view it is just another business transaction, simple and clear!

Trump’s argument on this point would go something like this: “I can reward you, when and if I am satisfied with the work you have done for me! For I am the one who is running this political bonanza called the “midterm elections” campaign, and I am the one who gave you the chance to vote for my-would be supporters at the Senate and the House”!

Then, he might go on to say: “But I cannot pay you now simply because, I do not buy any fish that is still in the sea”!

But what President Trump is not saying is he first does not have this much cash “a trillion dollar” in his drawer, and that he does not trust every single “adult” who promises, he or she, would vote republican! Trump thinks, and he is right, that there could be some pretenders who would say something but do something else!

A third possibility could be that Trump’s bid would prevail and the republicans would have made it! And the day of payment would arrived, while Trump would not have cash yet! Here, Trump’s genius as a great businessman would come to the test and it will be the guessing game of the century!

But seriously, observers of the American scene under the Trump Presidency, and many Americans as well, must be wondering how on earth the politics of a great country like the US, could get stuck in such an unusual labyrinth of contradictions, where not so many can differentiate between reality and virtual reality, between incentive and bribery and between a hasty promise and commitment!!

Continue reading

You Missed

600 Israeli Occupiers Storm Al Aqsa

600 Israeli Occupiers Storm Al Aqsa

At 153 Israel Pumps More Illegal Settlements in WB

At 153 Israel Pumps More Illegal Settlements in WB

Remains of 17 People Uncovered in Gaza

Remains of 17 People Uncovered in Gaza

Israel Holds 37 Palestinians in its Prisons

Israel Holds 37 Palestinians in its Prisons

Remains of Journalist Doaa Al Sharaf Recovered After 3 Years

  • By marwan
  • September 13, 2026
  • 26 views
Remains of Journalist Doaa Al Sharaf Recovered After 3 Years

On a 1932 US Passport: ‘Jerusalem, Palestine’

On a 1932 US Passport: ‘Jerusalem, Palestine’