🔗 Share this article

Plans for an international stabilisation force authorized by the UN to demilitarize Hamas in the Gaza Strip are encountering increasing opposition after the United Arab Emirates stated it will not join due to the absence of a well-defined legal framework.

Growing International Concerns

Israeli authorities have previously ruled out Turkey involvement, and the Jordanian King Abdullah has declared that Jordanian forces will not participate. The Azerbaijani government, previously mooted as a possible participant, did not attend a preparatory session in Istanbul and indicated it would not contribute unless a complete truce was established.

The UAE does not yet see a clear framework for the stability force and under such circumstances will not participate, but will support all diplomatic efforts towards resolution – and remain at the vanguard of humanitarian aid.

Arab Skepticism and Legal Issues

The Emirati decision, delivered by diplomatic representative Dr Anwar Gargash at a conference in Abu Dhabi, reflects Arab doubts about the provisions of a US-drafted document already circulated to delegates at the UN in New York. The draft places an onus on a US-directed security mission to be the principal means of ensuring security in Gaza after Israel have withdrawn from the region.

Arab states would prefer greater responsibilities to be given to a distinct local law enforcement agency. Global jurisprudence would also forbid external forces from entering contested Palestinian territories unless there was explicit local approval; without it, the force could be viewed as coercive under UN law, and arguably stabilising an illegal presence.

Local Perspectives and Calls for Clarity

Jamal Nusseibeh of the ceasefire proposal said: “It is essential that the force be sent not to reinforce the unlawful presence, but to uphold international law and end it. The force will work as long as it operates in the entire occupied territory, including the West Bank, at the request of the Palestinian authorities, and has a clear goal to end the occupation within the context of a sovereign Palestinian state.”

The draft contains no mention to the occupied territories in the US draft resolution, or to a Palestinian state, or a two-state solution, a outcome that Israel opposes.

Ongoing Negotiations and Possible Dangers

In-depth talks on the mission mandate, including its command and control, began formally on last week in New York, and appear to be protracted – risking the development of a power gap in Gaza that may strengthen militant factions.

The United States is proposing that it lead the force although it will not have a large number of personnel involved on the ground. It has already in effect assumed command of the distribution of humanitarian aid into the territory from a new civil military coordination centre based in Israel.

Mission Mandate and Administrative Role

The proposed American document outlines the purpose of the security mission as “along with the recently prepared and vetted police force to help secure frontier zones, stabilise the safety situation in Gaza by ensuring the procedure of disarming the territory including the destruction and prevention of reconstructing the military terror and offensive infrastructure as well as the lasting removal of arms from non-state armed groups”.

The mission, answerable to a “peace council” led by the former US president, and not to the United Nations, would be required to use “all necessary measures” to fulfill its objectives.

Regional powers including Qatari officials are also concerned that this authority is overly broad, and if Hamas is to disarm, the faction will solely do so to local counterparts, probably in the local law enforcement, at a moment that, from the Hamas perspective, marks the end of Israeli presence.

They also worry the draft mandate extends to granting the stabilisation force a governance role in the territory, a responsibility that was to be set aside for a local technocratic committee working in conjunction with a restructured local government.

Aid Considerations and Funding Questions

This “interim authority” in Gaza would stay until “the local government has adequately completed its restructuring plan, the satisfaction of which shall be acceptable to the BoP”, the proposal states. It also “emphasizes the importance” of full humanitarian aid in the territory, including through the UN, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the Red Crescent.

However, it opens the door the exclusion of “any group found to have misused such assistance”. The phrase permits the council excluding the UN relief agency, the organization that the international court of justice has said is the lawful distributor of aid.

Global Diplomatic Efforts

French officials and Saudi Arabia are already pressing for a reference to a sovereign Palestine to be included in the document. The Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman, is due in the White House on 18 November, and Manal Radwan has stated that a mention to a independent Palestine is a prerequisite.

The Palestinian Authority leader, Mahmoud Abbas, met the French president, Emmanuel Macron, in Paris on Monday to discuss the authority's function.

Not the United Nations nor the 15 strong UNSC are given a oversight function over the mission, supervising the implementation of the proposal, a point mostly ignored by the draft text. Nothing is outlined about the funding of this stabilisation mission, which, according to the Americans, should be mostly covered by regional nations, with the Kingdom assuming primary responsibility.

Israel's Requests and Local Developments

Israel is requesting written guarantees from the United States that it be allowed to follow the model of Lebanon and retain the right to return to the territory if it considers disarmament is not occurring at a level or pace it demands.

The Israeli proposal was presented to the former US advisor, Donald Trump’s son-in-law, and the American diplomat, Steve Witkoff. Kushner was in Jerusalem on Monday to review progress on the truce and the envoy was scheduled to appear later the same day.

Only the bodies of four of the original 251 captives are still not recovered.

Independently, Israel has been proposing that the territory could still be divided in two with rebuilding efforts starting in the Israel occupied parts of the region. International officials maintain that this is no part of the former US administration's proposal.