Steven Sahiounie, journalist and political commentator
On November 18, the United Nations Security Council approved U.S. President Donald Trump’s plan for the Gaza Strip, endorsing a draft resolution submitted by Washington.
Trump hailed the vote as a “historic moment”, while Palestinian factions—particularly Hamas—condemned the resolution as an act of “international guardianship” imposed on the coastal enclave.
The approved plan authorizes the deployment of an international stabilization force in Gaza and outlines political pathways that could eventually lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state. The resolution passed with 13 votes in favor, while Russia and China abstained without exercising their vetoes, both describing the American text as “problematic” and potentially exacerbating the crisis.
The resolution includes language referring to a “pathway toward a Palestinian state”, igniting widespread debate within Israel and the Palestinian territories.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu insisted on Sunday that Israel’s opposition to a Palestinian state “on any territory” remains unchanged. However, he faced fierce criticism from ministers within his coalition, who accused him of political failure and silence in the face of growing diplomatic pressure.
Within Netanyahu’s camp, the resolution is seen as a strategic threat, with some analysts warning it could pave the way toward an irreversible diplomatic process. Israeli newspaper Maariv noted that the ambiguity of the language allowed for multiple, sometimes contradictory interpretations.
While Washington views the resolution as a framework for a long-term political solution that could allow for the emergence of a Palestinian entity, critics argue that the plan is vague and heavily conditioned on factors such as: long-term reconstruction of Gaza; reforms within the Palestinian Authority; full demilitarization of Gaza; international inspection mechanisms.
The Israeli right views the plan as an attempt to introduce the concept of Palestinian statehood “through the back door,” masked as a postwar solution for Gaza.
The American plan divides Gaza into zones to be rebuilt under joint Israeli–international oversight, with certain areas designated as “green monitored zones” during a lengthy transitional phase, while heavily damaged zones remain restricted.
Proponents argue this system is necessary to restore order after months of conflict, though critics warn that it could entrench foreign and Israeli control over Gaza’s civic and security structures.
Palestinian factions, led by Hamas, issued a memorandum on Sunday rejecting the U.S. proposal. Their main objections include: the resolution imposes international guardianship over Gaza; an international force could become a de facto extension of Israeli security control; any such force must be fully under UN authority, not coordinated with Israel; coordination must occur exclusively with Palestinian official institution; its mandate must be limited to protecting civilians, ensuring aid delivery, and separating forces, without assuming security or administrative power.
The factions emphasized that questions of weapons and resistance remain internal Palestinian matters tied to any future political settlement that ends the occupation.
In the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority cautiously welcomed the initiative.
Omar Awadallah, Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs, told BBC Arabic that the resolution marks the first time an American proposal explicitly references the Palestinian right to self-determination and independence.
He argued that the proposal challenges Israel’s rejection of any Palestinian role in Gaza’s future and could be built upon, especially given numerous existing UN resolutions affirming Palestinian sovereignty.
The revised U.S. draft requires the Palestinian Authority to implement transparent institutional reforms and demonstrate progress in Gaza’s reconstruction, conditions that Washington says may create the necessary environment for a credible path toward Palestinian statehood.
Awadallah stressed that reforms should not become preconditions for Palestinian independence, nor should they delay the PA’s return to administering Gaza.
According to international media outlets, the resolution authorizes the deployment of an International Stabilization Force in Gaza, and the establishment of a Peace Council, chaired by President Trump, to govern Gaza temporarily until December 2027.
The resolution follows Israel and Hamas’s agreement last month on the first phase of the 20-point Trump plan, which mandated a ceasefire after a two-year war, hostage–prisoner exchanges, and initial steps toward stabilizing the territory.
Russia presented a counter-resolution, arguing that the U.S. proposal provides insufficient clarity on Palestinian statehood or the United Nations’ role, and instead hands overwhelming authority to the Peace Council and the stabilization force.
Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi and Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdelatty stressed the importance of enabling the international force to carry out its mandate while ensuring security for Palestinians. They reaffirmed their support for a sovereign Palestinian state based on the two-state solution.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres welcomed the Security Council’s adoption of the resolution, calling it a “significant step toward strengthening the ceasefire.” He urged swift implementation and praised the diplomatic roles of Egypt, Qatar, Turkey, the United States, and regional partners.
A European Union document reviewed by Reuters outlined a proposal for the EU to train 3,000 Palestinian police officers, with the goal of deploying them in Gaza during later phases of the Trump plan.
The proposal includes expanding the EU’s two civilian missions in the region, the Police Support Mission and the Border Assistance Mission at Rafah.
The EU also proposed expanding border monitoring to additional crossings. However, officials warned that political uncertainty could hinder the EU’s ability to move forward.
Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir called on Prime Minister Netanyahu to arrest Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and strip him of political Immunity if the UN recognizes a Palestinian state.
Ben Gvir described Palestinian leaders as “terrorists” and publicly advocated for targeted assassinations against senior PA officials—a statement that drew sharp condemnation from the Palestinian presidency, which warned that such rhetoric incites violence and invites attacks on Palestinian leadership.
The Palestinian presidency urged the international community, particularly the United States, to pressure Israel to halt what it called a “dangerous campaign of incitement.”
Palestinian political and legal scholar Dr. Jihad Abu Lahya stated that Ben Gvir’s calls to target Palestinian leaders constitute a violation of international humanitarian law, as they directly threaten the protected civilian leadership of an occupied population.
Abu Lahya argued that dismantling Palestinian institutions or arresting elected leaders amounts to unlawful interference in a people’s right to self-governance.
A senior Israeli official told CNN that the United States is not planning to send ground troops to Gaza and is struggling to assemble an international force willing to enter the Strip for disarmament operations.
Washington is reportedly considering bypassing the disarmament phase and moving directly to reconstruction—an approach Israel strongly opposes, as it would leave Hamas armed.
According to the official, such a shift would undermine the U.S. resolution and contradict Israel’s security interests.
Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz reiterated that a U.S.-led multinational force will be tasked with dismantling armed capabilities in “old Gaza,” where Hamas remains entrenched.
He said the Israeli army continues to destroy tunnels along the “yellow line” and remains committed to completely eliminating Hamas’s military infrastructure.
Netanyahu repeated that Gaza will be fully demilitarized and that no external pressure will change Israel’s position.
The adoption of the U.S.-sponsored resolution marks a pivotal moment in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, setting the stage for an unprecedented international role in Gaza’s governance, reconstruction, and potential demilitarization.
The coming months will determine whether the resolution becomes a foundation for a sustainable political process—or another flashpoint in an already volatile landscape.
Steven Sahiounie is a two-time award-winning journalist.