Full Breakdown
The Challenges of Establishing Governance in Gaza
2/26/2026, 3:12:40 AM
Overview of the Situation
The Board of Peace meeting held on February 19, 2026, in Washington marked the initiation of phase two of President Donald Trump’s 20-point plan for Gaza. This phase includes the establishment of the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), a new Palestinian technocratic government, which has received backing from various stakeholders, including the Palestinian Authority, Arab states, and Hamas. However, the absence of Palestinian representation in the Executive Committee raises concerns about the NCAG's ability to genuinely represent Palestinian interests.
Key Developments and Challenges
Following the Washington meeting, member states committed $7 billion, with an additional $10 billion from the United States, enabling NCAG to begin its operations. The immediate priorities for NCAG include entering Gaza to govern in place of Hamas, disarming Hamas, and initiating reconstruction efforts. However, a significant conflict of interest arises as Israel insists that reconstruction cannot commence until Hamas is fully disarmed. This situation creates a dilemma, as the ongoing deprivation faced by Gazans undermines the legitimacy of the new government.
Hamas has indicated its willingness to transfer control to NCAG, but the latter is not yet prepared to assume its responsibilities. The disarmament of Hamas is complicated by the ongoing Israeli occupation, with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu asserting that Israel will not withdraw until Hamas is disarmed. The lack of a clear timeline for Israeli withdrawal poses a significant obstacle to the successful implementation of the NCAG's governance.
International Involvement and Security Concerns
The International Stabilization Force (ISF) is expected to play a crucial role in stabilizing Gaza. Countries such as Indonesia, Morocco, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, and Albania have committed forces, while Egypt and Jordan will assist in training Palestinian police units. However, the scale of forces pledged is insufficient to ensure stability and protect Gazans from potential Israeli military actions. A robust international presence is deemed necessary to deter further conflict and support the NCAG in establishing law and order.
Criticism and Opposition
Critics argue that the current approach may not adequately address the needs of the Gazan population. The absence of Palestinian agency in decision-making processes raises doubts about the effectiveness of the new governance structure. Furthermore, the ongoing violence and repression by Hamas against dissenting voices within Gaza highlight the challenges of establishing a credible alternative to Hamas. Reports of protests against Hamas rule and subsequent crackdowns illustrate the internal strife that complicates the governance landscape.
Official Statements and Responses
Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem has condemned Israeli threats to eliminate the Palestinian resistance, calling them a disregard for ceasefire agreements and international diplomatic efforts. He emphasized the need for Palestinian sovereignty and criticized the Palestinian Authority for its lack of concrete actions toward unity and governance in Gaza.
What's Next?
The future of governance in Gaza hinges on the successful implementation of the NCAG's plans, the disarmament of Hamas, and the establishment of a credible international presence. The ongoing situation in the West Bank, characterized by settler violence and land confiscation, also poses a risk to regional stability and the broader peace process. The international community's role will be critical in shaping the trajectory of Gaza's governance and the prospects for Palestinian self-determination.
