The Crown Prince stressed the importance of ending the humanitarian suffering of Palestinians, ensuring a complete Israeli withdrawal, and advancing peace efforts in line with the two-state solution.

The cabinet reaffirmed the Kingdom’s support for ongoing regional and international initiatives aimed at strengthening global security and fostering sustainable peace.

Alongside international diplomacy, the council reviewed domestic initiatives focused on enhancing public services, improving productivity, and supporting sustainable growth.

Officials highlighted progress on government programs designed to deliver innovative solutions and benefit citizens across the Kingdom.

A key highlight was the launch of the King Salman Gate Project in Makkah, a transformative infrastructure initiative aimed at improving the experience for visitors to the Grand Mosque.

The project represents the Kingdom’s commitment to combining modern development with cultural and spiritual excellence.

Housing and real estate development were also central to the discussions. The cabinet reviewed strategies to expand housing supply, achieve market balance, and provide citizens with diverse housing options. These measures aim to attract investors, support urban growth, and enhance economic stability.

The council also celebrated Saudi Arabia’s recent achievements in education, rural development, and transport, reflecting the Kingdom’s dedication to innovation and global best practices.

The Saudi International Railway Exhibition and Conference further demonstrated this commitment, bringing together participants from over 20 countries and facilitating more than 50 agreements supporting the National Strategy for Transport and Logistics Services.

The Crown Prince emphasized that these initiatives reflect a balanced approach, combining leadership in global humanitarian issues with tangible progress in national development.

By addressing urgent needs abroad and advancing infrastructure and housing at home, Saudi Arabia continues to enhance quality of life for citizens while reinforcing its international influence.

Officials underscored that these efforts align with Vision 2030, promoting sustainable development, economic diversification, and international collaboration.

By integrating domestic growth with diplomatic engagement, the Kingdom aims to maintain its role as a proactive and responsible global actor, driving progress on multiple fronts.

Saudi Arabia’s achievements in diplomacy, infrastructure, and innovation demonstrate its commitment to peace, stability, and prosperity.

The government’s focus on both humanitarian leadership and domestic development exemplifies a forward-looking strategy that positions the Kingdom as a regional and international leader in governance, innovation, and social progress.

This duality—preaching unity while practicing duplicity—has become Pakistan’s diplomatic hallmark.

When the Taliban stormed into Kabul in August 2021, Pakistan’s powerful intelligence chief, Lt. Gen. Faiz Hameed, appeared at the Serena Hotel and assured journalists, “Everything will be okay.”

His confident smile captured Islamabad’s belief that decades of strategic maneuvering had finally paid off. Pakistan, long accused of nurturing the Taliban, assumed it would now wield decisive influence over its western neighbor.

Four years later, those hopes have turned to ashes. The Taliban’s rise, once hailed in Islamabad as a geopolitical triumph, has become a source of profound insecurity and humiliation.

The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), emboldened by its ideological kin in Kabul, has unleashed a deadly insurgency across Pakistan’s tribal belt. Hundreds of Pakistani soldiers have been killed in cross-border raids. The Taliban, despite Pakistan’s past support, has refused to curb the TTP.

The so-called “strategic depth” has instead exposed Pakistan’s strategic shallowness. A state that once boasted of controlling its proxies now finds itself hostage to them. The illusion of regional mastery has dissolved into a grim reality: Pakistan is isolated, insecure, and rapidly losing credibility.

Weaponizing Refugees

Having failed to tame the Taliban, Pakistan turned its frustration toward Afghan civilians. In October 2023, Islamabad launched the Illegal Foreigners Repatriation Plan (IFRP), targeting nearly 1.7 million undocumented Afghans. For decades, Afghan refugees had lived, worked, and raised families in Pakistan. Suddenly, they became scapegoats for Islamabad’s security failures.

By mid-2025, more than 600,000 Afghans had been deported in what international observers described as one of South Asia’s largest forced repatriations in decades. Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch chronicled chilling stories of police harassment, arbitrary detentions, and family separations.

Pakistan justified the campaign as a counterterrorism measure, accusing Afghan refugees of harboring TTP militants. But analysts saw it differently: an act of political retribution against the Taliban regime. Kabul condemned the deportations as a breach of international law and accused Islamabad of deepening Afghanistan’s humanitarian catastrophe.

This was more than just a border dispute—it was a symptom of Pakistan’s broader malaise. A state that once prided itself on being a refuge for the oppressed had turned into a place of fear and hostility. The moral cost of Islamabad’s Afghan policy was now unmistakable.

Airstrikes and Escalation

Pakistan’s response extended beyond deportations. Under the guise of pursuing TTP sanctuaries, it began conducting airstrikes inside Afghan territory.

In April 2022, bombings in Khost and Kunar killed 47 civilians, mostly women and children. Similar attacks followed in March and December 2024, targeting Paktika and Khost. In January 2025, fresh strikes were launched along the volatile Durand Line. Over a hundred civilians have died since 2021, according to regional monitors.

Each operation fuelled anger and anti-Pakistan protests across Afghanistan. The Taliban government condemned the attacks as violations of sovereignty, accusing Pakistan of hiding its failures behind a counterterrorism narrative.

By 2025, Pakistan’s western frontier was once again aflame—only this time, without American troops to share the blame. The Afghan war that Islamabad once believed it had outsourced had come home, exacting both human and diplomatic costs.

Diplomacy as Deception

The crisis reached a symbolic peak in September 2025, when Islamabad hosted the “Towards Unity and Trust” conference under the South Asian Strategic Stability Institute.

Despite the event’s conciliatory title, the Taliban government was conspicuously excluded. Instead, the gathering featured anti-Taliban activists and politicians, turning what was billed as a dialogue into an exercise in diplomatic provocation.

Just days later, Defense Minister Khawaja Asif labeled Afghanistan an “enemy state”—a stunning reversal from Pakistan’s earlier rhetoric of “brotherhood.”

This diplomatic whiplash mirrors a deeper inconsistency at the heart of Pakistan’s foreign policy. It speaks of a nation perpetually caught between ambition and insecurity, between Islamic solidarity and realpolitik.

Even its domestic realities now echo this hypocrisy.

In early October 2025, a story broke that underscored how deeply investor confidence has eroded under the current administration. Out of 23 oil and gas exploration blocks offered for bidding, no local or foreign bids were received for 22. The only bid came from Mari Gas, and even that was for a small block with negligible output.

Taimur Saleem Khan Jhagra, Pakistan’s opposition leader, wrote “investors know this is an illegitimate govt,” saying no company—foreign or domestic—was willing to invest in a country “without rule of law.” He accused the government of driving away foreign direct investment through arbitrary governance, economic mismanagement, and political repression.

This episode is emblematic of Pakistan’s larger credibility crisis. When even domestic energy firms shy away from state-backed ventures, the problem is not market dynamics—it is a collapse of trust. The same lack of accountability that defines Pakistan’s regional duplicity now poisons its economic foundations.

The Iran Paradox and the Palestine Hypocrisy

Pakistan’s double-dealing extends far beyond its Afghan misadventure.

In June 2025, Islamabad publicly condemned U.S. airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, declaring solidarity with Tehran. Yet, only days earlier, Army Chief Gen. Asim Munir had met privately with Donald Trump, reportedly discussing “regional stability.” In a surreal twist, Pakistan went on to nominate Trump for the 2026 Nobel Peace Prize, effectively undercutting its supposed alignment with Iran.

This duality—preaching unity while practicing duplicity—has become Pakistan’s diplomatic hallmark.

The same contradictions stain its stance on Palestine. While Pakistani leaders have long professed unwavering support for the Palestinian cause, history tells another story. During Black September 1970, Brigadier Zia ul-Haq, later Pakistan’s military ruler, helped Jordan crush the Palestine Liberation Organization, a massacre that claimed thousands of lives.

In July 2025, Pakistan awarded the Nishan-e-Imtiaz to U.S. CENTCOM Commander Gen. Michael Kurilla, despite his role in coordinating American military support for Israel during its Gaza operations.

At the UN General Assembly’s 80th session, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif met Daniel Rosen, head of the American Jewish Congress, signaling a quiet but unmistakable outreach to pro-Israel circles.

For a country that brands itself the guardian of Muslim causes, the hypocrisy is striking. From Amman to Gaza, Pakistan’s leaders have consistently traded principle for expediency.

A Consistent Inconsistency

Across every theater—Afghanistan, Iran, Palestine, and even its own energy sector—a single pattern emerges: Pakistan’s promises collapse under the weight of its own contradictions.

It seeks influence in Kabul but alienates Afghans through bombings and deportations. It pledges brotherhood with Tehran while courting Washington. It proclaims solidarity with Palestine while decorating America’s military commanders. And now, it claims to welcome foreign investment while creating an environment so lawless that even local companies refuse to bid.

In the end, Pakistan’s gravest betrayal is not of its neighbors, but of itself. The erosion of credibility abroad mirrors the decay of governance at home. As investors flee, allies distance themselves, and insurgents advance, the message is clear: a nation that manipulates every alliance eventually stands alone.

For decades, Pakistan’s generals and politicians have built policies on the illusion of control. The Afghan gamble was meant to cement regional influence; instead, it has exposed a state adrift, distrusted by friends and foes alike.

The “everything will be okay” optimism of 2021 now rings hollow. For Pakistan, everything is decidedly not okay—and the world, finally, has stopped believing its promises.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.

Macron’s remarks, delivered during a state visit to Singapore, called on European nations to reconsider their diplomatic posture toward Israel, warning that the continuation of the status quo in Gaza was morally and politically untenable.

“If the situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate, Europe must adopt a hardened stance,” Macron said, adding that such a stance would involve “dropping the assumption that human rights are being respected, and applying sanctions.”

He further declared that recognizing a Palestinian state under conditions was “not only a moral duty, but a political necessity,” signaling a shift in France’s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In a swift and scathing response, Israel’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement denouncing Macron’s position. “There is no humanitarian blockade. That is a blatant lie,” the statement said, defending Israeli efforts to facilitate humanitarian aid into Gaza.

“But instead of applying pressure on the jihadist terrorists, Macron wants to reward them with a Palestinian state,” the ministry added. “No doubt its national day will be October 7,” referencing the date of Hamas’ surprise attacks in southern Israel in 2023.

The Israeli government’s unusually sharp rhetoric underscores growing diplomatic friction between Tel Aviv and European capitals, particularly as calls intensify for an immediate ceasefire and increased humanitarian access in Gaza.

Macron’s stance aligns with a broader European sentiment that the prolonged conflict and civilian toll in Gaza require a recalibration of the West’s policies toward Israel. While France has traditionally maintained strong ties with both Israel and the Arab world, the war in Gaza appears to be testing those diplomatic balances.

France has not formally recognized a Palestinian state but has indicated it may do so unilaterally if peace prospects remain blocked — a move Israel sees as undermining negotiations and rewarding extremist factions.

As Gaza’s humanitarian crisis deepens and global outrage mounts, Macron’s call may signal a turning point in European diplomacy — and a potential diplomatic rift with Israel.

According to a report by the Safa news agency, the devastating air raid struck the Al-Najjar family home in Khan Yunis last week, igniting a blaze that claimed the lives of nine children and inflicted severe injuries on Dr. Al-Najjar’s husband. Adam, the only child to survive, is currently undergoing treatment at Nasser Hospital in southern Gaza — the same hospital where his mother works.

In a statement released on Thursday, Italy’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed its deep concern and ongoing coordination regarding the tragedy.

“Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani is closely following the case of Dr. Alaa Al-Najjar, whose family was targeted in an Israeli attack in recent days,” the ministry said. “The Italian government is prepared to transfer Adam to Italy for treatment.”

Efforts are now underway to arrange Adam’s transfer, the statement added, noting that all actions would be undertaken in accordance with the wishes of Dr. Al-Najjar and her family. Rome’s outreach comes amid mounting international concern over the escalating civilian toll in Gaza.

Malta has also joined Italy in offering humanitarian support, expressing readiness to provide refuge to Dr. Al-Najjar and her family.

The airstrike that obliterated Dr. Al-Najjar’s home is part of a broader Israeli military campaign in the Gaza Strip. The pediatrician, known for her service at Nasser Hospital, was reportedly on duty when the charred remains of her children arrived at the facility. Witnesses say she collapsed in shock upon seeing them.

The attack has stirred emotional reactions across Europe and the Middle East, with several humanitarian organizations urging immediate international intervention to protect civilians in conflict zones.

Italy’s proposal marks a significant diplomatic stance, as Rome seeks to demonstrate solidarity with the victims of the ongoing conflict. Minister Tajani’s office emphasized that Adam’s care and safety are of “paramount importance,” and that Italy stands ready to act on humanitarian grounds.

With Gaza’s health infrastructure teetering on collapse, the potential evacuation of Adam to Italy could mark a rare success story amid a growing humanitarian catastrophe.

As the conflict grinds on, the story of little Adam — an orphaned survivor with the weight of unimaginable loss — is emerging as a powerful symbol of Gaza’s suffering and the urgent need for global action.

According to CNN journalists in Gaza City, armed gangs have increasingly taken to the streets in search of dwindling food supplies, challenging Hamas’ authority. Hamas claims some of the alleged looters are collaborating with Israel.

“A warning has been issued — those who ignore it bear full responsibility,” Hamas said.

Despite being severely weakened after 18 months of war, the executions underscore Hamas’ continued grip over the territory.

With food stocks nearly exhausted, desperation is growing. On Wednesday night, thousands of Gazans stormed a UN facility and several warehouses in Gaza City, scavenging for flour and canned goods, eyewitnesses said.

On Saturday, the Hamas-run Ministry of Interior accused “a group of outlaws and collaborators with the occupation” of stoking unrest and targeting public and private property.

The humanitarian situation in Gaza has rapidly deteriorated. Famine looms over the enclave’s 2.1 million people, following Israel’s decision on March 2 to seal off all aid, including food and medicine.

Dr. Ahmad Al-Farra, head of pediatrics at Nasser Medical Complex, warned that “a looming health catastrophe is threatening the lives of hundreds of thousands.”

He said the risk of widespread deaths from malnutrition is imminent if aid is not restored. On Saturday, two-month-old Janan Saleh Al-Sakkafi died from malnutrition at Al-Rantisi Hospital, according to Gaza’s Ministry of Health.

The U.S. State Department said an announcement on new humanitarian access to Gaza could come “in the coming days,” ensuring that aid reaches Palestinians without falling into the hands of Hamas or Islamic Jihad.

“Safeguards are finally in place. Israel remains secure, Hamas empty-handed, and Gazans with access to critical aid,” a State Department spokesperson said, describing the plan as a product of “creative thinking.” Further details were not disclosed, but a private foundation is expected to oversee the mechanism.

Hamas has ruled Gaza since 2007 and has previously carried out dozens of executions, including of individuals accused of collaborating with Israel.

Meanwhile, the Israeli military continues its offensive. IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir said Sunday that “tens of thousands” of reservist call-up orders would be issued this week to intensify operations in the enclave.

Abbas, 88, did not mince words, referring to Hamas fighters as “sons of dogs” and blaming the group for prolonging the ongoing war in Gaza by giving Israel justification for its continued offensive.

“Sons of dogs, release the hostages and block their justifications,” Abbas declared, adding, “Israel’s military campaign has turned into the Israeli genocide that the Gaza Strip is being subjected to.”

While Israel denies accusations of genocide, asserting its military actions target Hamas in self-defense, Abbas’s remarks underscore a dramatic escalation in tensions between Palestinian factions and a notable shift in his public stance toward Hamas.

A Stark Shift in Tone

Though Abbas has often criticized Hamas, Wednesday’s scathing address marked his most direct public attack. The timing coincides with renewed ceasefire efforts led by regional powers including Egypt, which has proposed disarming Hamas as a step toward peace.

Abbas refrained from explicitly condemning Hamas’s October 7 attack on Israel but reiterated his longstanding opposition to violence against civilians and his advocacy for a two-state solution.

“Hamas must end its control over the Gaza Strip, hand over all its affairs to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the legitimate Palestinian National Authority, and refrain from carrying arms,” he said. “It must transform into a political party operating within the framework of international legitimacy.”

Hamas Fires Back

Hamas responded swiftly, rejecting Abbas’s accusations and challenging his legitimacy as Palestinian leader. The group claimed Abbas was shifting blame for Israel’s “crimes” onto the Palestinian people, calling his statements “suspicious and dangerous.”

The bitter rivalry between Fatah—Abbas’s party—and Hamas has long fractured Palestinian politics. Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007 following a violent power struggle, and repeated reconciliation attempts have failed, despite agreements in Cairo and Beijing involving numerous Palestinian factions.

Internal Rift and International Implications

Abbas accused Hamas of inflicting “severe damage” on the Palestinian cause for independence. “It has provided the occupation with dangerous free services, whether intentionally or unintentionally,” he said. “Hostage-taking gave the criminal occupation one of its most prominent excuses to carry out its conspiracies and crimes in Gaza.”

He renewed his appeal for an international peace conference and the enforcement of existing UN Security Council resolutions, aiming to break the impasse and reignite efforts toward a lasting solution.

As the humanitarian crisis in Gaza worsens and political divisions deepen, Abbas’s sharp rhetoric signals a critical moment in Palestinian politics—and raises new questions about the path forward for both Palestinian governance and the broader conflict.

The protests in Gaza are more than just a reaction to immediate hardships; they are a plea for recognition.

The recent public demonstrations in Gaza have surprised many observers worldwide. For over 16 months, Gazans have endured relentless Israeli airstrikes, devastation, and an ongoing humanitarian catastrophe. Throughout this period, they have been lauded for their resilience and sacrifice. However, this week’s protests reveal a different side of Gaza’s reality—one that underscores the human need for dignity, justice, and relief from suffering.

The people of Gaza have become synonymous with resistance. Their ability to endure unspeakable hardship has turned them into symbols of perseverance. But as Daoud Kuttab, the award-winning Palestinian journalist, rightly points out, they are human, not superhuman. They feel pain, grieve for their loved ones, and grow frustrated when faced with endless injustice and global indifference. The latest protests are an expression of that frustration—a desperate call for attention to their plight.

The Breaking Point: Renewed Violence and Desperation

The situation in Gaza had seen a glimmer of hope in January when a long-overdue ceasefire was finally implemented. Displaced families began making their way back north, only to find their homes in ruins. With limited resources, they started clearing debris, hoping for the arrival of heavy machinery to remove the rubble and recover the bodies still trapped beneath. But just as they were attempting to rebuild their shattered lives, the ceasefire was abruptly shattered by an Israeli airstrike that killed 400 Palestinians, many of them women and children.

Israel justified the attack by claiming it targeted mid-level Hamas leaders. However, this massive escalation did more than eliminate specific individuals—it reignited a war that had already left Gaza on the brink of collapse. Many Palestinians had placed their faith in the U.S.-brokered ceasefire, expecting some degree of enforcement from the American administration. Instead, Washington chose silence, failing to hold Israel accountable for violating the agreement.

The attack was followed by an intensified blockade on humanitarian aid, leaving Gaza’s already-starving population in an even more dire situation. The Jordanian airdrops of food and medical supplies—though symbolic—failed to provide meaningful relief. As hunger and despair deepened, Gazans found themselves facing a cruel reality: neither the ceasefire nor the promises of humanitarian intervention could protect them.

A Response to Betrayal and Neglect

The frustration that erupted in the form of protests was not merely directed at Israel but also at Hamas. The people of Gaza expect their leaders to navigate crises with strategy and pragmatism, not just ideological steadfastness. In Beit Lahia, when Hamas fired a single symbolic rocket in response to Israeli violations, the Israeli military responded with overwhelming force, once again forcing civilians to evacuate their homes.

This cycle of suffering has tested the patience of even the most steadfast supporters of the resistance. For many Palestinians, the inability of Hamas to negotiate effectively or anticipate Israeli retaliations has become a source of anger. The protesters in Gaza were not only condemning Israeli aggression but also demanding that their leadership show better judgment in a conflict where the balance of power remains overwhelmingly against them.

Attempts to dismiss the protests as externally orchestrated—whether by Mohammed Dahlan’s faction or the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority—were quickly refuted by community leaders in Beit Lahia. These demonstrations were an organic expression of the people’s anger, not the result of political manipulation.

A Call for Immediate Action

Despite growing discontent with Hamas, the protests should not be misinterpreted as a rejection of Palestinian resistance. Rather, they reflect the urgency of a more strategic approach—one that recognizes the evolving geopolitical landscape. The recent shifts in Washington, Beirut, and beyond necessitate careful recalibration. While Palestinian resilience remains unshaken, the need for diplomatic maneuvering is becoming ever more apparent.

The ceasefire must be reinstated immediately. This is not just a demand for temporary relief but a necessity for survival. The ongoing blockade of food and medical supplies is a blatant war crime, and its continuation only serves to deepen Gaza’s humanitarian crisis. International law explicitly prohibits the use of starvation as a weapon of war, yet the global community has failed to enforce these laws when it comes to Israel’s actions in Gaza.

A comprehensive political process must follow the ceasefire. The reconstruction of Gaza is essential, but it cannot happen in a vacuum. Any meaningful rebuilding effort must be accompanied by a serious peace initiative—one that includes the release of prisoners, restoration of basic human rights, and an end to the indiscriminate targeting of civilians.

Will the World Listen?

The protests in Gaza are more than just a reaction to immediate hardships; they are a plea for recognition. Palestinians are not just statistics in an ongoing conflict—they are human beings with emotions, aspirations, and the right to live in dignity. Their suffering has been met with indifference for far too long. It is time for the world to listen.

Arab nations must take a stronger stand. While public outrage in the region remains high, political action has been lacking. Diplomatic pressure on Israel must be increased, and unconditional support for its war policies must be challenged. The international community, too, must move beyond empty statements and push for tangible accountability.

The cries from Gaza should not be ignored. They serve as a stark reminder that this war is not just about military strategies or political power plays—it is about real lives being lost, real families being destroyed, and real suffering that must end. The time for action is now, before more innocent lives are lost to a conflict that has already claimed too many.

The plan envisions an “International Stabilization Force,” primarily composed of Arab troops, to assume security responsibilities in Gaza.

Egypt has drafted a plan for post-war Gaza that aims to replace Hamas with interim governing bodies controlled by a coalition of Arab, Muslim, and Western states. The proposal, according to Reuters, serves as a counter to former U.S. President Donald Trump’s vision for Gaza, which sparked controversy by suggesting mass displacement of Palestinians.

The Egyptian proposal, expected to be presented at an Arab League summit on Tuesday, does not specify whether it would take effect before or after a permanent peace agreement. However, it marks a significant effort by regional powers to shape the future of Gaza.

A Response to Trump’s Vision

Trump’s plan, which appeared to depart from longstanding U.S. policy supporting a two-state solution, drew sharp criticism from Palestinians and Arab nations. The fate of Gaza remains a critical and unresolved issue in post-war negotiations, with Hamas firmly rejecting any externally imposed governance structure.

Egypt’s plan, while offering an alternative framework, leaves key questions unanswered, including how Gaza’s reconstruction will be funded and how Hamas—an entrenched and militarily powerful entity—will be removed from power.

Interim Governance and Reconstruction

Under the Egyptian proposal, a “Governance Assistance Mission” would temporarily replace Hamas-run governance in Gaza. This interim body would focus on humanitarian aid and the initial phases of reconstruction, avoiding explicit details on long-term governance structures.

“There will be no major international funding for Gaza’s rehabilitation if Hamas remains the dominant armed political force,” states the draft plan’s preamble. This underscores the reluctance of international donors to finance rebuilding efforts while Hamas remains in control.

Egypt, Jordan, and Gulf Arab states have been working for nearly a month to develop a diplomatic strategy opposing Trump’s plan. Among various proposals, Egypt’s framework has emerged as the most viable alternative.

While the draft does not specify who would oversee the governance mission, it mentions drawing on expertise from Palestinians in Gaza and the diaspora to accelerate the region’s recovery.

Rejection of Mass Displacement

A core element of the Egyptian proposal is its firm opposition to the U.S. suggestion of mass Palestinian displacement. Arab states, including Egypt and Jordan, have warned that such a move would pose a serious security threat to the region.

Responding to inquiries about Egypt’s plan, White House National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes stated, “President Trump has been clear that Hamas cannot continue to govern Gaza. While he stands by his vision for a post-war Gaza, he welcomes input from our Arab partners. His proposals have compelled the region to engage rather than allow the situation to worsen.”

Security Arrangements and the Role of Hamas

Senior Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri denied any knowledge of Egypt’s proposal, reiterating that “the future of Gaza must be decided solely by Palestinians.” He rejected any attempt to impose external governance or foreign forces on the enclave.

Notably, the Egyptian draft does not mention elections or outline specific consequences if Hamas refuses to disarm or relinquish political control.

Instead, the plan envisions an “International Stabilization Force,” primarily composed of Arab troops, to assume security responsibilities in Gaza. Over time, this force would facilitate the establishment of a new local police force.

Security and governance under this framework would be supervised by a steering board consisting of key Arab nations, members of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, the United States, Britain, the European Union, and other stakeholders.

The proposal does not grant a central governing role to the Palestinian Authority (PA), which has low approval ratings among Palestinians in both Gaza and the West Bank. A Palestinian official, speaking anonymously, asserted that Gaza remains under the PA’s jurisdiction and must be managed by Palestinians.

“We agreed with the Egyptians on a committee of Palestinian experts to assist the PA in governing Gaza for six months. This committee coordinates with the PA but does not report to any non-Palestinian entities,” the official stated.

Reconstruction and Funding Challenges

Since Hamas expelled the Palestinian Authority from Gaza in a 2007 civil conflict, it has suppressed opposition and fortified its power through an extensive tunnel network and military infrastructure—much of which Israel claims to have destroyed during the war.

The Egyptian plan does not specify who would finance Gaza’s reconstruction, which the U.N. estimates will cost over $53 billion. Sources indicate that Gulf and Arab states would need to contribute at least $20 billion in the initial rebuilding phase.

The proposal suggests that nations on the steering board could establish a reconstruction fund and host donor conferences to secure long-term financial support. However, no concrete financial commitments are outlined in the draft.

Resource-rich Gulf states such as Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates could be crucial financial backers. However, the UAE, which views Hamas as a security threat, is unlikely to provide funds until the group is sidelined.

Future Governance and Civil Society Involvement

To promote local involvement, the draft proposes the creation of a “Civil Society Advisory Board” composed of academics, NGO leaders, and other prominent figures to provide guidance on governance and reconstruction.

The foreign ministries of Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia have not yet commented on Egypt’s proposal or their potential financial commitments.

While Egypt’s plan presents a structured alternative to Trump’s controversial vision, it still faces significant hurdles, including Hamas’ resistance, uncertainty over funding, and the challenge of implementing security measures in a volatile post-war environment.

The two leaders discussed regional stability, the ongoing crisis in Gaza, and ways to strengthen diplomatic and economic ties between the UAE and the United States, according to UAE state media.

During their talks in Abu Dhabi, Sheikh Mohamed stressed the UAE’s commitment to a two-state solution as the only sustainable path to peace. He emphasized that efforts to rebuild Gaza must be directly linked to long-term stability in the region, warning that any expansion of the conflict would pose a significant threat to regional security.

Senior Emirati officials, including National Security Adviser Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al-Nahyan and Foreign Minister Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al-Nahyan, were present at the meeting, highlighting the UAE’s high-level engagement on the issue.

The UAE has consistently called for de-escalation in Gaza and remains committed to providing humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians affected by the conflict. The country has also pushed for diplomatic efforts to secure a peaceful resolution and prevent further humanitarian crises.

Normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia has not been entirely derailed by the October 7 attacks, but it has undoubtedly been put on hold due to the political and humanitarian sensitivities of the war in Gaza

For many months, since the beginning of the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas, the desolate departures board at Ben Gurion Airport has told us a story: in the face of countless flight cancellations by international airlines, one of the few destinations that is always present is the United Arab Emirates, which, through the low-cost Flydubai and Etihad flying to Abu Dhabi, has replaced Istanbul as the main hub for travelers departing from Israel.

Today – while global airlines are starting to reschedule this route – there are fifteen daily flights Israel-Emirates. All of them, including those of the three Israeli airlines, fly over Saudi Arabia, a concession that drastically reduces the duration of the flight, which was already made by Riyadh back in September 2020, with the signing of the Abraham Accords and has never been revoked since.

The propensity towards the much-discussed normalization between Jerusalem and Riyadh can also be measured through the Middle Eastern sky, which has witnessed much more dramatic cooperation that took place in the context of the broader war of the “axis of resistance” led by Iran against the Jewish State and then formed by Gaza, Iraq, Yemen, Syria and Lebanon – today, due to the unprecedented domino effect triggered after the attack of October 7, Syria and Lebanon are trying to relocate themselves within Riyadh’s Sunni sphere of influence, and as far as Gaza is concerned: it is the fulcrum of the ongoing negotiations.

To counter the Iranian missile and drone attack on the night of April 13 last year, Jordan and Saudi Arabia also did their part, guaranteeing freedom of maneuver in their airspace to their allies. Even before that, Riyadh, which did not formally join the coalition for the defense of the Red Sea maritime route against the Houthis, intercepted missiles launched by Yemen against Israel on its territory.

Every now and then, a strategic meeting at the highest levels is leaked: for example in June, when journalist Barak Ravid revealed that the IDF Chief of staff secretly met with senior figures from the Saudi army in Bahrain, under the aegis of Centcom.

Several indicators tell us that the “flirt” between Israelis and Saudis continues, despite the images of devastation arriving from Gaza and the public statements of Arab leaders.

“The fact that silent normalization continues during the war is an important sign of the strong interests behind this alliance”, tells Prof. Elie Podeh of the Department of Middle Eastern Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and author of an illuminating book, “From Mistress to Known Partner: Israel’s Secret Relations with States and Minorities in Middle East, 1948-2020”, which maps the complex dynamics that have led Israel, since its foundation, to establish relations with its neighbors.

“Normalization has many faces. One model is characterized by bilateral, mostly secret, relations without the establishment of diplomatic relations. This is the situation Israel repeatedly found itself in immediately after its declaration of independence, up to the peace agreements with Egypt, Jordan, the Oslo Accords and finally the Abraham Accords.”

“Peace is not just a one time event signed on the lawns of the White House, but rather a process slowly cooked over low heat for years”, adds Ohad Merlin, Middle East correspondent for the Jerusalem Post. “For instance, in the case of Israel and Jordan, even during wartimes, King Hussein and the Israeli leadership were on good terms, slowly building trust over the years until the signing of the peace agreement in 1994.

In more recent cases, Israeli delegations to business forums, sporting events and international organizations were present in some of the Gulf countries, again building trust and even friendships between people. However, despite the positive outlook, for a prosperous and lasting peace, it is necessary to emphasize the importance of education for tolerance both in the media and in the educational system: the normalization of the very existence of Jews, Israelis and the Jewish State in the region is directly related to processes of deradicalization, openness and tolerance”.

And so, while last December the Chabad Jewish community lit a candelabra for the first time in the heart of Riyadh for the holiday of Chanukah – for years it has distributed kosher food in the Saudi Kingdom to the large community of Jewish expats – some indicative changes can also be noted in the education sector. Last May, a study revealed that the Saudi Ministry of Education had made significant changes to the current school curriculum, removing much anti-Israel (and anti-Semitic) content from textbooks.

The 267-page report by IMPACT-se, an NGO based in London and Tel Aviv that analyzes the content of textbooks around the world to encourage peace and tolerance according to UNESCO standards, provides many examples and concludes: “Representations of Israel and Zionism have made further progress. Students no longer learn content that defined Zionism as a “racist” European movement that aims to expel Palestinians, or that Zionism’s “fundamental goal” is to expand its borders and take over Arab lands, oil wells, and Islamic and Christian holy sites in Jerusalem.”

Israel is still not recognized on maps, but, curiously, on many maps the name Palestine, which previously indicated the entire area from the “river to the sea”, has been removed and the area remains unnamed. The same process of deradicalization of school textbooks had been monitored by the NGO since 2014 in the Emirates, which in 2023 became the first Arab country to officially include some elements of study of the Holocaust in the school curriculum.

Abdalaziz Alkhamis, a Saudi journalist based in the UAE and a well-known face on Sky News in Arabic, confirmed to Il Foglio that “normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia has not been entirely derailed by the October 7 attacks, but it has undoubtedly been put on hold due to the political and humanitarian sensitivities of the war in Gaza”.

“Saudi Arabia publicly condemned Israel’s military actions and halted formal normalization talks, but indirect diplomatic backchannels remain open. While overt collaborations have decreased in visibility, business and security-related exchanges between private Saudi and Israeli entities have not completely ceased”, Alkhamis added.

Someone who knows something about trade exchanges with the Saudis is Dr. Nirit Ofir, an Israeli researcher specializing in the Gulf countries, who has organized countless delegations to Saudi Arabia with participants openly identified as Israeli, starting in 2021 with the Rally Dakar, up to the delegation of 12 companies in the cyber sector (including flag at the Israeli stand) in Dammam, a month before the attack on October 7. “After October 7, everything is slower, but it is not possible to stop the path that has been started”, Ofir, who has never stopped visiting Saudi Arabia even in recent months, tells Il Foglio.

Also interesting in this sense is the work of MENA2050, an organization that since 2021 has brought together hundreds of activists and experts from across the Middle East (including Israelis and Palestinians) to collaborate in offering tangible solutions to the main challenges of the area, primarily climate change and water and food security, sectors in which Israeli expertise is highly valued and sought after.

Eli Bar-On, director and co-founder (together with the Saudi Alkhamis), confirms to Il Foglio that “in Saudi Arabia there is already Israeli technology. The Saudis want to buy it because it is considered high quality. Bin Salman himself has stated that his Vision 2030 includes Israel as an ally, but just six months ago he also said that he fears ending up like Sadat because of this”.

The public street has its weight, but Alkhamis points out that, since the beginning of the war in Gaza, “while the public’s perception has hardened against normalization due to the war, the elite maintains a long-term strategic interest in keeping normalization on the table—though with new conditions and expectations”. Alkhamis points out that the Saudi media has remained moderate on Israel, the problem is instead evident on social media: more openly hostile.

On the media side, another signal has appeared in the last year that also requires a certain amount of deciphering: a series of editorials and interviews published in the Israeli press by Dr. Aziz Alghashian, a Saudi researcher on normalization with Israel. The clear message he sends is that normalization must include “strong, credible and concrete measures that fit into the ‘two peoples, two states’ solution, because the Saudis need internal legitimacy,” Alghashian explained to the people of Israel in the columns of Israel Hayom just ten days ago.

A clear example of soft power diplomacy: his words printed with an open signature on Israeli paper (from the left of Haaretz to the mainstream of Israel Hayom) constitute in themselves a precedent, an act of recognition of the interlocutor, usually “unnamed” (as with maps in schoolbooks). Alghashian also says that “Saudi Arabia’s primary objectives in any agreement will focus on its economic and security interests” and that these are determined by the level of “concessions” that Riyadh must receive “from both the United States and Israel”.

Abdelaziz AlKhamis explains to Il Foglio that Mohammed bin Salman could contribute to the post-war arrangement of Gaza on several fronts: “Financial aid for reconstruction, although probably through international frameworks rather than unilateral initiatives; influence on the new Palestinian leadership that reduces the power of Hamas; deradicalization efforts, in line with the promotion of a more moderate Islam in Saudi Arabia itself, an integral part of Vision 2030”. How this will actually work out is exactly the answer the White House now expects from its Arab allies in the Middle East, after having boosted the negotiations with Trump’s enigmatic proposal on the “Gaza Riviera”.

Original Italian article Il Foglio Daily. Posted in English by Eli Bar-On (Exec. Director MENA2050.

Sharon Nizza is a Middle-East expert. She tweets under @SharonNizza.