The much-hyped emergency Arab summit on Gaza ended in Cairo on Tuesday with a 23-point communique.
If you don’t want to wade through all the clauses – filled with tired and outdated ideas like the “right of return,” a full Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines, Israel-occupied Golan, a UN peacekeeping force, genocide, apartheid, and the “indispensable role of UNRWA” – just know this: Hamas welcomed it.And that is really all one needs to know to judge the plan.
“We welcome the plan to rebuild Gaza, and we call for the provision of all the elements needed for its success,” Hamas said.
Why wouldn’t Hamas embrace it? The plan makes no mention of them – not once – nor does it acknowledge the terrorist organization’s brutal attack on October 7, the event that triggered the war and the devastation that followed.
No accountability for Hamas
Under this proposal, the Arab states and the international community would be expected to contribute some $53 billion for reconstruction. The first phase involves removing unexploded ordnance and clearing millions of tons of debris. The second focuses on building 200,000 temporary housing units. In the long term, 400,000 permanent homes, a rebuilt seaport, and a new international airport would be added.
But in the final communique, is there a trace of anger or even mild frustration at Hamas for bringing about this destruction? Any hint of accountability? Not a word.
The proposal envisions a team of independent Palestinian technocrats running Gaza initially until a reformed Palestinian Authority assumes control. Nowhere does it mention disarming Hamas or demilitarizing the territory – so naturally, Hamas has no objections.
And yet, people call US President Donald Trump’s plan to relocate Gazans and develop a Riviera in the enclave unrealistic.
What’s truly unrealistic is expecting Israel to tolerate a scenario in which Hamas is left standing, fully armed.
No Israeli government would allow a situation where technocrats manage Gaza’s day-to-day affairs while Hamas terrorists with RPGs and green headbands lurk behind them, dictating the real terms of power.
That would be the Lebanonization of Gaza – just as Hezbollah turned Lebanon into a state where the government exists on paper, but the absolute authority rests with an armed terror group.
Following the Six Day War in 1967, the Arab states met in Khartoum and issued their infamous “three no’s:” no peace with Israel, no recognition, no negotiations. Much has changed since then, but the communique that emerged from Cairo suggests that today – just as then – much of the Arab world still refuses to confront reality.
Tuesday’s communique reads as if October 7 never happened, as if 1,200 Israelis were not murdered, 251 others were not taken hostage, and as if Israel had not been forced to reconsider all its diplomatic assumptions – including the supposed inevitability of a two-state solution.
But October 7 did happen. And if the Arab states genuinely want a future for Gaza, they need to do more than recycle slogans; they need a plan that acknowledges reality and charts a different course for the Palestinians.
As Foreign Ministry spokesman Oren Marmorstein said in an understatement, the communique “fails to address the realities of the situation following October 7, 2023, remaining rooted in outdated perspectives.”
The White House, to its credit, recognized this as well. Brian Hughes, the National Security Council spokesman, dismissed the plan outright.
“The current proposal does not address the reality that Gaza is currently uninhabitable and residents cannot humanely live in a territory covered in debris and unexploded ordnance,” Hughes said. “President Trump stands by his vision to rebuild Gaza free from Hamas. We look forward to further talks to bring peace and prosperity to the region.”
The White House reaction is telling because the plan was clearly drafted as an alternative to Trump’s idea of relocating Gazans and placing the territory under US control. Had the president not put forth his proposal, this plan likely wouldn’t have surfaced at all. Egypt would have remained on the sidelines, watching Hamas and Israel fight – hoping for the terror group’s defeat but also for a weakened Israel.
Just as Israel must recognize the duplicitous role Qatar plays in supporting Hamas, even as it presents an image to the world of a forward-looking, moderate Arab state, it should also understand that for Egypt, a Gaza that presents a never-ending problem for Israel is not necessarily a bad thing.
A perpetually volatile Gaza drains Israeli energy and resources while enhancing Cairo’s standing as one of the primary mediators between Hamas and Israel. If it wanted to put forth a workable proposal, Egypt could have done so months ago. Instead, it waited for Trump to act first, then scrambled to respond.
The conference was not without its ironies. The Arab states condemned what they called Israel’s “use of siege and starvation as political weapons,” yet they refused to open their gates to Gazan refugees and relieve the siege or end their “starvation.”
Or consider this: Security in Gaza, the plan insists, “remains a solely Palestinian responsibility.” Well, not after they failed in that responsibility, resulting in the murder of hundreds of Israelis. Then, it becomes Israel’s responsibility.
Perhaps the greatest irony, however, was the presence of Lebanon’s newly elected president, Joseph Aoun, and Syria’s new leader, Ahmed al-Sharaa, at the Israel-bashing summit.
Neither man would be in power today were it not for Israel’s military successes over the past 16 months. A pre-October 7 Hezbollah would never have allowed Aoun’s election, and Bashar al-Assad would still be in control in Damascus had Israel not struck a severe blow against Hezbollah and Iran.
Lebanon would not have begun to free itself from Hezbollah’s grip, nor would the Syrian people have cast off the yoke of Assad’s dictatorship, were it not for Israel. And yet, here were their new leaders, joining this anti-Israel fest, slamming the Jewish state alongside the rest of the Arab world, castigating the very force that made their political rise possible.
The Arab summit in Cairo was meant to offer a vision for Gaza’s future. Instead, it clung to the past, ignoring the events that led to this war, the new realities that have emerged since, and how this will shape what Israel will be ready to accept. No wonder Hamas was pleased.