U.S. Pushes for UN-Mandated International Force in Gaza
 |
| Trump Administration on Gaza |
Introduction
In a significant development, the Donald Trump administration is advancing a draft resolution at the United Nations aimed at authorising a multinational “stabilisation force” in the Gaza Strip for at least two years.
The Jerusalem Post
+3
Axios
+3
Dawn
+3
What the Draft Resolution Proposes
According to reports, the draft gives the proposed international force the power to operate in Gaza under a broad mandate: securing borders with Israel and Egypt, protecting humanitarian corridors, training a new Palestinian police force, and demilitarising the enclave by dismantling military infrastructure used by non-state armed groups.
Axios
+1
It emphasises that the force would be an “enforcement force”, not simply a peacekeeping mission, meaning it could carry out operations under unified command and use “all necessary measures… consistent with international law”.
Axios
The force is proposed to link with a transitional governance body, the so-called Board of Peace, which is to oversee a technocratic Palestinian civil administration in Gaza until reforms are completed.
Dawn
+2
The Washington Institute
+2
The resolution would likely be tabled at the UN Security Council and requires member-states’ support; some nations are reportedly conditioning participation on a UN mandate.
The Washington Institute
+1
Why This Matters
The proposed move reflects a serious shift: rather than simply negotiating a cease-fire, the U.S. is now pushing for a structural security mechanism to stabilise Gaza in the medium term. The two-year minimum mandate underscores that this is more than an immediate stopgap.
For countries considering contributing troops, the legitimacy of a UN resolution is key. As one expert puts it: “some of the potential participants would join only with some form of international mandate.”
Axios
+1
If adopted, this could reshape the security dynamics in Gaza: the disarmament of non-state armed groups, transitional governance, and international oversight may impact the region’s future balance of power.
On the other hand, implementation remains highly uncertain: questions remain about how the force will coordinate with Israel’s security interests, how Palestinians will receive it, and how flexible the mandate will be in reality.
The Washington Institute
+1
What to Watch
UN Security Council Vote: Will the draft resolution secure enough backing—especially from permanent members like China and Russia—to avoid a veto?
Dawn
+1
Composition of the Force: Which countries will commit troops or resources? Arab states, Turkey, and Egypt have signalled interest—but their decisions depend on the mission’s details.
Axios
+1
Role of Non-state Actors: Will the force attempt to disarm groups like Hamas directly? The draft hints at “permanent de-commissioning of weapons from non-state armed groups”.
Dawn
+1
Coordination with Israel & Egypt: The mission is likely to operate “in close consultation and cooperation” with these states. How that plays out will matter for operational effectiveness.
Axios
+1
Impact on Reconstruction & Civil Governance: Stability is tied to rebuilding. The governance transition via the Board of Peace and technocratic administration will be critical to long-term outcomes.
The Washington Institute
Conclusion
The Trump administration’s push for a UN-mandated international force in Gaza marks a bold step. If realised, it could signal a new chapter in how Gaza’s security and governance are handled—moving from war and cease-fire to transformation and reconstruction. Yet the path ahead is fraught with diplomatic, operational and political obstacles. For Southeast Asian, Middle Eastern and global stakeholders alike, the coming weeks will be pivotal.
Post a Comment