Arab leaders support Egypt’s reconstruction plan for Gaza, aiming to retain the population while contrasting with Trump’s proposed depopulation and redevelopment. Egyptian President el-Sissi emphasized the need for a comprehensive resolution to the Palestinian issue. Criticism from the U.S. and Israel highlights the disagreements over approaches and roles in the ongoing conflict and humanitarian crisis, exacerbated by the aftermath of recent violence.
Arab leaders have shown support for Egypt’s comprehensive plan for the reconstruction of Gaza, advocating for the retention of the local Palestinian population. Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sissi expressed gratitude for the Arab consensus on this approach, asserting it enables Palestinians to remain on their land without the threat of displacement, in contrast to Trump’s plans for redevelopment and depopulation.
El-Sissi emphasized the need for collaboration with Trump and the international community to achieve a fair resolution to the Palestinian issue, which involves addressing the root causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict while upholding regional security and stability.
In response, the White House dismissed Egypt’s reconstruction blueprint, arguing it failed to consider the dire living conditions in Gaza, with debris and unexploded ordnance endangering inhabitants. National Security Council spokesman Brian Hughes reaffirmed Trump’s objective to rebuild Gaza free from Hamas influence.
Israeli officials also criticized Egypt’s plan for neglecting key realities, arguing that it does not acknowledge the recent attacks by Hamas. They reiterated support for the U.S. plan, which aims to resettle Gaza’s population, framing it as an opportunity for a more favorable future for its residents.
Egypt’s Foreign Minister, Badr Abdelatty, condemned Israel’s dismissal as unacceptable, stressing that lasting peace in the region is contingent upon an independent Palestinian state established in accordance with international law. He asserted such a situation defies principles of justice and global governance.
Hamas expressed approval of the summit’s outcomes, interpreting it as a strengthening of Arab support for the Palestinian cause and opposing any displacement of Gaza residents. Israel, however, has signaled its preference for alternate proposals aimed at securing temporary ceasefires and resolving hostage situations.
The Egyptian reconstruction plan proposes a comprehensive rebuilding of Gaza by 2030, skipping the displacement of its population while clearing more than 50 million tons of rubble. Plans include the establishment of an international aid Conference alongside U.N. involvement for effective reconstruction funding, while temporary housing solutions are to be implemented immediately.
Long-term visions outline the development of environmentally sustainable housing, rejuvenation of agricultural areas, and enhancements to infrastructure, including airports, fishing piers, and commercial ports that were part of earlier peace agreements. Control dynamics between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority remain a contentious point, as Israel seeks disarmament of Hamas while rejecting a role for the Palestinian Authority.
The conflict escalated following a significant attack by Hamas on October 7, resulting in substantial casualties and leading to a major Israeli military response. The resulting devastation has significantly impacted Gaza’s infrastructure and living conditions, displacing a large portion of its population.
The endorsement of Egypt’s reconstruction plan by Arab leaders reflects a strategic pivot towards a solution that prioritizes the welfare of the Palestinian people, as opposed to proposals that could result in their displacement. While U.S. and Israeli officials express skepticism about the feasibility of Egypt’s approach, the international community’s involvement appears crucial for its execution. The ongoing humanitarian crisis and the geopolitical landscape remain intertwined as efforts to achieve peace and security in the region continue amidst underlying tensions.
Original Source: www.washingtonpost.com
