Israel’s effort to prevent the Palestinian Authority (PA) from returning to Gaza under any circumstances is unintentionally helping entrench Hamas as the territory’s only viable governing authority.
Four months after White House Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff announced the launch of the second phase of President Donald Trump’s 20-point Gaza peace plan, the process has stalled, with little optimism about its advancement.
Key measures required to complete phase two have yet to be implemented: Hamas refuses to disarm, a Palestinian technocratic government has been formed but has not begun effectively governing Gaza, and violations of the ceasefire continue unabated.
Moreover, the Board of Peace recently submitted a report to the United Nations indicating a serious funding gap for Gaza’s reconstruction, leaving the war-battered enclave without a viable solution for the 85% of its buildings and infrastructure that have been destroyed and the 70 million tons of rubble that still must be removed.
According to Axios, the Board of Peace is considering advancing a “Plan B” that would implement reconstruction and an alternative governance mechanism in areas not under Hamas control, thereby bypassing the requirement of disarmament for the time being.
The immediate result is the emergence of a new status quo in Gaza in which Israel controls approximately half of the Gaza Strip while Hamas consolidates its hold over the Palestinian population.
Hamas is weakened but functioning
Certainly, Hamas remains significantly weakened and still has a long way to go before returning to its prewar organizational capacity. For an extended period, the group has faced a severe financial crisis and has struggled to pay the salaries of its personnel.
Most recently, the commander of US Central Command, Adm. Brad Cooper, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee that Hamas, along with Hezbollah and the Houthis, “have been cut off from Iran’s weapons supply and support” following Operation Epic Fury.
Nevertheless, Hamas has forcefully preserved its monopoly on violence and remains the only Palestinian governing authority in the areas still under its control in Gaza.
While director-general of the Board of Peace Nickolay Mladenov has unsuccessfully attempted to broker a breakthrough on Hamas’s disarmament – thereby leaving the group in de facto control of Gaza – some of the Israeli government’s own policies are indirectly contributing to this reality.
Israel’s daily Ynet reported on May 19 that US and Israeli officials are discussing ways to prevent Hamas from benefiting economically from the current situation. According to the report, officials are concerned that Hamas is profiting from humanitarian aid entering Gaza at the expense of the civilian population.
Involving the Palestinian Authority
One proposal under consideration is reinstating a private mechanism for distributing humanitarian aid, similar to the US- and Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which ultimately failed and was shut down.
The US is reportedly pushing for funding for such a program – as well as for portions of Gaza’s reconstruction – to come from funds Israel has withheld from the Palestinian Authority. These withheld funds amount to approximately NIS 275 million per month that the PA would ordinarily transfer to Gaza, totaling roughly NIS 5 billion.
Despite reported US support – and apparent backing from the PA itself – Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich vetoed the proposal in order to prevent the PA from “establishing a foothold in Gaza.”
This position is highly reminiscent of the current Israeli government’s pre-October 7 approach, which sought to preserve the political division between Hamas-ruled Gaza and the PA-ruled West Bank. Allowing the PA to return to Gaza – a central component of Trump’s 20-point plan, contingent upon internal reforms – would bring the Palestinians closer to politically reunifying Gaza and the West Bank and, ultimately, advancing Palestinian statehood.
However, the cost of this approach is high. It indirectly leaves Hamas as the only functioning governing authority in Gaza, without any serious alternative capable of challenging it.
Smotrich has been blunt about his vision for Gaza’s future: occupation, annexation, and encouraging large-scale emigration from the Gaza Strip. But it is unlikely that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will fully pursue this course due to its impracticality and the severe diplomatic consequences Israel would face as a result.
At the same time, no viable long-term Israeli strategy for stabilizing Gaza appears to be on the table. For the past two-and-a-half years, Netanyahu has promised the Israeli public “total victory” and the eradication of Hamas as both a military and governing force in Gaza. Yet Hamas remains the territory’s de facto ruler.
At present, the only meaningful framework available is Trump’s 20-point plan. Israel should exhaust every effort to see it implemented – including the eventual return of the Palestinian Authority to Gaza – and adopt policies that increase its chances of success. Hamas cannot be replaced through military force alone but only through the establishment of a viable alternative governing authority.
The writer is director of research and policy at the Economic Cooperation Foundation (ECF) and a PhD candidate in International Relations at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.