Exclusive: U.S., Israel discuss possible U.S.-led administration for Gaza, sources say
Possible U.S.-led administration would last until Gaza demilitarized and stable, sources say
Discussions between US and Israeli officials are at a preliminary stage, with no guarantee of an agreement
U.S.-led provisional administration would not include Hamas or Palestinian Authority, sources say
A U.S.-led administration in Gaza would face risks, possible backlash in the region, sources say
JERUSALEM, May 7 (Reuters) - The United States and Israel have discussed the possibility of Washington leading a temporary post-war administration of Gaza, according to five people familiar with the matter.
The "high-level" consultations have centered around a transitional government headed by a U.S. official that would oversee Gaza until it had been demilitarized and stabilized, and a viable Palestinian administration had emerged, the sources said.
According to the discussions, which remain preliminary, there would be no fixed timeline for how long such a U.S.-led administration would last, which would depend on the situation on the ground, the five sources said.
The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity as they were not authorized to discuss the talks publicly, compared the proposal to the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq that Washington established in 2003, shortly after the U.S.-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein.
The authority was perceived by many Iraqis as an occupying force and it transferred power to an interim Iraqi government in 2004 after failing to contain a growing insurgency.
Other countries would be invited to take part in the U.S.-led authority in Gaza, the sources said, without identifying which ones. They said the administration would draw on Palestinian technocrats but would exclude Islamist group Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, which holds limited authority in the occupied West Bank.
Islamist group Hamas, which has ruled Gaza since 2007, sparked the current war when its militants stormed into southern Israeli communities on October 7, 2023, killing some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and capturing another 251.
The sources said it remained unclear whether any agreement could be reached. Discussions had not progressed to the point of considering who might take on core roles, they said.
The sources did not specify which side had put forward the proposal nor provide further details of the talks.
In response to Reuters questions, a State Department spokesperson did not comment directly on whether there had been discussions with Israel about a U.S.-led provisional authority in Gaza, saying they could not speak to ongoing negotiations.
"We want peace, and the immediate release of the hostages," the spokesperson said, adding that: "The pillars of our approach remain resolute: stand with Israel, stand for peace."
The office of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declined to comment.
In an April interview with Emirati-owned Sky News Arabia, Israeli Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said he believed there would be a "transitional period" after the conflict in which an international board of trustees, including "moderate Arab countries", would oversee Gaza with Palestinians operating under their guidance.
"We're not looking to control the civil life of the people in Gaza. Our sole interest in the Gaza Strip is security," he said, without naming which countries he believed would be involved. The foreign ministry did not respond to a request for further comment.
Ismail Al-Thawabta, director of the Hamas-run Gaza government media office, rejected the idea of an administration led by the United States or any foreign government, saying the Palestinian people of Gaza should choose their own rulers.
The Palestinian Authority did not respond to a request for comment.
RISKS
A U.S.-led provisional authority in Gaza would draw Washington deeper into the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and mark its biggest Middle East intervention since the Iraq invasion.
Such a move would carry significant risks of a backlash from both allies and adversaries in the Middle East, if Washington were perceived as an occupying power in Gaza, two of the sources said.
The United Arab Emirates - which established diplomatic relations with Israel in 2020 - has proposed to the United States and Israel that an international coalition oversee Gaza's post-war governance. Abu Dhabi conditioned its involvement on the inclusion of the Western-backed Palestinian Authority and a credible path toward Palestinian statehood.
The UAE foreign ministry did not respond to questions about whether it would support a U.S.-led administration that did not include the PA.
Israel's leadership, including Netanyahu, firmly rejects any role in Gaza for the Palestinian Authority, which it accuses of being anti-Israeli. Netanyahu also opposes Palestinian sovereignty.
Netanyahu said on Monday that Israel would expand its attacks in Gaza and that more Gazans would be moved "for their own safety". Israel is still seeking to recover 59 hostages being held in the enclave. Its offensive has so far killed more than 52,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza health ministry data.
Some members of Netanyahu's right-coalition have called publicly for what they describe as the "voluntary" mass migration of Palestinians from Gaza and for the reconstruction of Jewish settlements inside the coastal enclave.
But behind closed doors, some Israeli officials have also been weighing proposals over the future of Gaza that sources say assumes that there won't be a mass exodus of Palestinians from Gaza, such as the U.S.-led provisional administration.
Among those include restricting reconstruction to designated security zones, dividing the territory and establishing permanent military bases, said four sources, who include foreign diplomats and former Israeli officials briefed on the proposals.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Hezbollah dismisses Lebanon's move to restrict arms as ''a grave sin'
Hezbollah, the Lebanese Shia militant and political movement, says it will disregard a decision by Lebanon's government to task the army with establishing a state monopoly on arms."We will treat this decision as if it does not exist," Hezbollah said in a statement on Wednesday, describing it as a "grave sin".The comments come despite mounting international pressure for the group to Iranian-backed group was significantly degraded in last year's war with Israel but has, so far, refused to give up its arsenal, despite calls from the US and domestic rivals. Hezbollah also said that the Lebanese cabinet's decision to try and confine arms supply and production to state forces was the result of American "diktats".It added that it was open to dialogue and discussions on "the national security strategy", but not "in the context of aggression".On Tuesday, Lebanon's cabinet asked the military to present a plan that will see all arms brought under state control by the end of the plan is to be presented to the cabinet by the end of this month for discussion and approval, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam told a press conference after the six-hour cabinet meeting. In June, American officials presented a roadmap to Lebanese authorities that proposed Hezbollah's full disarmament in exchange for Israel halting its strikes and withdrawing troops from five locations in southern Lebanon, which have been occupied despite a ceasefire deal reached in November. The group's leader, Naim Qassem, in a televised address while the cabinet meeting was underway, said Hezbollah would not discuss "the issue of the weapons" while Israeli attacks continue, accusing Israel of breaching the terms of the ceasefire. Israel says its attacks are to prevent Hezbollah from regrouping and its weakened status, Hezbollah still enjoys significant support among Lebanon's Shia Muslim population, and discussions around its disarmament risk elevating tensions in the country, where many still remember the 1975-1990 civil war.
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Dozens killed seeking aid in Gaza as Israel considers further military action
The Israeli military said it had fired warning shots when crowds approached its forces. The latest deaths came as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was expected to announce further military action – and possibly plans for Israel to fully reoccupy Gaza. Experts say Israel's ongoing military offensive and blockade are already pushing the territory of some two million Palestinians into famine. Another escalation of the nearly 22-month war could put the lives of countless Palestinians and around 20 living Israeli hostages at risk, and would draw fierce opposition both internationally and within Israel. Mr Netanyahu's far-right coalition allies have long called for the war to be expanded, and for Israel to eventually take over Gaza, relocate much of its population and rebuild Jewish settlements there. US President Donald Trump, asked by a reporter on Tuesday whether he supported the reoccupation of Gaza, said he was not aware of the 'suggestion' but that 'it's going to be pretty much up to Israel'. At least 28 Palestinians were killed overnight and into Wednesday in the Morag Corridor, an Israeli military zone in southern Gaza where UN convoys have been repeatedly overwhelmed by looters and desperate crowds in recent days, and where witnesses say Israeli forces have repeatedly opened fire. The Israeli military said troops fired warning shots as Palestinians advanced towards them, and that it was not aware of any casualties. Nasser Hospital, which received the bodies, said another four people were killed in the Teina area, on a route leading to a site in southern Gaza run by the Israeli-backed Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), an American contractor. The Al-Awda Hospital said it received the bodies of six people killed near a GHF site in central Gaza. Another 12 people were killed in Israeli air strikes, according to the two hospitals. The GHF said there were no violent incidents at or near its sites. The military says it tries to avoid harming civilians and blames their deaths on Hamas because its militants are entrenched in heavily populated areas. Israel facilitated the establishment of four GHF sites in May after blocking the entry of all food, medicine and other goods for two-and-a-half months. Israeli and US officials said a new system was needed to prevent Hamas from siphoning off humanitarian aid. The United Nations, which has delivered aid to hundreds of distribution points across Gaza throughout the war when conditions allow, has rejected the new system, saying it forces Palestinians to travel long distances and risk their lives for food, and that it allows Israel to control who gets aid, potentially using it to advance plans for further mass displacement. The UN human rights office said last week that some 1,400 Palestinians have been killed seeking aid since May, mostly near GHF sites but also along UN convoy routes where trucks have been overwhelmed by crowds. It says nearly all were killed by Israeli fire. This week, a group of UN special rapporteurs and independent human rights experts called for the GHF to be disbanded, saying it is 'an utterly disturbing example of how humanitarian relief can be exploited for covert military and geopolitical agendas in serious breach of international law'. The experts work with the UN but do not represent the world body. The GHF did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The Israeli military says it has only fired warning shots when crowds threatened its forces, and the GHF says its armed contractors have only used pepper spray and fired into the air on some occasions to prevent deadly crowding at its sites. Israel's blockade and military offensive have made it nearly impossible for anyone to safely deliver aid, and aid groups say recent Israeli measures to facilitate more assistance are far from sufficient. Hospitals recorded four more malnutrition-related deaths over the last 24 hours, bringing the total to 193 people, including 96 children, since the war began in October 2023, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Jordan said Israeli settlers blocked roads and hurled stones at a convoy of four trucks carrying aid bound for Gaza after they drove across the border into the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Israeli far-right activists have repeatedly sought to halt aid from entering Gaza. Jordanian government spokesperson Mohammed al-Momani condemned the attack, which he said had shattered the windscreens of the trucks, according to the Jordanian state-run Petra News Agency. The Israeli military said security forces went to the scene to disperse the gathering and accompanied the trucks to their destination. Hamas-led militants killed some 1,200 people, mostly civilians, in the October 7 attack and abducted another 251. Most of the hostages have been released in ceasefires or other deals. Of the 50 still held in Gaza, around 20 are believed to be alive. Israel's retaliatory offensive has killed more than 61,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza's Health Ministry, which does not say how many were fighters or civilians but says around half were women and children. It is part of the now largely defunct Hamas-run government and staffed by medical professionals. The UN and independent experts consider it the most reliable source for the number of war casualties.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Elite liberal Yimbys are killing off the family home
The Yimbys believe that the only real solution is to roll back regulations further and introduce new housing laws designed to increase urban density. Much of this is based on often exaggerated climate concerns about 'sprawl'. Remarkably they have gained the support of the libertarian Right. One might think such people would embrace the notion of promoting a class of small property owners, but it seems that juicing the profits of large corporations is a higher priority. The problem here, for Yimbys on the Right and Left, lies in the small matter of market preferences: most people don't want to live in the inner-city high rise apartments beloved by planners and Yimbys, but in a house with a garden of their own. Indeed, generally high-end dense housing has a relatively small market. Condos and apartments may thrill Yimby imaginations – the public, not so much. Surveys, such as one in 2019 by political scientist Jessica Trounstine, have found that the preference for lower-density, safe areas with good schools is 'ubiquitous'. Three out of four Californians, according to a poll by former Obama campaign pollster David Binder, opposed legislation that banned zoning which only permitted single family homes. This mismatch between what is being built and what most people want can be seen in the huge oversupply of apartments, not just in the US but in Canada's big cities too, causing prices for such properties to drop over the past two years. Yet despite all the evidence, Yimbys show little or no interest in the predominant dreams of their own citizens. Worse, their ideas are helping to inform the agenda of the so-called 'Abundance Democrats', a fashionable new movement which seeks to make peace between the Left, prosperity and growth, inspired by a book by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson. Even the Yimbys' more moderate ideas as laid out in the book – also called Abundance – largely ignore the suburbs and exurbs, where most Americans live, and stay clear of ownership. As attorney Jennifer Hernandez suggests, there is an 'ugly elitist underbelly' to Abundance, reflecting the values of hipster professionals while eschewing 'even a passing wave to those who choose not to live in city centres, who want to be able to buy a detached, single family home, and who don't want to share a wall, sound, ride or odours with their neighbours…' The obvious and likely failure of Yimby policies might well empower far more radical approaches to housing, which seem more interested in turning cities into a souped up version of greater Moscow. The Mamdani approach of public housing and rent control may come to be seen by progressives as the best alternative – however disastrous public housing has been in cities across the United States. Given the utter failure of mainstream Yimbyism, the progressive embrace of a more socialist approach seems inevitable. Well-heeled Yimbys, and their corporate backers, are unlikely to enjoy the results.
