ISRAELI OCCUPIED GAZA, 21 Jan. - (ANA) - Palestinians in the war-torn Gaza Strip responded with fear, anxiety, and a deep sense of foreboding to US President Donald Trump’s announcement of a so-called "Peace Council for the Gaza Strip." 

 

Rather than signalling a complete end to the war, the move intensified widespread concerns that Gaza's fate is once again being decided beyond its borders, without the consent or participation of the people who have endured months of bombardment, displacement, and loss.

 

As news of the announcement spread through overcrowded shelters and shattered neighbourhoods, many Palestinians in Gaza said it echoed previous experiences of externally imposed solutions, from the British Mandate to more recent international interventions, that failed to deliver justice or sovereignty.

 

For residents already living under siege and exhaustion, the council appeared less like a path to peace and more like a renewed form of control, wrapped in the language of reconstruction and international management.

 

 

 

 

On Friday, Trump's announcement came one day after his special envoy, Steve Witkoff, unveiled what Washington described as the second phase of a Gaza "peace agreement," centred on disarmament, the establishment of a technocratic government, and post-war reconstruction.

 

According to US statements, the council includes 11 members, among them former UN envoy Nikolay Mladenov as "High Representative for Gaza," former British prime minister Tony Blair, Dutch diplomat Sigrid Kaag, Israeli-Cypriot businessman Yakir Gabbay, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, Qatari official Ali al-Thawadi, Egyptian intelligence chief Hassan Rashad, and UAE Minister of State Reem al-Hashemi.

 

What alarmed Palestinians most, however, was who was absent.

 

"There is not a single Palestinian representative on the council. This alone explains the nature of the project," Ahmed Hamad, a Gaza-based university lecturer, told The New Arab. 

 

For many, the exclusion reinforces fears that decisions regarding Gaza's security, reconstruction, and political future will be made without the input of more than two million people who live there, continuing a long history of marginalisation.

 

Palestinian Political analyst Ahmed Zakarna, based in Ramallah, described the initiative as "a hybrid form of mandate."

 

"It resembles international legitimacy, but functions as direct control," Zakarna remarked to TNA. "Trump has created something that looks like a UN-style body, but without accountability or legal grounding."

 

Zakarna pointed to reports that participating countries are expected to pay up to one billion dollars in membership fees. "This places the council firmly within an economic framework," he said. "It is not only about governance, but about influence, profit, and geopolitical positioning."

 

He argued that the initiative reflects Washington's attempt to preserve dominance amid shifting global power dynamics. "Trump does not recognise international law as a constraint," Zakarna opined. "He recognises only power."

 

That approach, he added, was underscored by Trump’s invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—or his representative—to join the council, despite Netanyahu being wanted by the International Criminal Court over war crimes in Gaza.

 

 

 

 

Bilal Ashour, a resident of Gaza City displaced multiple times since the start of Israel's war in October 2023, told TNA that the announcement revived painful historical memories rather than hope. 

 

"This council has offered nothing to Gaza [...] We have lived through this logic before. Every time the future of Palestine is discussed without Palestinians, the result is more control, more suffering, and fewer rights," the 52-year-old father of six said. 

 

Ashour drew a direct comparison between Trump's initiative and earlier periods of foreign rule. "It resembles the British Mandate, and in some ways it may be worse," he said. "Back then, Gaza was not destroyed like this. Today, we are exhausted, besieged, and traumatised. Imposing a council now feels like exploiting our weakness."

 

For Ashour, the core issue is political agency. "Nothing will change unless there is an independent Palestinian government, supported by the Arab world and free from foreign dictates," he added. "Peace cannot be built on exclusion."

 

Others described the council as a modernised version of colonial governance, cloaked in diplomatic language. Ahed Hussein, another Gaza resident, told TNA the proposal reflects a deeper contradiction in US policy.

 

"In theory, we hope for anything that could stop the war," Hussein said. "But in practice, this looks like a new form of colonialism. The same country arming Israel and protecting it politically cannot suddenly become a neutral sponsor of peace."

 

He argued that the council risks entrenching occupation under a different name, saying "Palestine is already occupied." 

 

"Now they are talking about administration, security arrangements, and reconstruction, but without addressing the root cause. This could deepen control over Gaza while pretending to manage it internationally," he further said. 

 

He warned that Gaza could face "a long-term foreign presence disguised as humanitarian governance," one that prioritises stability over justice and containment over freedom.

 

Not all Gazans dismissed the announcement outright. Some acknowledged that after two years of relentless Israeli genocidal war, even deeply flawed initiatives are met with careful consideration.

 

Mohammed Awad, from central Gaza, told TNA that the only positive scenario would be an immediate end to the war. 

 

"If this council actually stops the bloodshed, that would matter, but words alone mean nothing to people who have lost their homes and families," he said. 

 

Awad stressed that any sustainable solution must be Palestinian-led. "Gaza must be governed by a purely Palestinian body, under the Palestinian National Authority," he added. "Otherwise, every party involved will pursue its own interests, not ours."

 

He also expressed concern that the initiative is driven by economic calculations rather than humanitarian urgency. "This project is not just political," Awad said. "It is also commercial, linked to Gaza's gas fields, reconstruction contracts, and future investments."

 

From this perspective, the council appears to many Gazans as less about rebuilding lives and more about reshaping Gaza's economy under foreign supervision.

 

 

 

 

According to reports, several countries, including Argentina, Canada, France, Germany, Australia, Bahrain, Egypt, and Turkey, have received invitations to join the council, although none has formally confirmed participation.

 

Trump has described it as "the most prestigious council ever created."

 

Bloomberg reported that Trump would chair the body himself, retain veto power, and control membership, while states contributing larger sums would receive greater influence.

 

For Western diplomats, the council could evolve into a "mini-UN." For Gazans, the concern is far more fundamental.

 

After months of devastation, displacement, and loss, the central question is not institutional design, but agency.

 

"Who decides our future?" Ashour asked quietly. "Why is it always decided for us, and never by us?"

 

For many Palestinians in Gaza, the "Peace Council" may be new in name, but in substance it echoes a long history of imposed solutions and broken promises—a history they fear is once again being written over their lives, without their consent.   - (ANA) -

 

AB/ANA/21 January 2026 - - -