A newly passed United Nations Security Council resolution linking Gaza’s reconstruction and humanitarian relief to political and security conditions has triggered deep frustration, suspicion and anger among Palestinians. After more than two years of relentless bombardment, siege, destruction and near-total collapse of essential infrastructure, many residents expected international institutions to prioritize humanitarian support above all else. Instead, the new resolution’s provisions have intensified fears that political agendas are once again overshadowing immediate survival needs, delaying life-saving assistance and undermining Palestinian agency at a moment of unprecedented humanitarian crisis.
Growing mistrust as Palestinians say humanitarian needs are sidelined for political objectives
Inside Gaza, reactions to the resolution are marked by distress, disappointment and resentment. The population, devastated by years of airstrikes, infrastructure collapse and isolation, had hoped that any UN intervention would focus squarely on relief, reconstruction and civilian protection. Instead, resolution 2803 has left many with the impression that their suffering has been minimized while political conditions and security frameworks have been elevated above urgent humanitarian requirements.
One of the most controversial elements of the resolution is the creation of an internationally led “transnational governing body” and the deployment of an international military force mandated to oversee the “demilitarization” of Gaza. The force is authorized to use “all necessary measures” to implement its mandate, wording many Palestinians view as dangerously vague and potentially destabilizing. Most troubling to residents is that the resolution effectively links reconstruction and humanitarian expansion to political conditions, meaning aid may be withheld or delayed until demilitarization benchmarks are met.
In a region where food, medical supplies, clean water, electricity and safe shelter are scarce, such conditionality feels not only impractical but fundamentally unjust. Families displaced by two years of devastating conflict continue to live in damaged schools, makeshift camps, ruined apartment blocks and tents made from plastic sheeting. Months-long power outages, severe water shortages and limited humanitarian access have pushed communities to the brink, with medical facilities overwhelmed and infectious diseases rising.
Satellite surveys conducted by UN agencies show that over 81 percent of Gaza’s infrastructure has been destroyed or severely damaged. More than two hundred thousand structures—including homes, hospitals, schools, water facilities, commercial buildings and roads—have been flattened or rendered unsafe. These conditions have left entire towns uninhabitable and forced families to endure hunger, fear and illness with little expectation of immediate relief.
Residents like Abu Malik Jarzawi argue that the Security Council’s focus is fundamentally misplaced. Jarzawi believes the Council should have prioritized reconstruction, medical infrastructure and rapid humanitarian expansion rather than tying aid to political conditions Palestinians had no role in negotiating. He describes the resolution as “deeply disappointing” and accuses the international community of committing a moral injustice by attaching political conditions to life-saving relief at a time when millions are fighting to meet basic needs.
This disconnect between on-the-ground realities and the resolution’s priorities has intensified Palestinian fears that humanitarian assistance will now be weaponized as leverage. If reconstruction depends on meeting political thresholds, many worry that rebuilding Gaza could be postponed for years. Such delays could exacerbate an already catastrophic situation, leaving families trapped in ruins with no clear path to recovery.
Outside Gaza, displaced Palestinians also express profound insecurity. More than one hundred thousand Palestinians have been stranded abroad since the Rafah crossing closed in May 2024, with no guaranteed route back. Many fear that decisions about Gaza’s future made in their absence could undermine their land rights or restrict their eventual return.
Distrust deepened further after the announcement of a twenty-point United States–Israel plan in September 2025, which was drafted without Palestinian participation. Human rights groups argue that the plan ignores Palestinian collective rights, public opinion and long-standing historical claims. Many Palestinians believe the international system remains unwilling to include them in decisions that shape their future, reinforcing the perception that their political and human agency is consistently marginalized.
Displaced residents like Nermeen Basil emphasize that any meaningful peace process must center those whose lives will be most affected. Basil insists that lasting solutions require justice, protection of rights and concrete steps toward ending the occupation. Without these foundations, she argues, no governance plan or reconstruction roadmap can be legitimate or sustainable.
Fears over international military deployment and concerns about renewed instability
Beyond humanitarian concerns, Palestinians in Gaza express serious fears about the proposed international military force. Under the resolution, this force is granted sweeping powers to enforce demilitarization, maintain security and deploy necessary measures. For many Gazans, this signals the possibility of further confrontation, not stability.
Residents like Abu Malik Jarzawi argue that any external military force—regardless of its stated purpose—may struggle to understand or navigate Gaza’s complex social and political landscape. Jarzawi fears that the presence of such a force could trigger clashes with local armed groups, disrupt daily life or impose new restrictions on civilians. Given Gaza’s dense population and ongoing trauma, even minor missteps could produce catastrophic consequences.
Armed factions, including Hamas, have rejected the proposal, asserting that disarmament cannot be imposed externally and must instead be part of a political process tied to ending occupation and establishing a sovereign Palestinian state. They characterize resistance as a response to ongoing occupation, arguing that demilitarization cannot precede political rights or resolution of core grievances. This position raises concerns that the presence of an international force could intensify tensions rather than reduce them.
For many civilians, the possibility of new armed confrontations adds to an already overwhelming burden of fear. Gazans recall earlier periods when international missions were present but failed to prevent violence or protect civilians. As a result, there is widespread skepticism that a new military force could succeed where others have not. Many fear that the force’s priorities—focused on security and enforcement—will overshadow the humanitarian desperation that has reached unprecedented levels.
Another concern is that the resolution distances Palestinians from decision-making about their own governance. With international bodies now discussing security, administrative structures and reconstruction strategies largely without input from local communities, many Gazans feel increasingly alienated from the process. They believe their voices and rights are being overshadowed by geopolitical interests and external political agendas.
Ordinary Palestinians insist that any framework for Gaza’s future must place them—not international committees or foreign militaries—at its center. They argue that relief, human dignity, safety and empowerment must form the basis of reconstruction. As long as humanitarian needs remain subordinate to political conditions, Gazans fear that recovery will be both delayed and incomplete.
The people of Gaza continue to emphasize that humanitarian support cannot be contingent on political compliance or imposed security frameworks. They call for immediate access to resources that can alleviate hunger, rebuild homes, restore hospitals and provide safe environments for children. Without these foundations, any political proposal—no matter how detailed—will fail to meaningfully address the real crisis faced by millions of Palestinians.
