An Emergency Summit of the Arab League in Cairo resulted in a $53-billion Egyptian plan for Gaza reconstruction that emphasizes local governance and Palestinian unity. The Cairo Declaration outlines the need for a two-state solution, rejects ethnic cleansing, and insists on Israel’s withdrawal. However, the plan’s success depends on Israel’s cooperation, particularly regarding Hamas and settlement policies.
On March 4, 2025, an Emergency Summit of the Arab League convened in Cairo, resulting in a significant $53-billion Egyptian proposal aimed at reconstructing Gaza, regarded as a comprehensive Arab strategy. This meeting occurred shortly after Israel halted humanitarian aid to Gaza, following the conclusion of the first phase of the Israel-Hamas Agreement. The Cairo Declaration serves as the first collective Arab initiative addressing Gaza’s future post-crisis, contingent on the strict application of the ceasefire agreement, particularly by Israel.
Furthermore, the Cairo Declaration draws on previous proposals, particularly the Bahrain Declaration presented at the Arab League Summit in Manama in May 2024. The plan advocates establishing a “Gaza administration committee” consisting of qualified Gazans during a transitional phase, alongside a commitment to fund recovery and reconstruction. It also advocates for United Nations peacekeeping forces in Gaza and the West Bank, echoing suggestions previously supported by Israel until March 2024.
The Declaration emphasizes the necessity of a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, maintaining continuity with the Arab Peace Initiative from 2002. The Arab states reaffirm their acceptance of Israeli sovereignty, conditional upon the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state based on 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, coexisting peacefully alongside Israel. Moreover, there is a pronounced need for Palestinian factions to unify under the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as the legitimate representative of the Palestinian people.
Notably, the Cairo Declaration refrains from directly addressing Hamas, potentially allowing the group to retain its influence during the interim period. The proposed interim administration would serve as a transitional governance body until the Palestinian Authority (PA) is reinstated, with the ultimate goal of political elections. Reactions to this declaration have varied, with Hamas expressing approval, while both Israel and the United States criticized the omission of Hamas in the discussions.
The Cairo Declaration firmly opposes the notion of “ethnic cleansing” of Palestinians and affirms the critical roles of Jordan and Egypt in safeguarding the Palestinian cause against displacement. Additionally, it demands Israel’s complete withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, a crucial criterion for sustaining the ceasefire and initiating long-term recovery efforts. The proposed pathway for peace in Palestine includes halting Israeli military action, developing a reconstruction plan accepted by all stakeholders, and addressing the overarching political questions surrounding Palestinian statehood.
In conclusion, there are now two competing visions for Gaza’s future presented by the Cairo Declaration and Trump’s previous proposals, which seek diverse pathways for both reconstruction and governance. That said, the viability of these plans hinges on Israel’s cooperation, especially regarding the contentious issue of Hamas. The ongoing expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank poses an additional challenge to achieving a functioning two-state solution. Without a genuine shift in policies regarding settlements, the aspirations for peace and governance in Gaza remain precarious.
In summary, the Cairo Declaration represents a pivotal Arab effort to reconstruct Gaza while promoting governance through local representation and emphasizing Palestinian unity. It articulates a distinct vision countering U.S. proposals and seeks to establish conditions conducive to a two-state solution. However, the implementation of this plan faces significant hurdles, notably Israel’s stance on Hamas and settlement expansions, which could undermine the prospects for peace and sustainable governance in the region.
Original Source: indianexpress.com
