Arab League representatives gathered in Cairo to discuss an Egyptian-led reconstruction plan for Gaza, but regional divisions and a lack of security provisions complicate the plan’s prospects
President Donald Trump caused an uproar across the Arab world last month when he proposed relocating the 2 million residents of Gaza and the US taking control of the enclave in order to rebuild. Largely in response to President Trump’s proposal, Arab League representatives gathered in Cairo this week to discuss an Egyptian proposal for a $53 billion reconstruction plan for Gaza.
The Egyptian initiative, which has gained widespread regional support, is the only structured plan for Gaza’s future proposed so far, but the plan lacks provisions for security and long-term governance. Israel and the US have rejected the plan, and there are diverging interests among Arab states, making experts skeptical about the plan’s feasibility.
Unlike President Trump’s plan, the Egyptian plan proposes allowing Palestinians to remain in Gaza during a five-year phased approach to reconstructing Gaza, with a focus on rebuilding infrastructure, housing, and essential services. The proposal would have governance be handed to an independent administrative body under the Palestinian Authority (PA), excluding Hamas from any future leadership role. However, the plan lacks a clear mechanism for Hamas’ transition out of power, a concern that remains central to international discussions.
“The Egyptian plan is realistic because it prioritizes stability and immediate reconstruction,” Egyptian journalist Mohamed Gamal told The Media Line. “This is not just about rebuilding homes—it’s about rebuilding hope and ensuring that Gaza is livable again. Hamas must step aside for a proper governing body to take over, and the PA, with the right support, can provide that leadership.”
Gamal noted that the plan “does not go into specifics about Hamas’ transition” and said that diplomatic efforts would be needed to work out the details of Hamas’ withdrawal.
This plan is a starting point, not a final solution. It needs refining, it needs support, and it needs international backing. But at least it’s a plan—because right now, there is no alternative.
“This plan is a starting point, not a final solution,” he acknowledged. “It needs refining, it needs support, and it needs international backing. But at least it’s a plan—because right now, there is no alternative.”
Michael Milshtein, head of the Palestinian Studies Forum at the Moshe Dayan Center for Middle Eastern and African Studies, was more critical of the plan. “If you read the full document, you’ll see that 90% of it is focused on financial aspects—money, money, and more money. The strategic dimension is very shallow,” he told The Media Line. “There is no real discussion on how Hamas will be dismantled or how long-term security arrangements will be implemented.”
At the Cairo summit, PA President Mahmoud Abbas announced plans for elections in the Palestinian territories and said he was ready to reconcile with members of his Fatah party. If elections happen next year, as Abbas proposed, they will be the first elections in the PA since Abbas’ election in 2006, and they may provide the PA with the legitimacy it needs to take over as the ruling body in Gaza.
Milshtein dismissed Abbas’ commitments as empty words. “Many Palestinian officials privately admit that his announcement was a result of Egyptian pressure rather than a genuine step toward change,” he said.
Israel and the United States have firmly rejected the Egyptian proposal, citing its lack of security guarantees and its failure to address Hamas’ military capabilities. Washington made it clear that its position is closely aligned with Israel’s, meaning the US will not back any initiative that does not include the complete demilitarization of Gaza.
Even as Steven Turner, an American geopolitical analyst, dismissed President Trump’s plan as “outlandish,” impractical, and unethical, he also noted that the Egyptian plan also has serious gaps.
The Arab plan doesn’t address demilitarization at all. It talks about rebuilding, but without security measures in place, Israel and the US will never accept it.
“The Arab plan doesn’t address demilitarization at all,” Turner told The Media Line. “It talks about rebuilding, but without security measures in place, Israel and the US will never accept it.”
Milshtein expressed a similar concern. “Israel does not have a counterproposal at the moment, and that’s a major problem. But the Arab plan, as it stands, does not provide the security assurances that Israel requires,” he said.
If European countries get behind the Egyptian initiative, Israel “will find itself in a difficult position,” Milshtein added.
While the Arab League has officially endorsed the Egyptian plan, key regional players remain divided on its implementation. Notably, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and United Arab Emirates President Mohamed bin Zayed were absent from the Cairo summit, signaling dissatisfaction with Egypt’s approach.
Milshtein characterized both leaders as “very upset with the initiative.” “They don’t see it as strategic enough and are looking for ways to refine it, possibly by involving American businesses in the reconstruction process,” he said. “They want a long-term vision, not just an emergency financial package.”
NEXT FROM
Top Stories
Meanwhile, Jordan and Egypt remain deeply concerned about potential displacement from Gaza into their territories, which some see as a factor influencing their support for the plan.
“Jordan and Egypt have been pressured nonstop to take in Palestinian refugees, but neither country will allow that,” an Arab representative at the summit said. “This is why they are pushing for an initiative that guarantees Palestinians remain in Gaza.”
Saudi Arabia, which is negotiating potential normalization with Israel, is also treading carefully. “The Saudis want normalization with Israel, and Israel wants normalization with Saudi Arabia. Riyadh could use its influence to pressure both sides into accepting a compromise, but they are in no rush,” Turner said. “They benefit from strategic cooperation with Israel behind the scenes, and they won’t jeopardize that for an unfinished plan.”
Despite diplomatic efforts, the Cairo summit concluded without any significant breakthroughs. The Egyptian plan remains the only structured proposal, but its limitations—along with Israeli and American resistance and disparate Arab positions—suggest that a long-term resolution for Gaza is still distant.
Most likely, we’ll return to the same tense, unsustainable status quo, with Hamas still strong as an ideology and Israel countering it with military operations.
Turner said that a breakthrough is unlikely to come anytime soon. “Most likely, we’ll return to the same tense, unsustainable status quo, with Hamas still strong as an ideology and Israel countering it with military operations,” he said.
As the dust settles on the Cairo meetings, Gaza’s future remains in limbo. With no consensus on governance, security, or funding, the region faces a critical moment that will determine whether rebuilding efforts move forward or if the conflict again spirals out of control.
For now, the situation remains fragile. As Milshtein put it, “One spark, and the whole region could be on fire again.”