The ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip has posed significant challenges in formulating a comprehensive “day after” plan acceptable to various stakeholders, including Israel, the U.S., Arab nations, and Hamas. Central to these negotiations has been the release of 55 hostages held by Hamas, which has stalled due to disagreements over the future of Gaza and the political landscape. A potential solution has emerged from discussions among foreign policy leaders and security experts who propose the involvement of private security contractors (PSCs). These groups, with extensive experience working in the Middle East, could offer stability and an effective framework for rebuilding Gaza, starting with the essential provision of humanitarian aid.
In response to the violence initiated by Hamas’s attack on Israel in October 2023, experts from the Jewish Institute for National Security of America (JINSA) and the Vandenberg Coalition developed a report outlining how management of humanitarian aid could transform the security situation in the region. This strategy builds upon existing initiatives, such as the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), which the U.S. and Israel support for distributing aid. The experts emphasized that while divergent political visions might exist for a future Palestinian state, there is consensus among key actors on the necessity of addressing humanitarian concerns in Gaza. The facts of humanitarian crises create a common ground for progress among parties invested in stabilizing the region.
While the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) recognized the importance of dismantling Hamas following a deadly attack, experts contended that aid distribution needed reform. They believed Hamas had historically utilized humanitarian aid to maintain its power and suppress dissent. Hence, the experts argued that a revamp of this aid system was imperative for genuine change. Furthermore, they concluded that neither the IDF nor American forces were suited for this task due to various legitimacy issues and operational burdens. Thus, they identified PSCs as the most viable option for undertaking this significant humanitarian effort in Gaza.
The discussions surrounding this proposal included briefings for both the Biden and Netanyahu administrations, alongside conversations with Israeli officials about how a PSC framework might function in Gaza. Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Barbero, who previously oversaw U.S. military operations against insurgents in Iraq, also contributed insights on effectively managing PSCs. Some progress on the initiative seemed to stall due to rising tensions between the U.S. and Israel over humanitarian issues, but the groundwork may have influenced later changes in U.S. policy regarding aid distribution efforts in Gaza.
As humanitarian efforts unfolded, the GHF faced challenges with the distribution of aid, resulting in chaotic scenes as desperate Palestinians sought assistance. Reports emerged indicating that Hamas may have exaggerated the turmoil to undermine these efforts, which were designed to alleviate suffering. The GHF has since taken steps to enhance transparency and ensure smooth delivery of aid. Despite assurances that the foundation operates independently and does not receive U.S. government funding, PSCs are intended to secure distribution sites and facilitate aid delivery throughout Gaza.
This proposal’s ambition extends beyond mere humanitarian assistance; the experts advocate for using PSCs to support reconstruction efforts in Gaza as well. Their concept includes a collaborative approach involving Arab nations, who would provide funding and ground personnel, while international PSCs would offer security and expertise. There’s also a vision for a new local Palestinian security force to help foster stability and trust within the community, ultimately aiming to diminish Hamas’s influence. The emphasis is on establishing a more effective civil administration in Gaza that could integrate local leadership and work toward a peaceful existence, thereby addressing long-standing issues and reducing the potential for future conflict.
