The Gaza War, Ten Months In Where Are We? Where Are We Headed?

Key Findings:

An Israeli Perspective

Israel's recent tactical military successes in the targeted killings of key leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah sent a clear message to all hostiles. Despite these operations, the broader strategic situation remains unchanged. The conflict drags on with over 115 Israeli hostages still held in Gaza, displaced Israeli civilians, and ongoing war in both Gaza and the north. Additionally, the death of 12 Druze teenage civilians from Majdal Shams threatens further escalation. The domestic public is still traumatized by recent Hamas attacks, and is somewhat disconnected from the realities of international pressures and the potential consequences of continued escalation — including deeper regional destabilization and international isolation.

2024 presents both significant challenges and potential opportunities. However, these opportunities depend on the willingness of the Israeli government to change course, particularly with respect to negotiating with Palestinian authorities and regional partners. The Israeli government is criticized for its lack of a coherent national strategy, lacking clear objectives or an exit plan from the conflict.

Israel must decide between continuing its current military path, which risks prolonged conflict and regional alienation, or pursuing diplomatic opportunities, contingent on a shift in government policy and leadership. The release of hostages and regional stability are key priorities, but these goals will require a broader and more inclusive approach to peace and governance in the region.

A Palestinian Perspective

The events of October 7 and the ongoing conflict have made it clear that without embracing a new approach, the situation for both Israelis and Palestinians will worsen. A future Israeli government must engage with a reformed Palestinian Authority (PA), enabling it to take security control in Gaza and the West Bank. Key steps include providing financial support, minimizing military activity, and pursuing regional initiatives such as a Saudi-led peace process. These efforts would help marginalize radical groups and empower moderate Palestinian forces.

The Palestinian political system requires major reforms to represent its people more inclusively and effectively. In the short term, a technocratic government should be established, with the long-term goal of holding general elections to create a more accountable and balanced political structure. A major obstacle remains the lack of a unified Palestinian strategy among competing factions. Regional and international actors must support efforts to create this unified approach, as it is critical for achieving long-term stability in both Gaza and the West Bank. Coordinated efforts will foster greater cooperation and contribute to broader regional security and stability.

An Egyptian Perspective

Arab nations, particularly Egypt, are willing to play a security role in Gaza post-war but demand guarantees that Israel will not maintain military freedom of action. This would likely involve U.N.-mandated security mechanisms. A potential security force in Gaza could include personnel vetted by Israel, with training support from Egypt and Jordan. However, both Hamas and Israel’s conditions on security coordination complicate any PA return to Gaza.

The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is dire. Effective humanitarian assistance depends on establishing law and order and improving access. The United Nations should lead these efforts, with a focus on early recovery and reconstruction. Involving the PA in aid distribution could help restore its credibility, but large-scale aid delivery requires secure access routes and international coordination. Rebuilding Gaza requires a unified Palestinian political structure. Any interim governance solution must be linked to elections and broader PA reforms. While Hamas' popularity is waning, the PA's legitimacy also remains low.

Achieving peace requires simultaneous progress on humanitarian, security, and governance fronts. Egypt views active U.S. involvement as critical to orchestrating a viable peace process, with normalization between Israel and Saudi Arabia potentially offering a historic opportunity. However, public opinion in Israel is not currently aligned with a two-state solution, though changes in leadership could shift this perspective. Ultimately, the region faces a critical juncture: either seize the opportunity for peace or risk further violence and instability.

The stakes of inaction are high, with risks of wider regional conflict and continued instability in Gaza and the West Bank.

A Jordanian Perspective

In Jordan, there exists a broad societal consensus advocating for a reduction in relations with Israel, primarily due to widespread dissatisfaction with Israeli policies. This has created a dichotomy within Jordanian society, where the desire to limit relations is counterbalanced by the existential benefits conferred by the treaty. This tension has significantly shaped Jordan's response to the war in Gaza, particularly following the events of October 7. 

The debate surrounding the peace treaty has intensified as Israel's actions increasingly undermine the two-state solution, leading Jordanians to question the treaty's value. In response, Jordan has adopted a more explicit stance, condemning any forced transfer of Palestinians as a violation of international law and declaring such actions as a "red line," which would be regarded as a declaration of war.

While the desire to limit relations with Israel remains strong, the treaty’s role in ensuring regional stability and Jordan’s advocacy for a two-state solution continue to be central to its foreign policy and national security strategy.