The news released by Western media outlets in recent days shows a new plan for the Gaza Strip: a map that, in the absence of any national legitimacy and under the leadership of the U.S., seeks to establish a temporary government to pave the way for the complete disarmament of the region.

In the proposed structure, an American figure will be at the top, and Palestinian technocrats will merely play the roles of local tools. The scheme has been designed solely to weaken the Resistance groups entirely, sidelining Hamas and bypassing the Palestinian Authority.

According to the released data, the temporary government will continue to govern until the Gaza Strip becomes a fully civilian region and the conditions for the establishment of a "viable" Palestinian government are met. The use of such a term, which may seem hopeful on the surface but is quite vague in reality, clearly indicates that the American scheme is not based on supporting the Palestinian nation, but rather on ensuring the security of Israel.

Simultaneously, the plan to create safe corridors and ensure humanitarian aid through a controlled mechanism is being finalized as a complement to this project. Under pressure from mediators and on the brink of the U.S. President’s visit to the region, the debate over how aid should enter and be distributed has become a strategic issue, especially with the open opposition to delegating this responsibility to the Israeli regime. The effort to transfer the management of humanitarian aid to the U.S. itself reveals another layer of the future engineering of Gaza, flavored with foreign influence.

In this context, two regional countries appear to be playing the role of mediators, issuing statements in coordination with the U.S. that emphasize the need to end the humanitarian crisis. However, what is missing is the attention to the root causes of the crisis and the recognition of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination. Disarmament and the isolation of resistance forces, without providing any clear political horizon for the Palestinians, will only lead to the continuation of domination, humiliation, and structural violence.

Recent diplomatic movements, including the U.S. President's visit to the region, which has been accompanied by extensive media groundwork, and efforts to reach an agreement in light of this visit, along with the Israeli regime's officials’ statements on the importance of this opportunity, all point to a kind of "security project" for Gaza. This project fundamentally differs from genuine security, as in it, security is not achieved through justice and adherence to human principles, but through the elimination of resistance and the stabilization of imposed structures.

The field reality shows that despite the heavy human toll, Gaza still stands and rejects solutions that resemble foreign guardianship. Over 52,000 martyrs, mostly civilians and often children and women, are the direct result of Israel’s invasion under the pretext of the October 7 attacks. This level of violence and destruction itself indicates that solutions based on the elimination of the resistance force will only lead to the reproduction of the crisis and subsequent explosions.

Any new structure in Gaza, if it lacks national backing and the will of the Palestinian people, will, at best, be a temporary and failed project. Regional security will also not be achieved by dependency on Israel, as sustainable security can only arise from justice, popular participation, and the end of occupation, not from continued foreign interventions and a regime that has always been a major source of instability.