What would the post-war look like for the Gaza Strip?

JERUSALEM — As the war in Gaza continues, there is increasing talk of some 'day after' formula for the fractured territory. But that notion is fleeting — there will be no clear line between war and peace in Gaza, even if some kind of negotiated agreement is reached.

Israel has made clear that it will not outsource security along its southern border to anyone else, and Israeli military officials say their forces will long move in and out of Gaza based on intelligence, even after troops are eventually withdrawn.

“You have to abandon the whole 'day after' concept,” said Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. official at the Carnegie Endowment in Washington. “It is misleading and dangerous,” he said, because there will be no clear dividing line “between the end of Israeli military operations and relative stability that allows people to focus on reconstruction.”

There is a growing belief that any sustainable agreement would require a regional agreement involving countries such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and Qatar.

Inevitably, such an agreement would have to be led by the United States, Israel's most trusted ally. Most officials and analysts assume it would require new governments in both Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which partially governs the West Bank, but is considered outdated and corrupt, an indication of the long road ahead.

The release of all hostages, including soldiers, would require the controversial release of thousands of Palestinian prisoners.

There is also the question about Hamas leaders: Will they go into exile as part of a deal?

While Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel supports a hostage deal, he opposes President Joseph R. Biden Jr.'s broader concept: Biden has said he would like to see a “revitalized Palestinian Authority” govern Gaza as a stage toward a “two-state solution”—an independent, largely demilitarized Palestine, alongside Israel and committed to lasting peace.

Netanyahu portrays himself as the only person who can stop the Americans from imposing a Palestinian state on a traumatized Israel or significant restrictions on Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank. But the Americans believe they can have significant influence over Israel moving forward. Saudi Arabia, the key regional player, has indicated that it wants to continue a path toward normalization with Israel in exchange for American security guarantees against Iran.

But Saudi Arabia has also said that normalization depends on creating an “irrevocable” path to a Palestinian state, which Netanyahu rejects.

Netanyahu's vision of a future Gaza is unclear. He continues to insist that Hamas will be “destroyed” and all hostages will be released. But those goals appear more contradictory as the Israeli military operation in Gaza slowly progresses and casualties on both sides mount, creating more domestic and international pressure on it.

He has declared what he does not want: for Hamas to survive militarily and politically in Gaza; that the Palestinian Authority be given control over Gaza; no foreign peacekeeping forces; and an independent Palestinian state. He has denied wanting to reoccupy Gaza, but insists that Israel retain security control not only over Gaza, but also over the West Bank.

The Palestinians themselves are not prepared. “There is a complete disconnect between the international community's call for a two-state solution and the willingness of Israelis and Palestinians to contemplate it now” as a way to end the conflict, said Martin S. Indyk, former U.S. Ambassador to the United States. Israel.

Ultimately, there is a long way to go to a true “day after” and many ways for the best-laid plans to fail. Chief among them may be if war breaks out between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, which could make the destruction in Gaza seem like merely prologue.

By: STEVEN ERLANGER