London, United Kingdom –
In a statement reflecting growing European concern about the future of the Gaza Strip, European Commission Vice-President Elaine Marks strongly condemned a potential Israeli plan to impose long-term military or civilian control over the Strip after the end of military operations. This statement reflects a tough European stance against any scenario that does not pave the way for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state and increases international pressure on Israel to present a clear vision for the future of Gaza consistent with international law.
Ms. Marks emphasized that the European Union will not support any plan that violates the principle of a two-state solution or leads to the reoccupation of Gaza, believing that the only sustainable solution lies in the transfer of control to a unified and legitimate Palestinian Authority. This position comes amid intense international discussions about the “day after” in Gaza, where visions differ among the parties involved, with Israel adhering to a security plan that excludes any authority it considers hostile. 1. The European Position: A Decisive Rejection of Israeli Control
The Vice-President of the European Commission made it clear that any Israeli plan aimed at imposing direct or indirect control over Gaza is rejected by the European Union. She said in a press conference, “Occupation cannot be a solution. The return of Israeli control in any form to Gaza would be a grave mistake and would only perpetuate the cycle of violence and instability. The Palestinian people deserve their dignity and their right to self-determination, and this will not be achieved under any form of occupation.”
Marx emphasized that the European Union fully and absolutely supports the establishment of an independent and united Palestinian state, considering Gaza an integral part of any future Palestinian state. She added that the European Commission will work, in cooperation with the United Nations and regional partners, such as Egypt and Jordan, to find a political solution that guarantees Israeli and Palestinian security within the framework of a two-state solution. This tough European position is believed to come after growing frustration with the lack of a clear Israeli vision for the future of Gaza, and its focus solely on security aspects without providing a sustainable political solution. 2. Details of the Potential Israeli Plan
The European Commission’s statements come in response to media reports and leaks from within the Israeli government indicating the existence of potential post-war plans. According to these reports, the Israeli plan may include several key provisions:
* Buffer zone: Establishing a security buffer zone inside the Gaza Strip along the Israeli border, with the aim of preventing any future security threats.
* Freedom of military operations: Reserving the right to conduct military operations inside Gaza whenever Israel deems necessary, without time or sovereignty restrictions.
* Local civil administration: The plan seeks to establish a civil administration composed of “non-hostile” local Palestinian figures, but operating under effective Israeli security supervision.
* Disarmament: Imposing complete demilitarization in the Strip, preventing any unofficial entity from possessing weapons.
These points have been widely rejected by the international community, which views them as an attempt to impose a new occupation under a civilian guise and strip Palestinians of their sovereignty over their land. Critics assert that this plan offers no political horizon and aims to manage the conflict rather than resolve it. 3. Implications of the European and International Positions
The European Commission’s position represents significant political pressure on the Israeli government, which relies heavily on diplomatic support from Western countries. This condemnation demonstrates the growing gap between Israel and the European Union on how to deal with the crisis. The Europeans believe that any future solution must be primarily political, while the Israeli side focuses on security aspects.
* The American position: Although the United States is considered a strategic ally of Israel, it has repeatedly emphasized its opposition to any reoccupation of Gaza and called for the “activation” of the Palestinian Authority’s role in governing the Strip.
* The Arab position: Arab countries, especially Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, categorically oppose any scenarios that lead to the displacement of Palestinians or the occupation of Gaza and support a political plan leading to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.
* Impact on aid: The European position could affect future aid packages for the reconstruction of Gaza, as European countries may refuse to participate in funding any project that does not serve their political vision for the future. 4. Conclusion and Future Prospects
The European Commission Vice-President’s statements demonstrate that the future of Gaza has become a focus of broad international concern, transcending security and military operations. It has become clear that the international community, represented by the European Union, rejects any unilateral or purely military solutions that are inconsistent with international law.
The challenges remain significant, as achieving a shared vision for Gaza’s future requires concerted international and local efforts. As the humanitarian crisis in the Strip continues, pressure is mounting on all parties to move toward a political solution that ends the conflict, guarantees the rights and dignity of both peoples, and opens the door to sustainable peace. The European diplomatic escalation is a clear signal that the “day after” in Gaza will not be an internal Israeli matter, but a major international issue.
