Recovery has become a contest over political control.
Brussels | July 2026
Jared Kushner presented European and Arab ministers with a new United States proposal for rebuilding Gaza that would reduce reliance on the humanitarian model traditionally led by United Nations agencies. Speaking by videoconference during a closed meeting in Brussels, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law argued that previous aid mechanisms had managed repeated emergencies without transforming the political and security conditions behind them. Although Kushner holds no formal cabinet position, his proximity to Trump and his relationships with Israeli and regional officials give him influence over Washington’s emerging strategy.
The proposal places the disarmament of Hamas at the center of reconstruction. According to the American position, donors should not finance housing, roads, hospitals and public services while armed groups retain the capacity to divert materials or rebuild military infrastructure. The principle addresses a concern shared by several governments, but it creates an immediate dilemma because Gaza’s population requires shelter, healthcare, water and sanitation before a comprehensive political settlement is reached.
Kushner also called for greater participation from Arab states with experience in infrastructure development, including Egypt, Turkey and Gulf countries. Under this model, Washington could provide political direction, Arab partners could contribute capital and engineering capacity, and Europe could remain an important source of development financing. Such an arrangement would weaken the central role previously played by UN agencies and introduce a more fragmented system of international management.
European governments have responded cautiously. The European Union is preparing hundreds of millions of euros for early recovery, including rubble removal and the restoration of essential services, but several member states continue to support a strong role for the United Nations. Brussels also wants clear oversight of how European public money is administered and appears unwilling to place its contributions under mechanisms controlled primarily by Trump’s political network.
The disagreement goes beyond administrative procedure. Whoever manages reconstruction will influence which Palestinian institutions receive recognition, which foreign companies obtain contracts and which governments shape Gaza’s economic future. A reconstruction plan can restore daily life, but it can also create new dependencies and political structures without sufficient participation from the people expected to live under them.
Israel’s continued control over access routes and the entry of construction materials adds another unresolved layer. Donors may announce large financial commitments, but rebuilding cannot proceed at scale if borders remain restricted, military operations continue or new infrastructure risks being destroyed during another escalation. Temporary housing projects may offer immediate relief, although humanitarian organizations warn that provisional settlements can become permanent spaces of displacement when political solutions fail.
The estimated cost of rebuilding Gaza reaches tens of billions of dollars, far exceeding the funds currently available. Yet money alone will not resolve the central questions surrounding governance, security and legitimacy. No reconstruction program can become sustainable without a Palestinian authority capable of administering services, earning public confidence and negotiating credible arrangements with Israel and international partners.
The American proposal seeks to replace indefinite humanitarian management with a broader political transformation. Its weakness is that the transformation has not yet been agreed upon by Hamas, Israel, Palestinian institutions, Arab governments or the European Union. Gaza could therefore become the object of several competing plans, each supported by different donors and security conditions.
Kushner’s intervention reveals that the struggle over postwar Gaza has already begun. The debate is no longer limited to how much money will be required, but who will control it and what political order will emerge from the ruins. Palestinians risk being treated again as recipients of decisions designed in Washington, Brussels and regional capitals rather than as participants in determining their own future.
Reconstruir Gaza también significa decidir quién controlará su futuro. / Rebuilding Gaza also means deciding who will control its future.