Gaza’s New Custodian: The Colonization Returns Under a Humanitarian Flag
By Mohamad Hammoud
How “Israel’s” allies are reframing control as compassion
After nearly a year of bombardment, starvation, and displacement, Gaza now faces what the West calls a “humanitarian transition.” According to Reuters, US and European diplomats are discussing a postwar arrangement that places Gaza under international supervision—supposedly to rebuild, stabilize, and “restore order.” But behind the rhetoric of relief lies a familiar pattern: colonial management dressed as compassion. The plan’s framework envisions a foreign-led administration, backed by Arab states and Western donors, to oversee reconstruction while “Israel” maintains security control.
Critics see this as nothing short of recolonization. The Guardian reported that the same powers that armed and defended “Israel’s” assault are now positioning themselves as saviors. Washington insists that “Israel” cannot reoccupy Gaza, yet, as AP News noted, its security oversight would remain absolute. In practice, that means checkpoints, surveillance, and blockades—just under new management.
The Politics of Control
According to CNN, US officials describe the plan as a “temporary international presence” aimed at transitioning Gaza toward Palestinian self-rule. Yet such language echoes past experiments that prolonged dependency rather than sovereignty. The 1994 Oslo framework promised statehood but left Palestinians confined under layers of occupation and bureaucracy. Today’s “humanitarian mission” risks becoming Oslo 2.0—an indefinite holding pattern under foreign trusteeship.
The Wrong Man for the Job
The choice of Tony Blair as a potential coordinator has fueled deep unease. The former British prime minister, who served as envoy for the so-called Quartet on the Middle East, is viewed by many activists as emblematic of Western hypocrisy. According to Al Jazeera, Palestinian leaders remember his tenure as one of speeches without results, where economic workshops replaced genuine diplomacy. Blair’s record during the Iraq War—built on false claims of weapons of mass destruction—still haunts his credibility, symbolizing interventionism cloaked in moral rhetoric.
Moreover, The Guardian noted Blair’s long-standing alignment with “Israel’s” positions, including his public defense of its 2014 assault on Gaza. Human rights groups argue that appointing him signals continuity, not change—a custodian of the same failed policies that deepened Palestinian despair. “You cannot rebuild Gaza with the same man who helped destroy Iraq,” one London activist told CNN. In this light, Blair’s appointment appears less like a step toward peace and more like an effort to sanitize the old colonial playbook.
A Managed Future
The proposed plan divides Gaza’s reconstruction into “security zones” and “civil clusters,” overseen by international agencies and private contractors. According to The New York Times, these zones would prioritize industrial projects, foreign investment, and “community stabilization,” terms that often mean pacification through dependency. Palestinian officials warn that without absolute sovereignty, Gaza will remain a fenced labor reserve—its people managed rather than empowered.
Meanwhile, “Israel” is already shaping the geography of the new order. Satellite imagery reviewed by AP News shows bulldozed neighborhoods near Khan Younis and Rafah being cleared for “security corridors.” A European diplomat told Reuters that these corridors will ensure “Israel’s freedom of movement” inside Gaza long after the war ends. Under the guise of reconstruction, the land itself is being redesigned to prevent Palestinian resistance.
From Aid to Authority
The humanitarian-industrial complex has learned to operate within war. Billions in aid flow through Western and Gulf donors, but as CNN reported, much of it is tied to conditions that favor political compliance. NGOs that challenge “Israel’s” blockade risk losing funding, while contractors aligned with Western firms gain reconstruction deals. The result is a form of outsourced occupation—power without accountability.
The same narrative—“helping Gaza stand on its feet”—was used after 2014, when donors pledged $5.4 billion. Yet most projects stalled under “Israel’s” restrictions. According to The Guardian, materials were withheld, crossings remained closed, and the Gaza economy collapsed again. This time, Western officials promise “efficiency,” but efficiency without justice only reinforces control.
Colonization Repackaged
In the end, Gaza’s so-called humanitarian transition looks less like liberation and more like the return of colonial trusteeship. A region destroyed by bombs will be rebuilt by the very powers that supplied them, while Palestinians watch foreign experts debate their future in conference halls. As one Gazan doctor told Reuters, “They kill us in the name of security, and now they will manage us in the name of humanity.”
If “Israel” remains the gatekeeper and Tony Blair the mediator, then the cycle of dependency will continue—wrapped in new language but driven by the same logic: control disguised as care. What Gaza needs is not another custodian but the right to rebuild itself, free from those who confuse domination with duty.
