The post-war struggle for Gaza: Who will govern the strip?

Following the destructive war in Gaza, the main debate has focused not on a ceasefire or reconstruction, but on the question of who will govern the region.

According to a report by The Cradle portal, the post-war struggle is centered around legitimacy, sovereignty, and the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination.

The report noted that past “reconstruction” and “aid” processes were used to suppress the Palestinian people’s quest for sovereignty, with justice being replaced by external impositions under the guise of “political realism.”

‘This is an existential struggle’

Ayman Shanana, a senior Hamas official, told The Cradle that the outcome of the war cannot be measured by the standards of a conventional conflict.

“This is an existential struggle for a people seeking freedom against a Western-backed occupation,” Shanana said.

Stating that Israel has failed to achieve its declared objectives, Shanana expressed that Hamas remaining on the political scene after nearly two years of war is a “strategic victory.”

Haytham Abu al-Ghazlan, an official from Islamic Jihad, voiced a similar opinion.

“The resistance is now more entrenched than ever,” Abu al-Ghazlan stated, adding that the real victory is “the Zionist project’s failure to displace Palestinians and break the will of the resistance.”

Shanana emphasized that the resistance has now become “a fundamental actor that cannot be ignored in any discussion about the future of Gaza.”

Is reconstruction a tool for political pressure?

The Cradle reported that international plans for Gaza’s governance, such as a technocratic government or an interim administration, are new forms of old guardianship mechanisms.

Abu al-Ghazlan stressed that any future arrangement “must be the result of a comprehensive Palestinian national dialogue, not foreign agreements or international tutelage.”

Stating that reconstruction cannot be a subject of political bargaining, Abu al-Ghazlan said it should not be linked to the disarmament of the resistance.

‘The weapons of the resistance are a red line’

Hamas and Islamic Jihad officials categorically reject any plan for the disarmament of the resistance. “As long as the occupation continues, the weapons of the resistance are a red line,” Shanana said, adding that Hamas is not opposed to a civil administration but will not compromise on its security structure.

“All peace initiatives that weakened the resistance through disarmament processes have resulted in more aggression and settlement expansion,” warned Abu al-Ghazlan. Both officials emphasized that sovereignty, especially in the security domain, is non-negotiable.

Three possible scenarios

The report evaluates three scenarios for the future of Gaza:

Resistance-led administration (60% probability): According to the most likely scenario, Hamas will re-establish its de facto control upon the withdrawal of the Israeli army. Shanana confirmed the situation on the ground, saying, “About 70% of the strip is under the control of Palestinian security forces loyal to Hamas.” This scenario envisions a hybrid period where resistance authority and a temporary civil administration are intertwined.

A return to the pre-2005 situation (25% probability): This model, preferred by the US and some regional actors, involves tripartite security coordination between Israel, the Palestinian Authority, and a US-led supervisory body. However, The Cradle notes that this plan is a “Western fantasy” because Hamas will not relinquish its presence and the Palestinian Authority has lost its credibility among the people.

Engineered chaos (15% probability): This scenario, reportedly preferred by Israel, anticipates the outbreak of internal conflicts among Palestinian factions if the ceasefire collapses. It is stated that this situation would wear down the resistance and prevent a unified administration.

Internal political crisis in Israel

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has failed in his goal of eliminating Hamas and is facing growing internal opposition.

Shanana described the Netanyahu government as “a fascist and extremist administration that has lost its legitimacy even within its own society.”

The report noted that Israel’s war objectives have evolved from “eliminating Hamas to sustaining failure,” which points to a strategic lack of direction.

Shanana concluded his words as follows:

“There is no authority above the resistance, and there is no reconstruction without sovereignty. Legitimacy is not granted by donors or imposed by external frameworks; it is forged in fire and won from the ruins.”