In the aftermath of a devastating war in the Gaza Strip, international efforts to chart a path toward peace and reconstruction have become a battleground of their own, pitting competing visions, political legacies, and regional interests against one another. The appointment of former British Prime Minister Tony Blair as a potential head of a transitional authority for Gaza has sparked fierce debate, with Arab states, European powers, and the United States each wrestling with the implications for Palestinian self-rule and the future of the region.
On October 25, 2025, as reported by The New Arab, a proposal backed by Washington surfaced to install Blair at the helm of the Gaza International Transitional Authority (GITA)—a body envisioned to oversee Gaza’s reconstruction and governance until the Palestinian Authority (PA) is deemed “reformed and ready” to assume full control. Blair’s decades-long involvement in Middle East diplomacy, including his stint as envoy for the Quartet, made him a familiar face to Western policymakers. The hope, at least from the U.S. perspective, was that an internationally recognized figure could lend credibility to the daunting task of rebuilding Gaza and managing its transition.
But the plan immediately ran into a wall of resistance from key Arab and Muslim-majority states. Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Qatar, and Turkey, consulting through an Arab-Islamic mechanism, voiced strong objections. Their criticisms were not limited to Blair’s controversial legacy—particularly his association with the 2003 Iraq invasion, a source of deep mistrust in the Arab world—but extended to the very structure of the proposed GITA. Many saw it as an externally imposed solution, one that risked sidelining Palestinian voices and undermining the legitimacy of the PA.
"If you establish this formula… people will target Blair and say ‘he’s British, he’s acting as a colonial power’," an Arab official told The New Arab, capturing the prevailing sentiment that Blair’s leadership would symbolize foreign interference rather than partnership. Egypt, for its part, insisted that any post-war arrangement must preserve full Palestinian sovereignty over Gaza and maintain unity with the West Bank—a vision fundamentally at odds with a transitional authority that, at least initially, treats Gaza as a separate entity under international oversight.
These divisions are not merely theoretical. The United States has made it clear that regional buy-in is essential: Arab states are expected not only to provide funding but also to contribute troops to an international stabilization force in Gaza. Without their commitment, the entire transitional mechanism risks being perceived as a Washington–Tel Aviv project, lacking the local legitimacy needed for success. As The New Arab notes, the coming weeks will be critical for building consensus among regional players. Should Arab states remain cool or hostile to Blair’s leadership, the transitional regime could face paralysis, with dire consequences for reconstruction, security reform, and institution-building.
Meanwhile, the humanitarian crisis in Gaza remains acute. Since the ceasefire on October 10, 2025, the UN migration agency IOM has dispatched over 47,000 relief items, including 2,500 tents, to families struggling to survive amid the devastation, according to the UN News Service. An estimated 90 percent of Gaza’s population is displaced, with at least 1.5 million people urgently requiring emergency shelter assistance. "People in Gaza have endured unimaginable loss," said IOM Director General Amy Pope. "Shelter isn’t a luxury; it allows families to rest, to stay warm, and to begin rebuilding their lives. Every person deserves to live in safety and dignity, and humanitarian aid must reach everyone, everywhere."
The scale of need is staggering. Many residents are returning to find their homes reduced to rubble, and the recovery "cannot begin without safe housing," Pope warned. Despite the ceasefire, aid delivery has been hampered by customs delays, insecurity, and limited access through border crossings. The IOM has pre-positioned millions of relief items in nearby Jordan, ready for rapid deployment once access improves. On October 22, 2025, 127 UN-coordinated trucks delivered food, tents, medical supplies, and fuel into Gaza via the two operational crossings, Kerem Shalom and Kissufim. The UN and its partners are distributing over one million hot meals daily, with six UN-supported bakeries resuming bread production and more than 150 nutrition sites now operating across the Strip. Water and sanitation support has expanded, including hundreds of thousands of diapers, jerry cans, hygiene kits, and the installation of 140 new water tanks.
Yet, as UN Deputy Spokesperson Farhan Haq emphasized, "more can and must be done." He urged Israel to open additional crossings, especially to the north, and to facilitate access for NGOs. "We need full, safe and unrestricted humanitarian access. The needs are immense – and they are growing by the day."
Against this backdrop, Europe’s role in the Israel-Palestine conflict has come under renewed scrutiny. On September 22, 2025, France recognized the state of Palestine, following similar moves by the UK and Portugal the previous day, as reported by Fair Observer. While these gestures reaffirmed a commitment to a two-state solution, they also highlighted Europe’s limited influence. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the recognition as "disgraceful" and "sheer madness." The lack of unity among European states—France and the UK pushing for recognition, while Germany and Italy adopted more cautious stances—left Europe without a coherent voice in the peace process.
Germany’s own actions illustrated the continent’s ambivalence. In August 2025, Berlin suspended weapons shipments to Israel for use in Gaza after Israel’s Security Cabinet approved the takeover of Gaza City, but continued to approve shipments of military goods (excluding weapons) worth $2.9 million between September 13 and September 22, 2025. Italy’s Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni voiced support for a two-state solution, but only after the release of Israeli hostages and the removal of Hamas from government. Protests and strikes across Italy in 2025 underscored the domestic pressures facing European leaders.
Spain and Ireland took more confrontational approaches: Spain imposed an arms embargo on Israel and increased humanitarian aid for Gaza, while Ireland banned trade with Israeli-occupied territories—though the latter measure was scaled back amid business opposition. Yet, these actions, while symbolically significant, did little to alter the balance of power in the region. As Fair Observer noted, Europe’s failure to present a united front or leverage its partnerships with Arab states left it largely sidelined as the United States moved decisively.
Indeed, U.S. President Donald Trump seized the initiative. In late September 2025, he met with leaders from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the UAE, Egypt, Jordan, Turkey, Indonesia, and Pakistan to discuss his peace plan. On September 29, Trump announced a 20-point plan, and just over a week later, Israel and Hamas signed the ceasefire deal that began its first phase. European efforts to propose an alternative Euro-Arab plan for post-war Gaza were ultimately set aside in favor of the U.S.-brokered approach.
As the dust settles, the future of Gaza hangs in the balance. Whether a transitional authority led by Blair or another arrangement emerges, the pressing needs of Gaza’s population—and the legitimacy of any governing body—will depend on genuine local ownership and broad regional support. The ongoing debates among Arab states, Europe’s symbolic gestures, and the United States’ assertive diplomacy illustrate just how complex and contested the path forward remains.
For now, the eyes of the world remain fixed on Gaza, where the struggle to rebuild—and to define the terms of peace—continues in earnest.
