How the UN Resolution Reinforces Foreign Control and Reshapes Middle East Power Dynamics
A US-engineered Gaza mandate deepens foreign control, sidelines Arab institutions, and accelerates the dismantling of Palestinian sovereignty.
United Nations, PUREWILAYAH.COM - Monday’s resolution, adopted under Chapter VII, establishes a US-led international trusteeship for Gaza, putting Palestinian self-governance on hold.
This plan, discussed in the Sharm El Sheikh talks, suggests an interim administration under significant US and British control, asserting that stability should come before sovereignty.
Critics, especially Arab analysts, argue that this setup disrupts the natural order of statehood and risks creating a long-term foreign protectorate.
A major point of contention is the resolution’s demand for the complete disarmament of Palestinian factions, labeling groups like Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad as terrorists. While this appeals to Israel and Western nations, many Palestinians see it as a call for unilateral pacification, disregarding their right to resist occupation as acknowledged by international law.
Humanitarian Aid as a Tool for Political Pressure
Additionally, critics claim that the reconstruction plan, which channels international aid through a US-controlled body, uses dire circumstances as leverage for political compliance.
They argue that it turns humanitarian aid into a means of pressure, potentially delaying reconstruction until disarmament and governance goals are achieved.
The resolution also enhances the role of the US and UK in security and civil administration, raising suspicions from countries like Russia and China, who view this as a neo-colonial tactic to secure long-term influence in the region.
Absence of a Path to Statehood, Reinforcement of Israeli Expansionism
Importantly, the resolution does not propose a clear path to a sovereign Palestinian state, which many believe supports Israel’s expansionist policies.
By only addressing governance in Gaza without reaffirming a two-state solution based on 1967 borders, it may facilitate further Israeli settlement expansion. The varied reactions among Arab countries reveal fractures in the Arab League regarding support for Palestinian sovereignty.
Ultimately, this resolution risks undermining Palestinian sovereignty by placing control over Gaza’s future in foreign hands, likely perpetuating the crisis rather than resolving it.
Saudi–US Alignment and Mohammed bin Salman’s Washington Visit
Does this UN resolution on Gaza, which supports the American vision, coincide with Mohammed bin Salman’s visit to Washington, where Saudi Arabia offered to purchase F-35 aircraft and air defense systems from the US and enter into a joint defense agreement in a military and defense deal with the US for fear of a repeat of the Qatari scenario? as if the Qatari scenario was intended to use the Zionist scarecrow to drain the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council countries, and also to protect Saudi Arabia’s peaceful nuclear program.
The ‘Qatari Scenario’, Gulf Vulnerability, and Riyadh’s Strategic Calculations
Saudi Arabia is focused on establishing a formal mutual defense treaty and acquiring advanced American weapons, including F-35 fighter jets and air defense systems.
This push was sparked by a hypothetical event in September 2025, where a unilateral Israeli attack on Qatar revealed the vulnerability of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) nations despite their wealth, showing the inefficacy of their current defenses.
The 2025 incident is viewed as a strategic display of power designed to undermine the PGCC by creating a constant threat. This situation pressured PGCC countries to increase their defense spending and seek security assurances from external sources, redirecting vast financial resources away from critical economic development plans.
Saudi Arabia’s main goal is to prevent a similar threat in its territory. The kingdom aims to secure a strong U.S. security guarantee that would deter any attacks, signaling that an assault on its infrastructure would be treated with the seriousness of an attack on U.S. interests.
This arrangement is also linked to safeguarding its ambitious peaceful nuclear program, crucial for its Vision 2030. Riyadh fears its emerging nuclear facilities might be targeted under non-proliferation arguments, making a U.S.-Saudi defense agreement essential for protection.
Additionally, by offering limited support for the U.S.-backed plan regarding Gaza, Saudi Arabia is helping the U.S. gain diplomatic leverage. This support aids Trump’s administration in securing approval from Congress for defense funding and the defense treaty, navigating significant legislative challenges. This negotiation marks a shift in Saudi foreign policy, as the kingdom is actively using its influence to obtain guaranteed security commitments.
The Failures of the OIC and Arab League Amid Gaza’s Crisis
Where exactly is the role of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in what is happening in Gaza, as well as the Arab League?
The Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and the Arab League are being criticized for their lack of effective action regarding Gaza. They mainly issue statements of condemnation without creating a solid, unified plan, which harms their credibility.
These organizations have notably avoided discussing who will govern Gaza, indicating internal divisions and a failure to lead in diplomatic matters. This silence allows others to propose solutions that may not align with the interests of the Arab or Islamic communities.
Additionally, the OIC and Arab League have not opposed the normalization of relations with Israel, particularly through agreements like the Abraham Accords. While these are seen by some as steps toward peace, many view them as a betrayal that undermines Palestinian rights. This shift changes the diplomatic landscape in the region without the collective agreement of Islamic nations.
Their inaction extends to economic issues, as OIC member countries such as Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan are major suppliers of oil to Israel. This financial support directly funds military operations against Palestinians, creating a significant moral and political contradiction. The OIC’s reluctance to criticize these member states exposes its weakness, prioritizing non-interference over enforcing ethical standards.
This situation raises doubts about the true loyalties of these countries within global alliances, like BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which seek to counter Western influence. Their ties with the West may compromise their reliability as partners for countries like China and Russia.
Even Turkey, which advocates for Palestinian rights, maintains strong trade relations with Israel while criticizing it rhetorically. This complex approach highlights the struggle for unified action, showing that national interests often take precedence over Islamic unity, leaving both the OIC and Arab League as platforms for words rather than meaningful action.
Sustainability of International Oversight and the Economic Strain on Western Powers
Can the presence of international peacekeeping forces or international administration of the sector be sustained in the long term?
The prolonged economic sustainability of Israel’s military engagements is increasingly untenable for its Western backers. The Gaza campaign has proven extraordinarily costly, consuming vast resources without achieving its stated strategic objectives of dismantling Hamas or demilitarizing the resistance, thereby questioning the return on a significant financial investment that strains allied economies.
This fiscal pressure is acutely felt in the United States, the primary benefactor. With a public debt exceeding 120% of GDP, continued massive military aid to Israel, while simultaneously funding a war in Ukraine, presents a severe macroeconomic challenge. This strains a budget already facing unsustainable deficit spending, forcing difficult opportunity-cost analyses for Washington’s strategic commitments.
The European posture is similarly constrained.
By Dr. Ahmed Moustafa
Source: Mehr News