A Reading on the Peace Council's Decision to Cancel UNRWA's Work in Gaza

In a move with deep political implications, the so-called "Peace Council," established by US President Donald Trump in the wake of the alleged ceasefire in the Strip, has once again stirred controversy regarding the future of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) in Gaza. This was done by calling for an end to the agency's role and the abolition of its headquarters in the Strip. This call cannot be read in isolation from the broader political context, especially in light of discussions about Gaza's reconstruction projects and the accompanying proposals regarding the identity of those responsible for managing the Strip in the post-war phase. This step raises crucial questions about the future of the refugee issue, international arrangements in the Palestinian territories, and the nature of the ongoing political conflict. The "Peace Council" and the redefinition of the conflict... The statements of the "Peace Council" were not limited to administrative aspects but revealed a political vision aimed at "emptying the Palestinian cause of its essence as a people suffering under Israeli occupation, and reducing the conflict to merely a humanitarian aid issue." This approach, as described by the "Resistance Committees in Palestine," represents a "comprehensive destructive project targeting both the people and the cause." UNRWA is not just a relief organization; it is an embodiment of international recognition of the continuity of the right of return and a symbol of the Palestinian cause in international forums. Therefore, targeting it is read as an attempt to impose a new political reality that negates the national dimension of the conflict. The legal dimension and the impossibility of administrative cancellation. Palestinian factions and forces believe that these calls "reveal a clear bias towards the Israeli agenda, with the aim of canceling the right of return and undermining established national rights." They affirm that the agency was established by UN General Assembly Resolution No. 302 of 1949, and its dissolution can only be achieved by a similar resolution from the General Assembly. This legal dimension grants UNRWA immunity against any unilateral decisions, as attempting to circumvent it does not negate the historical and legal rights of refugees. UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned that any infringement on the agency's work or property is a violation of international law and the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. Are we facing an alternative UNRWA? Strategic studies indicate the existence of American and Israeli trends calling for the dismantling of UNRWA, considering the Gaza Strip as the "strategic starting point" for achieving this. The scenario of replacing it with other UN agencies such as the World Food Programme and the World Health Organization, or relying on a local body supported by Arab and international forces, is being proposed. However, this path faces many obstacles; most notably the enormous service vacuum that the agency will leave, especially in the absence of a local authority capable of assuming responsibility, in addition to the bureaucratic and logistical complexities of transferring tasks employing nearly 29,000 employees, the majority of whom are refugees themselves. Repercussions of the decision on the humanitarian situation. In light of the suffocating humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip, any infringement on UNRWA's work is a direct threat to the lives of millions. The agency is considered the "backbone" for providing education, healthcare, and food aid to more than 5.9 million Palestinian refugees. The factions warned that strengthening support for UNRWA and ensuring its continuity, especially in Gaza, which is suffering from a severe humanitarian crisis, is the "highest degree of responsibility." Therefore, discussing cancellation at this time entails deepening suffering and creating a humanitarian vacuum that other parties may not be able to compensate for. Conflict of influence. The UNRWA file carries regional and international dimensions, as it is seen as an arena for the struggle for influence. Donor countries and international actors face varying pressures between calls for reform or cancellation. In this context, some sources indicate that the United States seeks to grant the "Peace Council" broad powers similar to a "new United Nations" in which selected countries make decisions, which raises Western concerns about creating a parallel mechanism to the United Nations without international legal basis. The "Peace Council's" call to cancel UNRWA's work in Gaza is not merely an administrative measure, but a link in a long political struggle aimed at redefining the nature of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, and here we recall the saying of the late revolutionary sage George Habash, "The conflict may extend for a hundred years or more, so those with short breath should step aside." Despite the significant challenges facing the agency, the attempt to erase it clashes with legal, humanitarian, and political realities. UNRWA remains, for now, the international umbrella for refugee rights and the most prominent guarantor of the continuity of their cause on the international agenda, and any attempt to circumvent it requires a comprehensive political settlement, not unilateral decisions aimed at imposing a new reality by force. * Media File Official at the National Popular Conference for Jerusalem