Hamas Sets Strict Conditions for Receiving International Forces in Gaza and Warns Against 'Alternative to Occupation'

The Hamas movement has defined its official and final stance regarding international proposals for sending peacekeeping missions to the Gaza Strip in the coming phase. This announcement followed official statements from Indonesia expressing its full readiness to contribute approximately 8,000 soldiers as part of a large-scale international force, which brought political and field discussions to the forefront of events.

Hamas leader Basem Naim affirmed that the movement does not reject the principle of international forces in principle, but it sets a set of strict criteria to ensure the sovereignty of Palestinian decision-making. He clarified that acceptance of these forces is contingent on them not becoming a tool aimed at changing the political or internal security reality in the Strip under international cover.

The movement stressed that the only acceptable role for these forces is to act as a 'buffer force' stationed along the border lines to separate the warring parties. This presence, according to the Palestinian vision, aims to ensure the sustainability of the ceasefire and prevent the recurrence of military operations or a return to a comprehensive confrontation.

Naim warned that any attempt to expand the tasks of these forces to include intervention in Palestinian civil, administrative, or security affairs would be met with an absolute rejection. He indicated that Palestinians would treat any force that exceeds its border tasks as an 'alternative occupation authority,' which could lead to a direct clash with the forces on the ground.

Sources clarified that this position does not express Hamas's solitary orientation, but rather is the result of a series of coordination meetings that included various Palestinian factions. This national consensus reflects real fears of international attempts to impose external guardianship that would seize Palestinian sovereignty over the land and confiscate independent national decision-making.

In a related context, reports indicated that the anticipated international force might include military formations from more than 12 friendly countries, including major Islamic countries. However, welcoming these countries remains conditional on their full commitment to the terms of Palestinian agreement that prevent any direct friction with the local population or interference in the administrative structure of the Strip.

The biggest challenge facing this mission lies in how to balance the proposed international plans, including the new US administration's plan, with the conditions set by the factions on the ground. The complex geographical nature of the Gaza Strip requires extremely precise security protocols to avoid any misunderstanding that could lead to the failure of the entire peacekeeping mission.

The 'Peace Council' expected to be formed is anticipated to serve as a political and legal umbrella to coordinate the work of these international forces and define the scope of their movements. The success of this experiment remains dependent on the ability of international parties to avoid 'political adventures' that could undermine trust with the active Palestinian forces on the ground.

Any interference in internal Palestinian affairs will force us to view these forces as an alternative to occupation, not as a peacekeeping force.