Gratitude From Washington, Fear in Gaza: Why Palestinians See ‘Stabilisation’ as Another Name for Control

Why Palestinians See ‘Stabilisation’ as Another Name for Control

When US Secretary of State Marco Rubio says Washington is “very grateful” to Pakistan for considering a role in the proposed Gaza Stabilisation Force, the words may sound diplomatic in Washington — but in Gaza, they echo with alarm.

For Palestinians, gratitude expressed by the same powers that watched Gaza burn for two years carries little reassurance. After tens of thousands killed, entire neighbourhoods erased, and a population pushed to the edge of survival, Palestinians are now being told that foreign troops will bring “stability.”

But stability for whom?

Stability Without Justice Is Not Peace

Gaza is not suffering from chaos because Palestinians lack discipline or governance. Gaza is suffering because it has endured decades of occupation, siege, and military domination, culminating in one of the most devastating assaults of the modern era.

To suggest that Gaza’s primary problem today is the absence of an international security force is not only dishonest — it is insulting.

You do not stabilise a people by policing them after destroying their homes. You do not impose order on the rubble of injustice and call it peace.

The Real Fear: Policing Palestinians, Not Protecting Them

The proposed International Stabilisation Force is marketed as neutral and humanitarian. Yet buried in its mandate is the word Palestinians know all too well: demilitarisation.

For Washington and its allies, demilitarisation sounds like safety.

For Palestinians, it sounds like forced surrender.

Hamas has rejected the plan not out of stubbornness, but because history has taught Palestinians a brutal lesson:

When Palestinians are disarmed, Israel is never restrained.

No international force stopped the bombs.

No observers halted the siege.

No UN resolutions saved the children buried under concrete.

So Palestinians ask a simple question:

Why should we trust the same world that failed to protect us to now disarm us?

Hamas Is Not the Whole Story — Palestinian Fear Is

Western narratives often reduce Palestinian resistance to “Hamas,” as if the organisation exists in isolation from the people. This framing is deliberate — and misleading.

Many Palestinians who criticise Hamas’s governance still oppose its disarmament under occupation. Why? Because resistance, for Palestinians, is not ideology — it is consequence.

Disarmament without sovereignty means vulnerability.

Disarmament without justice means submission.

And Palestinians refuse to exchange one form of suffering for another.

The Hypocrisy of the ‘Free World’

The same governments that now speak urgently about stabilisation were silent — or complicit — as Gaza was flattened.

They spoke of “Israel’s right to defend itself” while children were pulled from rubble.

They blocked accountability while hospitals were bombed.

They demanded restraint only after destruction was complete.

Now these same capitals claim moral authority to manage Gaza’s future.

Palestinians are not fooled.

To them, the stabilisation force looks less like peacekeeping and more like conflict management — designed not to end injustice, but to contain its consequences.

The Muslim World’s Moment of Truth

The plan relies heavily on troops from Muslim-majority countries, a calculated attempt to add legitimacy to an otherwise contested mission.

This places countries like Pakistan at a historic crossroads.

Palestinians do not see Pakistan as just another state. They see it as a country that has:

• Never recognised Israel

• Consistently supported Palestinian rights

• Spoken against occupation in international forums

That moral capital matters — and it must not be squandered.

If Muslim troops are deployed to protect civilians, facilitate aid, and shield Palestinians from renewed aggression, they may earn trust.

If they are deployed to police resistance, enforce disarmament, or legitimise an unjust status quo, they will be remembered as collaborators in oppression.

The Muslim world cannot afford another failure disguised as diplomacy.

Technocratic Governance: A Democracy Bypassed

The proposal to install a “Palestinian technocratic administration” sounds efficient — until one asks the obvious question:

Who chose them?

Palestinians have been governed enough by outsiders who claim to know what is best for them. Governance without representation is not reform; it is managed dependency.

Stability imposed without political legitimacy is fragile by design.

What Palestinians Actually Want

Palestinians are not rejecting peace. They are rejecting false peace.

They want:

• An end to occupation

• Lifting of the Gaza blockade

• Accountability for war crimes

• A sovereign Palestinian state

• The right to decide their own future

No stabilisation force can substitute these demands.

Peace cannot be enforced at gunpoint — especially by the same international system that enabled Gaza’s destruction.

Final Word: Gratitude Is Not a Moral Currency

Washington’s gratitude toward Pakistan may carry diplomatic weight, but gratitude does not absolve responsibility.

Before thanking nations for stabilising Gaza, the world must ask itself why Gaza needs stabilising in the first place.

Until justice replaces management, until freedom replaces control, and until Palestinians are treated as people — not a problem — no foreign force will ever bring real peace to Gaza.

What Gaza needs is not another experiment in international control.

What Gaza needs is justice.