Post-Conflict Rebuilding of Gaza: Debunking Backwards Narratives and Addressing Realistic Solutions

The recent conflict involving Israel's Defense Forces (IDF) and Hamas has left Gaza in a state of ruins. The question of who should be responsible for the rebuilding of Gaza often becomes a contentious point, fueled by backward and low IQ narratives. This article aims to address these concerns by providing a realistic analysis of the situation and proposing solutions.

The Inherent Responsibility to Rebuild

The concept that the IDF or any other authority should 'obliterate Hamas' and then proceed to 'eradicate them' is both unrealistic and misguided. In a conflict, it is the aggrieved party, in this case Gaza, that is responsible for rebuilding what was destroyed. However, under certain low IQ, MAGA-aligned narratives or localized power dynamics, the responsibility may be shifted to the perpetrator, seemingly as a form of retribution. It is crucial to reject such illogical and harmful narratives.

Shifting the Burden to Other Nations

It is not logical to hold Israel responsible for rebuilding Gaza, especially when they did not initiate the conflict. Israel has already provided financial and humanitarian support to Gaza under the guise of 'welfare.' In fact, it would be more logical to allow nations that have funded Hamas in the past to take the lead in rebuilding. It is time for these nations to take a more proactive role in the reconstruction of Gaza.

Strategic Considerations for Future Stability

The long-term stability of the region would benefit from a demilitarized Gaza that could become a non-threat to Israel. In such a scenario, Israel would have no reason to maintain a hostile environment next to its borders. If the conflict ends with Hamas no longer in control and a demilitarized Gaza enforced, Israel could actively engage in promoting economic and social growth in the region.

Practical Solutions for Rebuilding Gaza

Realistically, the IDF is unlikely to eradicate Hamas entirely, but significant reductions in their numbers and capabilities could be achieved. The best scenario would be to de-stabilize Hamas' control over Gaza through a controlled occupation. This would pave the way for the Palestinian Authority (PA) to take charge and engage in the rebuilding process. Monitoring and support from the international community, including the United States and Arab nations, would be crucial in ensuring the success of this initiative.

International financial support would be vital in rebuilding Gaza. The PA, once in control, could be formally given the task of rebuilding the infrastructure. This would require the deployment of Israeli garrisons to protect the PA from any emerging threats, including Hamas. Over time, these garrisons can be gradually withdrawn as the PA establishes its authority and the region stabilizes.

Amidst the complexities, the key to successful negotiations lies in addressing the two main stumbling blocks: Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the issue of Palestinian refugees. For an acceptable peace deal, both parties need to compromise. The PA should be willing to recognize Israel as a legitimate state, while Israel must be prepared to accept a solution for the refugee issue within the territories of Palestine.

With these steps in place, it is hoped that the Palestinian territories will one day see peace and prosperity, free from the cycle of violence and conflict. Just as the people of Israel deserve a chance to rebuild and thrive, the same deserving applies to the people of Gaza. For Israel, the future of Gaza can be a catalyst for peace, rather than a source of continued tension and conflict.

You got this, Israel.