A recently proposed US-drafted resolution on Gaza has faced sharp criticism for its potential impact on the political and humanitarian rights of the Palestinian population. Critics argue that the resolution prioritises external objectives over addressing the aftermath of two years of genocidal war, which left the Gaza Strip devastated and its communities enduring ongoing suffering. Observers warn that the plan could effectively place Gaza under international trusteeship, bypassing local governance and undermining national institutions.

The draft resolution also raises fears of further separation between Gaza and the rest of the Palestinian territories, threatening to impose political frameworks that compromise long-standing national principles, including the right to self-determination and the establishment of an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital. Many stress that any international force deployed inside Gaza should operate solely along borders to monitor ceasefire arrangements, coordinate with Palestinian authorities, and focus on facilitating humanitarian aid rather than exercising authority over civilians or resistance groups.

Humanitarian concerns remain paramount, with urgent calls for the opening of border crossings and the mobilization of resources to address the unprecedented humanitarian catastrophe left by years of war. Advocates highlight that assistance, reconstruction, and protection of civilians are fundamental rights, which should not be conditioned on political negotiations. The broader demand is clear: immediate action is needed to end the ongoing genocide, support the rebuilding of Gaza, and uphold the rights of its population to self-determination and statehood.