The Donald Trump administration has outlined a post-war plan for Gaza that would place former British prime minister Tony Blair in charge of overseeing the Strip’s rehabilitation and managing its operations with the backing of an international security force. Blair, 72, has signalled he is willing to lead a transitional authority provided that power eventually passes to the Palestinian Authority.
The proposal, recently presented at the White House, has gained traction in Washington, where Blair’s standing is seen as giving the plan a weight that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would find difficult to resist.
The plan centres on the creation of a temporary administration called the Gaza International Transitional Authority, or Gita. This body would act as Gaza’s supreme political and legal authority for up to five years, modelled on international transition missions in places such as Kosovo and Timor-Leste. It is designed as a counter to a rival UN-backed initiative, which calls for a faster transfer of power to the Palestinians.
Under the proposal, Gita would begin operating out of the Egyptian town of el-Arish before moving into Gaza once conditions allowed, supported by a multinational force drawn largely from Arab states and endorsed by the United Nations. Blair would chair a board of up to ten members, including senior UN officials, international figures, Muslim representatives, and at least one Palestinian voice, backed by a secretariat of around 25 staff.
The vision is that, in time, all Palestinian territories would be reunited under the Palestinian Authority. To support this, a separate Palestinian Executive Authority would be tasked with delivering services such as health, education and utilities through a professional and nonpartisan administration working with local Gaza municipalities.
Safeguards would also be put in place, including a unit to protect property rights and ensure that Palestinians leaving Gaza voluntarily would retain their ownership and right of return.
Despite its ambitious scope, the plan faces stiff opposition. Blair’s reputation in the region remains polarising. Many Palestinians blame him for stalling their aspirations for statehood during his time as Middle East envoy, while across the Arab world, he is still associated with his backing of the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
A larger obstacle is political rather than personal. Arab governments have said they will only support such an initiative if it comes with a clear timeline for Palestinian statehood. Unlike the UN-backed New York Declaration, which envisaged a one-year interim authority before handing power to a reformed Palestinian Authority, the American plan leaves the transition period open-ended. For many in the region, this ambiguity is unacceptable.
The White House has sought to present its proposal as a compromise, steering away from earlier ideas floated in Washington that would have risked large-scale displacement of Gaza’s two million residents. The current plan explicitly rules out encouraging Palestinians to leave and is framed as an attempt to stabilise Gaza while keeping alive the longer-term prospect of Palestinian statehood.
Security remains the central challenge. Israel insists on guarantees that weapons cannot be smuggled into Gaza, while international backers of the plan argue that basic materials for housing, power, water, and sanitation must be allowed in to prevent further humanitarian collapse. The task for any transitional authority will be to balance these competing demands while building the foundations of a viable Palestinian economy and state.
For Blair, the role would mark a return to the front line of Middle East diplomacy. He has long argued that peace requires a balance between Israel’s security and the daily needs of Palestinians. Yet the plan makes clear that Hamas would have no role in post-war governance unless it renounces violence.
Whether this initiative takes hold depends on whether Washington can bridge the gap between Israeli security concerns, Palestinian political aspirations and Arab demands for a clear path to statehood. Without that alignment, the Gaza International Transitional Authority risks becoming just another proposal that never takes off.
