Why Trump is Considering Tony Blair for a Role in the Post-War Gaza Plan

In a significant and somewhat anticipated development, former U.S. President Donald Trump announced a plan to end the war in Gaza. Upon its announcement, the plan received immediate endorsement from a key Arab and Islamic bloc, which met with him on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, as well as support from several Western capitals.

The plan also resonated widely within Israel, where opinion polls indicated that around 72% of Israelis support it as an opportunity to end the war and achieve the goal of releasing hostages held by Hamas.

This new political climate opens the door to in-depth discussions about potential transitional arrangements for Gaza. Among these is a U.S.-backed proposal to task former British Prime Minister Tony Blair with leading an international transitional authority to govern the Gaza Strip in the “day after” the military operations conclude.

This proposition has now become a focal point for interpretation and debate in political and media circles. Some view it as an opportunity for reconstruction and building modern institutions, while others describe it as an attempt to impose foreign trusteeship over the Palestinians.

The Proposed Transitional Authority: Key Features

According to media reports, the proposed body would be named the Gaza International Transitional Authority (GITA), modeled after transitional experiences in regions like Kosovo and East Timor.

This authority would be responsible for the administrative and political management of the Strip for a period of three to five years, pending the right conditions for the return of a unified Palestinian administration. It would comprise a supervisory board, an executive body, an international peacekeeping force, and locally trained police elements.

The Rationale Behind Choosing Tony Blair

The selection of Tony Blair is not random. He possesses a complex yet extensive network of relationships in the region, which supporters argue makes him uniquely qualified for such a sensitive role.

1. Established Diplomatic Credentials: Blair played a mediating role between Israel and the Palestinians during his time as the Quartet’s Envoy. He maintains close contacts with numerous Arab and Western capitals, positioning him as a potential mediator capable of managing a phase that requires complex multilateral consensus.

2. A Global Platform and Influence: Since leaving office in 2007, Blair founded the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI), a think tank/policy advisory organization headquartered in London with offices and partnerships worldwide. The TBI focuses on advising governments in areas such as:

   • Public administration reform

   • Digital transformation

   • Combating extremism

   • Supporting economic and development policies
     Through the TBI, Blair has remained an influential figure, helping to shape the economic and political strategic visions of many countries, which has allowed him to maintain a vast network of relationships with their leaders and influential figures.

3. A Figure on the Global Stage: Blair regularly participates in Track II (unofficial) diplomacy and is a constant presence at major global forums like the World Economic Forum in Davos and the Munich Security Conference.

The Potential Benefits of the Blair-Led Proposal

Proponents of placing Blair at the head of a temporary international administration argue that this move could:

• Separate Humanitarian and Political Issues: It could decouple the immediate humanitarian and administrative crises from the political conflict, providing an umbrella for organized reconstruction.

• Establish Good Governance: It would aim to lay the foundations for sound governance and build professional, non-partisan institutions in preparation for the return of the Palestinian Authority or another unified national body.

• Attract International Funding: Donor countries are often more inclined to support projects supervised by relatively neutral entities.

• Restructure Security Apparatuses: A cornerstone of the plan is the creation of a new, non-politicized local police force, backed by international peacekeeping troops—likely led by Arab nations—to ensure stability and prevent a return to chaos or the dominance of armed factions.

• Manage Economic Recovery: The temporary authority would oversee border crossings, rehabilitate infrastructure, and encourage investments.

Significant Challenges and Widespread Skepticism

Despite the proposed benefits, the plan faces substantial hurdles and skepticism:

• Perceived as an Undermining of Sovereignty: Entrusting the management of Gaza to a body led by Tony Blair—a figure many view as a symbol of interventionist Western policies—is seen as a direct challenge to Palestinian sovereignty.

• The Legacy of the Iraq War: Blair’s pivotal role in supporting the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, and his part in disseminating false intelligence about weapons of mass destruction, casts a long shadow. For many Arabs and Muslims, this history makes it difficult to accept him as a neutral party in managing Gaza’s transition.

• Exclusion of Palestinian Factions: The marginalization of Palestinian factions, including the Palestinian Authority, during the transitional phase raises fears that the international body could become a permanent parallel authority, as seen in other international experiences.

• Immense Practical Challenges: Success would require an uncertain international and regional consensus, as well as the acceptance, or at least non-opposition, of powerful Palestinian factions on the ground. Implementing new security arrangements in an environment awash with weapons and devastation is extremely complex. Without local popular support, the transitional authority could become a target for rejection and even attacks.

The Precarious Arab and Palestinian Position

Arab countries find themselves in a delicate position:

• On one hand, some capitals are eager to prevent a descent into chaos in Gaza and may be prepared to contribute to peacekeeping forces or provide financial support.

• On the other hand, they do not want to be seen as participating in a foreign trusteeship over the Strip.

Consequently, the ultimate Arab stance will be decisive in determining whether this proposal moves from idea to reality.

Hamas is likely to treat the plan with extreme caution. While it may reject any arrangements that pave the way for its complete exclusion, it might also find itself forced to engage if it believes that absolute rejection would lead to political and military isolation. Some indicators suggest Hamas might agree in principle to a ceasefire, provided it receives guarantees against unilateral disarmament and the inclusion of Arab or Islamic parties in any future security arrangements—which could open the door for indirect negotiation over the form of the temporary authority and Blair’s role in it.

Conclusion: A Reflection of International Aims and Inherent Contradictions

The discussion of a Tony Blair-led transitional authority in Gaza reflects the international community’s failure to facilitate an internal Palestinian-Palestinian solution and a desire to quickly fill the vacuum after the war. While this model might offer a chance for reconstruction and organizing civilian life, it carries the inherent risk of entrenching long-term foreign administration.

Ultimately, appointing Tony Blair to head a transitional authority in Gaza would be contingent on complex understandings between international, regional, and Palestinian parties. Its success is not guaranteed, but not impossible if international political will exists and a mechanism for meaningful Palestinian inclusion is found. The greatest challenge would be transforming this phase—if it happens—from an imposed foreign trusteeship into a genuine bridge toward a unified and sovereign Palestinian administration.

The early insertion of Tony Blair’s name into the Gaza landscape is neither a fleeting thought nor a media coincidence. It genuinely reflects an international desire to control the “day after” narrative and steer it from the very first moment of a ceasefire. However, a fundamental question remains: Can the legacy of a man so closely associated with the West’s controversial wars in the region suddenly transform into an acceptable face for managing a fragile peace in Gaza? The answer to this will define the viability of the entire proposal.

Support Dawat Media Center

If there were ever a time to join us, it is now. Every contribution, however big or small, powers our journalism and sustains our future. Support the Dawat Media Center from as little as $/€10 – it only takes a minute. If you can, please consider supporting us with a regular amount each month. Thank you
DNB Bank AC # 0530 2294668
Account for international payments: NO15 0530 2294 668
Vipps: #557320

  Donate Here