The United States has recently presented its Gaza strategy to the United Nations Security Council, advocating for a formal U.N. endorsement of a comprehensive, multi-year international security force to oversee the Gaza Strip until at least 2027.
This initiative, which is deemed crucial by the administration for the execution of President Donald Trump’s 20-point agenda, marks a significant shift in U.S. policy by positioning the United Nations at the heart of a major Middle Eastern security framework.
The U.S. Mission to the U.N. released a statement revealing that the draft of this proposal was crafted with contributions from nations such as Qatar, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates. The statement emphasized that the objective is to “realize President Trump’s historic 20 Point Comprehensive Plan,” a plan that received backing from over 20 countries during a summit in Sharm el-Sheikh on October 13.
During this summit, President Donald Trump was photographed holding the signed agreement, a moment captured alongside global leaders who convened to discuss ending the Gaza conflict. This meeting also coincided with a U.S.-facilitated prisoner-hostage exchange and a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas.
Discussions with Security Council members commenced in early November, aiming to establish the International Stabilization Force and pave the way for a stable and prosperous Gaza, free from Hamas influence. The U.S. Mission cautioned that the ceasefire remains “fragile,” warning that any delays in the process could lead to “grave, tangible, and entirely avoidable consequences for Palestinians in Gaza.”
Recent insights from Axios have shed light on the expansive nature of the U.S. proposal. The draft document, labeled “sensitive but unclassified,” outlines the creation of an International Security Force in Gaza with an initial mandate lasting at least two years, extendable through the end of 2027. A U.S. official informed Axios of plans to vote on the resolution in the coming weeks, with the intention of deploying the first troops by January. This force is described as “an enforcement force and not a peacekeeping force,” underscoring its proactive role in ensuring security.
World leaders, including U.S. President Donald Trump and Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, pose for a family photo, at a world leaders’ summit on ending the Gaza war, amid a U.S.-brokered prisoner-hostage swap and ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, Oct. 13, 2025. (Suzanne Plunkett/Reuters Pool)
Robert Satloff, executive director of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, told Fox News Digital the U.S. went to the U.N. because several states Washington hopes will contribute troops require a Security Council mandate.
“The decision to go to the United Nations was driven principally by the request of participating states, states that the United States hopes will participate in the stabilization force who need a U.N. mandate to help them politically, to dispatch forces eventually to Gaza. So that’s the real origin of this, to enable, to give a political umbrella to participating states to play a role in the stabilization force.”
U.S. President Donald Trump delivers remarks to the United Nations General Assembly at the UN headquarters in New York City on Sept. 23, 2025. (Timothy A. Clary/AFP via Getty Images)
Satloff said that although Israel has voiced real concerns about U.N. involvement, it understands why Washington believes the mandate is essential. “There’s no doubt that involving the United Nations has its own complications, and I think that the Israelis have been pretty vocal about this. But they also appreciate that the United States believes it needs this sort of endorsement for the 20-point plan to move forward. The Israelis want to make sure that these complications don’t overwhelm the benefits of the plan. Which is a legitimate concern.”
He warned that the plan faces major challenges but urged against pessimism. “There are enormous obstacles to the implementation of the entire plan. The U.N. aspect of it is just one of them. We’re already seeing some fundamental disagreement over, say, the definition of disarmament, which could derail the whole effort. Now, I think one has to be hopeful. The opportunity here is huge. The desire to find solutions among the states that are committed to this is real and serious. So, while it’s totally legitimate to recognize the significant obstacles, I don’t think that we should get negative about the prospects here.”
Military vehicles are gathered near the Israel-Gaza border, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in southern Israel on Oct. 12, 2025. (Ammar Awad/Reuters)
Anne Bayefsky, Director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and President of Human Rights Voices, offered a starkly different view. Bayefsky told Fox News Digital: “Incredibly, the United States has subjected its plans for Gaza to U.N. authorization and oversight. Arab countries claimed U.N. involvement was ‘necessary’ for them to participate and support the Gaza international force. That was a lie and blatant power grab. The proof is in the text which could have been a one-liner noting, with approval, a non-U. N. initiative. Instead, the resolution is a long-list of orders doing enormous harm to Israeli national security, sovereignty and right of self-defense, hamstringing America’s range of action by a web of agencies and involvement antithetical to U.S. interests and peace.”
She said the move is “an about-face for American foreign policy on the United Nations and the Arab-Israeli conflict,” and argued that the United Nations “has repeatedly demonstrated its antisemitic bias, lack of good faith and support for Palestinian aggression.” Bayefsky added that the draft “fails to condemn Hamas” and “refuses to acknowledge and affirm Israel’s U.N. Charter right of self-defense before granting the treacherous U.N. unprecedented influence,” calling the omission “devastating to the prospects of real peace.”
Palestinians make their way with belongings as they fled their homes, after Israeli air strikes, in the northern Gaza Strip on May 16, 2025. (REUTERS/Mahmoud Issa)
Russia, however, has countered with its own draft resolution that strikes a profoundly different tone. Moscow’s draft demands an immediate and unconditional ceasefire, the withdrawal of all foreign forces from Gaza, and the deployment of a U.N. peacekeeping mission under the Secretary-General’s authority and with the consent of the parties involved.
The draft also says it reaffirms the 1967 borders and East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state and insists that Gaza’s reconstruction must take place under Palestinian leadership and sovereignty, not through externally managed institutions. Unlike the American proposal, it contains no provisions for demilitarization or interim foreign governance, instead centering on “humanitarian relief and international law.”
Fox News Digital was referred by the White House and State Department to the U.S. Mission to the U.N. for comment.
