By Mahmood Fayazi, Royal Roads University
(The Conversation) – Two years into the Israeli war in Gaza, world leaders recently gathered in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt, to deliberate on a long-awaited peace plan to end the conflict.
As part of this plan, both Israel and Hamas agreed to another ceasefire agreement — the latest in a series of truces that have repeatedly collapsed since the war began in late 2023.
The meeting, involving Egypt, Qatar, Turkey and the United States, marks the most concerted diplomatic effort yet to halt a conflict that has killed more than 67,000 Palestinians, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, and at least 1,200 Israelis, according to Israel. It’s also displaced nearly 400,000 Palestinians.
Yet even if the fighting does stop, fundamental questions persist: how, when and by whom will Gaza be rebuilt? The recovery and reconstruction of the Gaza Strip will undoubtedly be an immense and complex undertaking, but the history of past conflicts sheds light on the way forward.
The scale of destruction
A February report from the World Bank estimated that recovery and reconstruction needs in Gaza and the West Bank will cost US$53.2 billion. Around US$20 billion of this is required to restore essential services, rebuild infrastructure and revitalize the economy — an amount exceeding the annual GDP of Belarus and Slovenia.
The scale of devastation is staggering. An estimated 84 per cent of the Gaza Strip and up to 92 per cent of Gaza City has been destroyed, with satellite data showing 292,904 homes destroyed or damaged. More than 60 million tonnes of debris — equivalent to 24,000 Olympic-sized swimming pools — is awaiting removal.
The conflict has devastated Gaza’s economic sectors. Up to 96 per cent of agricultural assets and 82 per cent of businesses were damaged or destroyed, halting production and eliminating key income sources.
Years of Israel’s blockade on Gaza — which predates Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023 attacks on Israel — have further restricted the movement of goods and people in and out of Gaza, severing access to international markets and vital raw materials. As a result, there has been near-total economic collapse and the private sector faces complete paralysis.
Beyond the physical and economic devastation, Gaza’s population faces severe psychological trauma. High rates of post-traumatic stress disorder, depression and anxiety, coupled with displacement and community breakdown, risk creating an intergenerational cycle of suffering through the psychological and epigenetic transmission of trauma.
Trump’s controversial peace plan
In an attempt to jump-start Gaza’s recovery, U.S. President Donald Trump introduced a 20-point peace plan envisioning interim governance by a committee of Palestinian technocrats under a “Board of Peace.” Authority would later be transferred to the Palestinian Authority following institutional reforms.
The plan outlines an economic development program to be designed by experts who “helped birth some of the thriving modern miracle cities in the Middle East.” It also includes the creation of a “special economic zone” and temporary security provided by International Stabilization Forces made up of U.S., Arab and international partners.
Under the proposal, Hamas, which has governed Gaza for nearly two decades, would be expected to disarm, accept amnesty and transfer control to international forces. Yet even if Hamas disarms, experts estimate up to 100,000 members could remain in Gaza’s political landscape and reconstitute under new forms to maintain influence.
While the peace plan outlines a framework for recovery, past post-conflict settings shows that externally designed plans rarely succeed without active local engagement.
Learning from past failures
As an expert in disaster and emergency management, I am conducting an ongoing systematic literature review (not yet published) analyzing recovery processes across post-war settings in Europe, Asia and Africa.
Experiences from Iraq and Afghanistan demonstrate that it’s naive to assume economic, administrative and security frameworks can succeed without genuinely engaging the local population.
This research shows that externally driven recovery plans often fail, and underscores the importance of adapting lessons from places where recovery has been effective.
My developing review suggests several critical factors for sustainable recovery:
- Developing local capacities
- Building strong and transparent institutions
- Implementing gradual and sequenced reforms
- Ensuring there is a deliberate transition from external to local leadership
Conversely, over-relying on external powers, neglecting capacity-building and failing to address social exclusion and power imbalances can undermine long-term outcomes.
Rebuilding hope through local participation
A common theme across nearly all the studies I looked at is the importance of restoring household livelihoods. This can be done by revitalizing economic production, supporting small businesses and implementing reforms that empower communities and restore hope.
After financing more than US$6.2 billion across 157 post-conflict operations in 18 countries, the World Bank concluded in 1997 that “without economic hope, we will not have peace.” This underscores the central role of economic recovery and livelihood restoration in post-war reconstruction.
An analysis of 36 post-civil war peace episodes (1990–2014) highlights the need for co-ordinated international efforts focused on administrative restructuring, judicial reform and local government elections.
Successfully integrating diverse political voices in post-war governance promotes transparency, accountability and local ownership, while helping to restore hope among populations affected by war.
In contrast, top-down reforms implemented without local engagement, as seen in Cambodia and Pakistan, can deepen divisions and undermine peace and development.
Toward a people-centred reconstruction
Although each post-war context is unique and requires its own approach, research consistently shows that actively including survivors in recovery efforts is essential.
Gaza’s reconstruction will only succeed if its people regain hope and play a central role in shaping a safe, peaceful and prosperous future for themselves and their communities.
Any international coalition or political initiatives aimed at rebuilding Gaza must recognize that survivors are not passive victims. They are central agents of their own recovery, whose voices must guide the reconstruction process.
Photo by Mohammed Ibrahim on Unsplash
Once immediate humanitarian needs are met through international support, all subsequent decisions about Gaza’s long-term development must be made through inclusive, democratic processes.
Fair and transparent elections must follow the urgent restoration of security, food, clean water, health care and education. Only through such an inclusive and locally grounded process can Gaza move toward genuine recovery, lasting peace and sustainable development.
Mahmood Fayazi, Assistant Professor and Head of Disaster and Emergency Management Program, Royal Roads University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
© 2025 All Rights Reserved