The Phases and Pillars for Resolving the War in Gaza

The UN's call had been muted, alongside the voices of the US and others. Gaza has become a playground of wanton inhumanity, a theater of brutal debauchery.

The UN’s call had been muted, alongside the voices of the US and others. Gaza has become a playground of wanton inhumanity, a theater of brutal debauchery amid a civilized modern world heavily influenced by Western powers who profess to emphatically uphold justice and human rights but are confounded by their abhorrence of racial hatred and ethnic mass killings.

Finally, however, the unified UN voice has grown louder and clearer, even as it remains polarized by clashing resolute personal and clan interests. Amidst this complexity, let me propose the phases and pillars for resolving the armed conflict in Gaza.

Phase One: Rescue Operation


Whether Gaza is termed an occupied or disputed territory, it remains a volatile flashpoint jeopardizing the national security of both Palestine and Israel. Gaza resembles a volleyball tossed back and forth between Israel and Palestine, with Western power brokers as the audience. In 1967, Israel captured Gaza from Egypt after the Six-Day War and withdrew its forces in 2005 as a political strategy under the Palestinian Authority. After Hamas took over in 2006, reciprocal military attacks ensued, characterized by civilian casualties that sadly have become a norm of warfare.

Deoccupation can facilitate peace and reconstruction in Gaza. However, the nature of this de-occupation is crucial, leading us to the next pillars.


Hamas regards itself as an armed resistance, contrasting with the diplomatic approach of the Palestinian Authority, which Hamas considers no longer practicable. Armed conflict has provided Hamas reason to exist and provided grounds for Netanyahu’s government military retaliations. The situation, exploited by resolute personal and clan interests, perpetuates the war. War is the raison d’etre for the parties involved; it creates a symbiosis that facilitates support and ensuring the continuation of their respective power bases, existence, and calculated relevance.

Demilitarization is the prerequisite for serious, feasible diplomatic resolution. It’s for the reconstruction of Gaza and the rehumanization of its people. Thus, deoccupation requires divestment of armed conflict resources, both internal and external, and investment in reconstruction and rehumanization endeavors.

However, it’s crucial to note militarization is the consequence of another factor—radicalization.


The conflict in Gaza thrives on radicalism from both sides, viewing diplomatic resolution as a historical failure devoid of power. Led by leaders deeply committed to personal causes and bolstered by their respective radical groups, the conflict becomes an obsession aimed at ultimate annihilation, leading to mutual destruction through sustained warfare.

Few are more resolute in their intent to exterminate perceived enemies than religious-political radicals. For them, extermination becomes a divine homage. Consequently, an armed conflict fueled by empowered religious-political radicalism remains indifferent to human suffering and death, regardless of its scale. Thus, the de-occupation of Gaza necessitates the disengagement of radical Israelis and Palestinians alike.

Resolving the war in Gaza requires not only an analytical understanding of religious-political radicalism, but also unveiling the empowerment of leaders by their radical support groups in sustaining the war. This is no easy task, considering that Western power brokers of peace may themselves be entrenched in their respective religious-political ideologies while pursuing their political, commercial, and military interests.

Thus, there is a need for a genuinely neutral intermediary and a mutually beneficial strategy and plan that ensures the national security of both Israel and Palestine, as well as infrastructural, societal reconstruction, and socioeconomic progress.

Creation of a Reconstructive Neutral Zone

A mere ceasefire alone cannot guarantee sustainable peace in Gaza. The presence of a UN peacekeeping force with civilian engineering and medical corps, humanitarian aid workers including educators and mental health providers, can enable Gaza and its people to transition from war to peace and societal reconstruction. This would also facilitate the establishment of a reconstructive neutral zone to safeguard the national security of both Palestine and Israel. When arms are laid down and people engage in productive endeavors, their focus shifts from war to socioeconomic progress.

Phase Two: Societal Regeneration


Similar to the post-war efforts in Japan, which benefited not only the Japanese but also the global community, a joint international reconstruction project could be implemented in Gaza. This could potentially stabilize both Palestine and Israel, with positive ripple effects throughout the Middle Eastern region. An adapted version of the Japanese-US reconstruction model might also prove effective in post-war Ukraine.

Reconstruction, coupled with initiatives for economic empowerment and global support, offer brighter prospects for the war-torn Gaza and vulnerable Israel to become sustainably peaceful states focused on societal regeneration and progress.

Rebuilding Gaza’s infrastructure is a daunting task, but even more challenging is the process of healing the souls of Gaza’s people, which could be prolonged and generational.


Sociocultural transformation through inclusive educational content and strategies can help shape a more inclusive and productive Palestinian and Israeli society. The masses, who are both victims and participants in inhumanity, critically need a globally supported and holistic societal process to recover from their profound traumas.

The armed conflict has deeply wounded the Palestinian soul and transformed Israel’s once-regarded civilized defense complex into an instrument of mass killing and destruction. The sufferings endured by Palestinians are unspeakable, and what has become of Israel under Netanyahu’s leadership is a disgrace to its history. Both peoples need healing and support to embark on a new journey toward humanization.


Unlike stable and progressive hereditary religious monarchies, Palestine and Israel cannot afford to entangle themselves in religious-political authoritarianism. Such entanglements would be destructive and bleak for their future. Transparent democracy offers both states a viable and enduring path forward. Transitioning from destructive militant leadership to constructive socioeconomic governance will facilitate the region’s smooth reformation.

Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar envision economic progress and prosperity for the Middle East. Countries that remain mired in a culture of war and destruction have no place in this vision of development; they can only regress into oblivion and insignificance unless they join this brighter national and regional outlook.

Closing Notes

Hope’s glimmer shines ever brighter. From the impassioned voices of Jewish-American leaders like Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer, to the rational and visionary messages of Israeli leaders like Ehud Barak and Benny Gantz, to the diplomatic inclinations of the Palestinian presidency, and the global chorus calling for peace—and now, the ostensibly unified call from the UN—we hear louder and clearer calls for peaceful social change in Gaza, Palestine, and Israel.

With the leadership of sensible and humane power brokers committed to positive change, the dream of a peaceful and progressive Middle East need not languish as a mere fantasy. Ordinary people simply want to live as valued and respected human beings, as part of a universal human family.

We are all one human species; our survival and future depend not on destroying each other, but on building up one another.  We may compete in our respective ethnic, technological, scientific, and economic achievements, each finding our niche, but we are all part of one human ecosystem of life and existence.

There is no future in destructive armed conflict. Getting even can be achieved in the constructive engagement in the Olympics of societal progress. Thus, the world does not need leaders who are weak, self-obsessed, and warmongers, but leaders who are strong, altruistic, and possess socioeconomic acumen.

Alan Delotavo, PhD
Alan Delotavo, PhD
Alan Delotavo, Ph.D. (University of Pretoria), is a Canadian writer with a diverse academic and professional background. Previously serving as an assistant professor in social science and a world religion instructor, Alan has also transitioned from a former sectarian clergyman to a secular job stint and became a person with inclusive and respectful outlook of religious beliefs and traditions. His academic background spans interdisciplinary anthropological studies, exploration of religion's impact on social dynamics, and ethical considerations. Throughout his career, Alan has actively engaged with scholarly communities, participating in esteemed organizations and presenting academic papers at international conferences. Alan is also the creator of, a platform providing specialized insights on global affairs.