The Ruins of Gaza as a Political Account: Washington Awaits Steps and Money from Israel

According to reports, the United States has strongly urged Israel to take responsibility for clearing the debris in Gaza, which has accumulated after more than two years of war. This is not just a humanitarian initiative but a large-scale multi-stage project that could cost more than a billion dollars and place a heavy financial and political burden on Jerusalem.

According to Friday’s report by Ynet, Washington’s position is that Israel should not only finance the initial phase of the work but also directly control the clearing process. This, as American sources emphasize, is considered a key condition for launching reconstruction, which has not yet begun.

The destruction in Gaza resulted from the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023, during which about 1,200 people were killed, and 251 people were kidnapped. In response, Israel launched a military campaign against Hamas, leading to an unprecedented level of destruction — both on the ground and from the air.

First Steps — Still Cautious

A senior Israeli official, cited by Ynet, confirmed: Israel has agreed at this stage to consider the American request. The proposal is to start with a limited pilot project in the southern city of Rafah, under IDF control. The plan is to clear one block in a test mode.

Even this “pilot,” according to estimates, could cost tens or hundreds of millions of shekels. And in Jerusalem, it is well understood that agreeing to the initial phase almost automatically opens the door to much more serious expenses in the future.

The Scale of the Task

The picture of destruction, recorded by UN satellite data, looks almost insurmountable. More than 123,000 buildings are completely destroyed, and about 75,000 are damaged. In total, this means that approximately 81% of Gaza’s construction is either destroyed or uninhabitable.

According to UNDP estimates, the volume of construction debris exceeds 68 million tons. Without its removal, it is impossible to move to the second stage — real reconstruction within the framework of a possible ceasefire.

Rafah as a Model

The American side, according to the Ynet report, considers Rafah an optimal starting point. There, in their assessment, Hamas presence is limited, allowing the area to be used as a model for subsequent recovery projects.

The idea is simple: first create a working template, and then scale it to all of Gaza. The question is, who will pay and who will be responsible for security.

Money and Donor Refusal

Regional powers and international donors are in no hurry to take on the expenses. Qatar’s Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani recently stated outright that Doha does not intend to finance the reconstruction.

“We will not pay for the reconstruction of what was destroyed by someone else,” he said at the Doha Forum.

In fact, this increases the risk of a scenario in which Israel becomes the only party capable of financing the clearing of the entire territory.

An Old Scenario in a New Package

Washington’s approach is not fundamentally new. In previous conflicts, the US has already insisted that Israel take on part of the expenses for humanitarian operations in Gaza — and Israel agreed.

The difference now is in scale, timing, and political context.

Tension Hasn’t Disappeared

Behind the scenes, there is serious tension. The American focus is increasingly shifting towards reconstruction, while Israel’s key demand — the disarmament of Hamas — is not receiving comparable attention.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu openly expresses skepticism about the ability of any international mechanisms to disarm Hamas without Israel’s direct involvement.

Questions Without Answers

In Jerusalem, there are also concerns that Washington may move to the next stage of a ceasefire even in the absence of a solution for the hostages and without a clear plan for eliminating Hamas’s military potential.

Additional concern is caused by reports of US attempts to form international stabilization forces for Gaza. According to Israeli sources, the US ambassador to Turkey is to discuss with Netanyahu the possibility of deploying Turkish troops — an option that Israel firmly rejects.

What This Means in Practice

This is not just about clearing debris. It is a matter of control, responsibility, security, and money — and all four points remain contentious.

In this situation, Israel finds itself between American pressure, the lack of donor support, and its own security requirements. It is this knot of contradictions that forms the context that NAnews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency analyzes today, tracking how the humanitarian agenda is increasingly intertwined with geopolitics and real risks for the region.