Can the Gaza Peace Council stop Israel’s expansionism? – Mehr news agency RCO News Agency

Mehr News Agency, International Group: The recent unveiling of a mechanism called the “Gaza Peace Council” in the early months of 2026 shows the efforts of Trump and his Western allies to manage the post-crisis in the Gaza Strip through “political engineering”.

According to the published documents and declarations, the declared goal of this council is to accelerate the process of rebuilding the destroyed infrastructure, to create a technocratic and civilian administrative structure, and finally, what is called “normalization of living conditions”. In the eyes of analysts, however, the formation of such councils generally have a dual function. On the surface, they are a response to the pressures of global public opinion to end the human catastrophe, but in the hidden layer, they act as a tool to institutionalize the desired order of the occupying power. The structure of this council is designed in such a way that it lacks any executive guarantee to restrain the “Bibi” war machine or to require this regime to retreat to the borders before the start of conflicts.

In fact, the architecture of this council is more focused on the concept of “economic peace” and disarmament of the resistance than it is based on the realization of the fundamental rights of Palestinians, including the right to self-determination. The history of international relations shows that mediating institutions without punitive levers against the aggressor ultimately help to stabilize the existing situation in favor of the more powerful actor, and therefore the Gaza Peace Council in its current structure does not have the capacity and will to stop the territorial expansionist machine of the Zionist regime.

On the opposite side of the diplomatic rhetoric surrounding the Gaza Peace Council, there are the field and ideological realities governing the ruling body of the Zionist regime and its American supporters, which were clearly revealed in the recent interview of Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, with Tucker Carlson. In this media interview, Huckabee, abandoning the usual diplomatic compliments, clearly defended the idea of ​​”Greater Israel” and rejected any prospect of forming an independent Palestinian state.

His statements, which are rooted in the beliefs of Christian Zionism and extreme rightists, are not just a personal position, but reflect the grand and unwritten doctrine of the ruling coalition in Tel Aviv and a significant part of policy makers in Washington. Huckabee’s emphasis on the historical and claimed right of the Jews to all the lands between the river and the sea shows that the grand strategy of the Zionist regime is not peaceful coexistence, but the gradual digestion of the remaining Palestinian lands, the continuous development of settlements in the West Bank and the change of the population structure in the Gaza Strip. This controversial interview reveals a strategic reality; While the international community is entertained by initiatives such as the Gaza Peace Council, the main policymakers in the Washington-Tel Aviv axis are pushing ahead with the project of ethnic cleansing and territorial development. Comparing these statements with the documents and articles of Western think tanks in recent years shows that the “Greater Israel” project is not a conspiracy illusion, but an operational agenda that is only waiting for geopolitical opportunities to be realized.

Inability to stop the Israeli war machine

The confrontation between these two phenomena, i.e. the establishment of a conciliatory institution called the Gaza Peace Council and the simultaneous public presentation of the doctrine of Greater Israel by a senior American diplomatic official, portrays a strategic paradox that is crucial to understand for the analysis of future developments in the Middle East. From the point of view of political science, this situation is a clear example of using diplomacy as a tool to buy time and cover hardware actions. In practice, the Gaza Peace Council plays the role of a “pacifier” to reduce international sensitivities and human rights pressures, while the Zionist expansionist machine advances its territorial annexation projects in the shadow of this relative calm. Academic studies in the field of asymmetric conflicts emphasize that whenever a peace plan ignores the main roots of the crisis, which are occupation and apartheid, it itself becomes part of the problem and the cause of the continuation of the crisis. Therefore, the Gaza Peace Council is not only an obstacle against Israel’s expansionism, but by reducing the Palestinian issue from an identity and territorial crisis to a purely human and economic issue, it actually paves the way for the realization of the dreams of the extreme rightists represented by Huckabee. In this context, this council is a diplomatic trap that tries to force the Palestinian groups to accept the imposed security structures and make the resistance to the expansion of the occupied borders look illegitimate with the promises of reconstruction.

From Gaza to Greater Israel; The emergence of new threats in the Middle East

Understanding these equations and recent developments has a deep connection with Iran’s national interests and the regional security doctrine of “axis of resistance”. From Tehran’s strategic point of view, Mike Huckabee’s statements regarding the idea of ​​Greater Israel are the most valuable document to prove the validity of the resistance discourse during the past decades. Iran has always emphasized in its scientific and analytical forums that the Zionist regime is an entity without fixed borders and has an inherently developmental nature. The American ambassador’s interview clearly shows that the ultimate goal of Tel Aviv, beyond Gaza and the West Bank, is to create an all-encompassing hegemony in the region, which directly threatens the national security of Iran and other countries in the region. As a result, plans such as the Gaza Peace Council are evaluated by the resistance axis not as an opportunity for peace, but as a “Trojan horse” for intelligence penetration, soft disarmament, and changing geopolitical calculations in favor of America and Israel. Maintaining military deterrence capabilities and strengthening solidarity on multiple fronts is the only credible and scientific response to a coalition that uses diplomacy to advance its developmentalist goals.

benefit of speech

In response to the key question of whether the Gaza Peace Council can stop the expansionism of the Zionists or not, the decisive answer based on scientific evidence and historical inference is “negative”. As long as the power structure in the international system is such that America acts as an unconditional supporter of the Zionist regime’s crimes and expansionism, and its ambassadors openly mock international laws regarding the non-annexation of occupied territories, no peace council will be able to change Tel Aviv’s behavior.

The Gaza Peace Council is, at best, a bureaucratic body for distributing humanitarian aid, and at worst, Israel’s executive arm for cheap administration of the occupied territories. The mission of the media, elites and decision-makers in Iran and the geography of resistance in this critical period from 2026 AD is to expose this duality and obvious contradiction. It should be explained in the media and academic environment that sustainable peace will never be achieved through imposed institutions and by ignoring the right to legitimate defense. The only element capable of standing against the destructive idea of ​​Greater Israel is maintaining and promoting the “balance of threat” and imposing strategic costs on the occupiers, because the history of the Middle East has proven that expansionist regimes are stopped only by hard power and practical deterrence, not by unsupported resolutions and peace councils.